Help us improve the quality of our images!!!

I have been using this site for nearly a year and have read many of

the ratings debate issues including: mate raters, abusers, self

raters, retaliators, low raters just to rate low, etc. Seems to me,

the site worked better when you needed to provide a comment for

1,2,&7 ratings. After all, much of the attraction of this site is

its mission to improve our photographic skills. Some of us really

do learn from the galleries and critiques.

 

In a perfect world, people would leave meaningful comments and not

be afraid of offending others. The low ratings and high ratings

without comment are meaningless. But requiring a comment makes one

think. I figure if you can find this site, you probably have that

ability. I know there is a lot of support from the members to

reinstitute this requirement. I think it would put a stop to some

of the drive by low rates and some of the controversy.

The problem is you (and I at one time) expect resonable people to critique and comment with careful unbiased thought. The truth is unless there is a juried panel, the egomaniacs that want to impose their judgment will find a way to circumvent any requirement and give you that beloved 1,1 that you cannot ever remove. When the requirement was in effect, all one needed to do was make a comment, give the rating and then delete the comment or worse give a phrase such as "HMMM".

 

 

The only comfort I can express is that a low rating (and even the high ones) should be ignored and most resonable people know that an image skewed by an offbeat rating or two reflects on the intelligence of the rater and not the image.

After I eliminated the requirement, the number of 1 ratings doubled: from under 1% to under 2% of all ratings. Many of these low ratings eventually get deleted anyway because they come from trolls. 2 ratings also increased, but are also still rare.

 

It is very doubtful that the comments that people might get with the 1 or 2 ratings would be very useful. Most of the photos that receive these ratings don't deserve them (which is why it is fortunate that they are rare) and the comments would be as idiotic as the ratings are, and even more infuriating.

How I agree with you......but its a case of 'in a perfect world'! I personally appreciate a well thought (constructive) criticism over any rating as I can't learn much from a rating, good or bad! Fortunately most pics receive enough ratings to get a true indication of what the public think, and at the end of the day its not a competition! Funny how the bad raters often don't have any work of their own uploaded (mmmmmmmmm, wonder why?), or their work aint much cop anyhow. Basically though, not everyone has very good manners, either that or they are so dense they have totally missed the point and don't realise that we are all here to learn some more. I really do think it is a shame though that on average you'll get between 10 - 12 ratings (I do anyway) and be lucky to get one or two comments.....in a perfect world.

Brian-

 

I really think that you are missing the point.

<P>

NOBODY is suggesting here that you will ever be guarnteed(sp, I know) constructive criticism. Unless every single comment and rating is hand selected for quality, even then, we simply cannot expect that.

<P>

The entire point of my first post on this topic was that constructive criticism and thought out ratings should <i>encouraged</i>.

<P>

Judging by the emmense number of people who are complaining about this, I am wondering if (a) you are overly cynical and assuming we are complaining about low ratings, which, I know I wasn't and everyone I have read since are not either as far as I can tell, or worse yet, (b) you are assured that the critique system is flawless and is not, and is never in need of improval, which, by the sounds of it, it obviously does!

You might notice that in most all the replies Brian and Bob give

they are justifications why they have implemented various

changes. It would be refreshing to see something along the

lines of " If we tried XXXXXX ... do you think that would help"

instead continually giving their opinions (no matter how

genuinely heartfelt they are) which appear to be THEIR gut

feeling and not a more soundly based opinion based on

Subscribers views.

Louis

Louis (and Brian, Bob too)-

 

I agree. But i also feel that Brian and Bob's justifications are more like excuses not to change a broken system, for whatever reason.

 

I have not been terribly impressed by their justifications on this particular topic.

 

That said, I think that brian and co. are doing a very, very good job in other places at PN, thank you for the classic cameras forum, it is already an aperant success! ... But as i have said before, the ratings and feedbacks are not up to par.

This is the old "blind men and the elephant" story - or visually impaired persons and the pachyderm if you prefer.

 

You know the story. Each feels a different part of the animal (tail, trunk, legs) and so "sees" the animal as a different creature.

 

Those looking for a contest see the gallery entirely differently than those looking for comments. If you please one, you usually displease the other. If you favor subscribers, non-subscribers complain. If you don't favor subscribers, subscribers wonder what they are paying for. If you favor experts, novices complain. If you favor novices, experts complain. If you favor nobody everybody complains because everyone sees you as favoring someone else. If you make ratings anonymous some people want them public. If you make them public some people want them anonymous. If you ran the gallery soley on the basis of user input, you'd go crazy inside a month.

 

BTW Brian does all the work on the gallery. I just make dumb suggestion here from time to time. He's the one who stays up nights trying to make the whole thing fuction as best it can for the largest number of people.

Sorry Bob, I did not mean to step on you...

 

I see what you are saying, and it does make sense... Still think something needs to be done, and i do not think that a contest is in the interest of photo.net, which, operates primarly as an educational site.

 

Whether this is what the site was intended for or not is irrelevant, this is, or has become just that...

It's true. No one appreciates my pure genius. How can you deny

it? And yet only one poor soul came around to throw a rate at it.

And it was a 2/2. Not the kind you wear mind you. I suppose a

two for originally because everyone has photographed this?

Hmmm.... I've been searching photo.net and haven't found one.

Tis very curious. You judge.<P>

 

<A

HREF="http://www.photo.net/photo/1734607"

>Oh Poo!</A><P>

 

<I>(take the bait, take the bait... Bwah-hahahahaha!....)</I>

It's a silly image, which was your intention after all, yet you've

since received a 5, 6 and yes, a 7 for originality, although it's been

done over and over. Maybe it's the IR, but you saw the comments on

that, too.

 

This is what the Photo Critique Forum has come to.

"If you ran the gallery soley on the basis of user input, you'd go

crazy inside a month."

 

Everyone who posts on this issue, and who is a bonafide participant in

the Photo Critique Forum - wants exactly the same thing: meaningful

feedback. We think there's a better way to get it, and are convinced

that it will take overhaul, not fine tuning. .