Exclusion from the Gallery Rating System

Also, see Ellis' July 07, 2003; 04:53 P.M. Eastern response on the "Revenge" posting.

For what it's worth yes I have received several offers and accepted two contracts from posting on Photo.net. "Webshots" sent their first check of $2000 for twenty images just last week. The other account is a new stock agency. There are three others that are on the back burner until I figure out what direction to go. All from THIS site.

 

So what if we get some business deals out of this?? This is how I make a living. I still contribute through comments and suggestions as much as I possibly can.....more than most! If you guys want "PROOF" as you say, simply e-mail me privately. It's all in writing. Whats your point?? Confusing if you ask me. Or how about this, lets ban any professionals here as well!! Nuts.

It appears to me that you are being slightly unkind to those of us who love the "weather channel"... :^)<br>It is my first choice for viewing, whenever I'm up in the US of A. You just gotta be fascinated by anything related to meteorology, or astronomy...<br>BTW, it now takes me a full 60 seconds to download this thread via my 56K connection - think it is time to pull the plug on this one!

Philip D, Thomas W and Brian, thanks for your wise comments,

I feel I must clarify one misunderstood point: my rating average is a final ex-post result and certainly NOT a ex-ante preset. So, for instance and IMVHO the average of ratings I gave to Emil Schildt is much higher (somewhere between 5 and 6) than average of some other photographer that I mentionned here before, and the spectrum of rate is much narrow as well. And if Emil or whomever posts a new picture, I will proceed to a similar approach.

<p>So that a new post is not a big deal. A limited number of picture loaded is more a problem to know the latitude and potential of a given artist. More difficult to evaluate one picture if u dont now what its author is able to achieve else IMO. That is the reason why I observed for 2 years here before starting to rate anything, a kind of benchmark was needed.

<p>The subjective and delicate point here (as it is stressed in my bio) is to be consistent between photographers, I must admit here that I am a little more hard to please with those who, IMHO, are very talented photographers, that is a bias...

<p>

Sorry if I call a cat a cat, I dont take anything for granted and a 'you can do better' is emulating. After rating some photographers, I realized theirs works are sometimes systematically high rated although I estimate it quite volatile in term of aesthetic quality and originality. For those who think I loose my time, I dont loose it (may be in some thread thou...), I do that also for me, not quick mechanical rating, but real think about one people works (I barely rate more than 5-8 photographers per week). Putting comment on each picture would certainly be better if I had more time... <p> Rem: I dont plan to achieve a certain number of rating by the end of the months, nor a target in term of average... if that please some to think like that , ... fine...

<p>

JVK happy your cholesterol could deflate!LOL!

Actually not only few rating and cholesterol but... Ego of some people should deflate as well and go back to closer ground level.

<p>

Tom, weather might turn cloudy and wet, so care your rheumastisms! ;-)

It's actually very funny to watch how many serious folks here carefully waisting a lot of time. Btw this time is non-refundable. There are certain patterns of social behavour which are pretty consistent. Do you remember if you name was printed on your ballot when you participated in last presidental elections? Or you signed your ballot with your full name? I don't think so. Did you think WHY?

Or here on PN somebody feels ability to invent something new? Surprisingly, normalization failed (I'm wondering why?). So, I'm pretty sure, that there is no any other challenge, rather than ANONYMOUS rating system. All negative consequences of this system may be just MINIMAL price for objectivity. Now we have to pay much more. And observe a thread like this or last year for each six months. Have fun.

As a professional photographer (I don't sell stock), I post images here that are either unrelated to my work, or are examples of techniques used in my professional and personal work that I think may be of interest to other photographers or that I need help with... If I <i>did</i> sell stock, I think I might keep a sample of my best work here, and make obvious links and invitations to my own, professional website. <p>I do not have any problem with other pro's posting as many images as they like on photo.net, but so far we have ONE who has actually made sales that are directly related to a presence on photo.net. Is this attibutable to being "Top Rated"? or could a photographer have these images on their own website and receive the same attention? With some attention to keywords and search engines, the same result might be available completely independant of the photo.net ratings system. Many professional photographers report this is happening every day <i>without</i> getting a 7/7 at photo.net. <p>So we have one photographer making sales because of photo.net (so far) out of how many thousands? And it's not yet tied specifically to high ratings. <p>My point is not that we should exclude professionals from anything (no histrionics, please), but that being top rated at photo.net isn't some make or break point in a photographic career. I believe it to be a group of excellent forums for people to share photographic knowledge through teaching and learning. The ongoing problems embedded in and enabled by the ratings system is antithetical to that process... t<p>p.s. I like the Weather Channel, and yep, I'm done too. I've got work to attend to.

