W11 : Is quality subjective or objective?

 I think it it subjective. For example, if someone clearly defines "art is what" and everyone agrees with it, I think art ends there. Art is not fully explained and has opened up infinite possibilities, so attempts to continue to challenge, question, and break away from the existing ones are made. The more people talk about any word or concept and the more they say their opinions, the more difficult they become and the more relative they seem to be.

 In other words, image quality may vary depending on the viewer and the purpose of using it. Depending on the atmosphere and purpose of the post, excessive clear image quality may not match. For example, if you want to explain vintage, you can fully express the concept as image quality. Low image quality, then, is a high quality tool for the author of the post.

Comments

  1. WANG XIAOLINGMay 16, 2021 at 6:00 AM

    I think it is objective. In many cases, subjective results will be affected by people's knowledge background, observation motivation, observation environment and other factors. In addition, subjective quality assessment cannot be used in all situations, such as in the field of real-time image quality assessment. Therefore, compared with subjective evaluation, objective evaluation will not be biased for artificial reasons.


    ReplyDelete
  2. JeongYoon OhMay 16, 2021 at 6:52 AM

    I haven't thought about abstract topics like "art." I focused on values, laws, and morality that vary with the times. Anyway, there's still a lot of debate about how far we're going to treat it as art.

    ReplyDelete
  3. JinaKimJune 18, 2021 at 7:29 AM

    I agree with the idea of subjective. In particular, I liked the example of vintage images you used as examples. The reason is that I also like vintage images, so I deliberately lower the quality and add noise. Like this, one may think that the quality is low if it is not high-definition, but for someone like me, low-definition feels more artistic, so it feels like high-quality. I think that the fact that individuals disagree on quality itself is subjective, that is, there is no clear standard.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary  The Internet has changed our culture so much. First, through the Internet, we can meet people regardless of distance. People in each country communicated over the Internet and reduced the barriers to distance by creating relationships. Also, the Internet has let us stay away from books. When we want to find expertise, we can get it from Wikipedia or Google. Even information in books can be obtained through e-books, reducing access to libraries and paper books. 2. Interesting point Further to the above, our brains are gradually degenerating because we don't have to remember information. We are constantly interrupted by SNS notifications ringing on our phones when we do something, so our concentration and attention are being reduced. Furthermore, the ease of obtaining information online is causing our short-term memory to decline. 3. Discussion point I think the Internet has made it easy to sever a relationship with a person because we can meet another person simply...
Read more

W7: Review of Good Faith Collaboration / Suyoung Han

  Review of Good Faith Collaboration 1) Summary – Wikipedia from an ethnographic perspective: focusing on collaboration within the community Wikipedia, which is called the world's largest encyclopedia, is an open community and is becoming more and more solid with the participation of various people, conflict, and resolution. In this respect, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. attempted to explain the culture that takes place within Wikipedia. The book describes how Wikipedia was created and what it values. In particular, he described Wikipedia in a book from an ethnographic point of view, and focused on cooperation within the community. 2) Interesting Point – Wikipedia is simple, but not I realized that Wikipedia is not just a site made up of community activities, but rather a collaborative activity that is carried out concretely for the goal. Before I read the book, Wikipedia was an encyclopedia site that only gave me information (even I didn't trust the information), and I thought ...
Read more

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

 Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? In terms of the comprehensiveness of the content, we have to admit the advantages of Wikipedia. For example, Wikipedia is undoubtedly my first choice when I don't understand an event at all. It is convenient, fast and comprehensive, and I can spend the least time to understand the whole content of this fact as comprehensively and neutrally as possible. But in the process of in-depth learning, Wikipedia can only be used as an introductory content, because in learning we need to understand this fact as much as possible, and we need to understand the different views of scholars in different regions on the same event. There will be different theories. Some theories seem to be not neutral or even discriminatory or ethnographic at present (such as Marxism and Marxism in China), and it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Be shown. In short, Wikipedia has a very low threshold for users. It assu...
Read more