I admit I only read the top half of this whole thread (just too many comments) but based on what I did read, I really have to say a couple of things

 

1) There seems to be undue attention/discussion to the people who give perhaps too many high ratings and none about the society of bitter people who do nothing but go around lowballing everybody's work. Often when I have gotten some mysterious lowballed rating, it's from someone who gives very low ratings on average to just about everybody AND 9 times out of 10, they are not brave enough to put their own work up to be viewed...quite interesting. I think that is much more of a problem than someone who tends to give high ratings. Honestly I tend to give high ratings on average because I don't usually feel that motivated to spend time on an image I have no interest in or doesn't work. And, I'm not really into going around and leaving stupid comments like "that's vulgar" or "that sucks" like a lot of people on this site seem to be just based on my searching around. Sorry, those people are a much bigger problem and ruin the whole purpose of the site, IMHO. I mean hell, noone does that in a civilized critique class for instance...why do it here? because you are anonymous here and you are a coward? I wish the people who run the site would pay more attention to do something about those losers, than people who may have dished out one too many high ratings. This isn't "Let me vent out my personal bitter frustrations on the world.net"

 

2) Brian said "The reason that we have the ratings is to help people find the better photos from the more than half million that are uploaded". Sorry but this will always be faulty logic because what is "better" is purely SUBJECTIVE and always will be subjective. And it is faulty logic due to the very reason we are all even discussing this issue. There most definitely is a "war" taking place on this site. Actually, probably a series of mini-wars. I have heard it been said and have noticed myself, through my own work but mostly looking at other people's work, that photographers tend to rate images that are completely different from the type of work they do themselves lower than people who do the same type of imagery they do. Human nature I guess, but lets' put forth a hypothetical: let's say 50% of the people on photo.net are Nature/Travel type shooters, then 30% more editorial, then another 10% fashion and another 10% do more fine art, experimental work. Being that people generally are lowballing those who do not do what they themselves do, then does that mean all the fine art/fashion people aren't as good as the Nature/Travel people? Obviously not in reality but if you took the ratings as your judge of quality, you would think so. I have no idea what the actual ratios are in terms of style and subject matter but I have noticed that the people who are doing the type of work I do are greatly outnumbered by those who shoot landscapes or flowers, etc. And most often when I see a photographer who I think is great on this site get lowballed, again it is ALWAYS by someone who does something entirely different than said photographer. Always. The only conclusion that can be made is that perhaps this viewer cannot appreciate a style of work that is entirely different than his/her own. Because of this the rating system will always be skewed and never be a true measurement of quality in any way.

 

I personally take the ratings with a grain of salt. I have seen some people on this site who, to me, far outshine the majority of people on this site get mediocre ratings, while others who are shooting the same old flower, or sharp focused landscape get amazing ratings. To me the ratings don't really tell me much at all. The only time the ratings effect me is when there is someone who inexplicably gives me a super low rating out of nowhere. usually with no comment.

 

I think what is sad is that I joined photo.net thinking it would be cool to get in touch with a photographic community. I soon found out that it is impossible not to become dragged into these "mini-wars", a guerilla style low-balling tactics perpetrated by what I am sure is a minority of cowards and malcontents. Unfortunately, they have ruined the experience for a lot of people, judging from what I have read in many forums since I joined. And I haven't been a member that long. That is a shame.

 

To sum up this longwinded exercise, I applaud the effort to try and make the rating system better, but I just feel from what I've read here, that the emphasis is being focused in the wrong place and should really be centered on the petty, vindictive, cowardly malcontents who seem to get their jollies by giving low ratings and posting useless yet nasty one line "critiques" to everyone.

Well said Andrew!

Phew...

 

I have been told that:

 

"LESS SAID, IS BEST SAID"

 

et voila...<div></div>

Vincent: Thank you.

Transit: Not a subject that requires a simple brief response (unless you like sitting on the fence)

I'd be very pissed if I were Anna. And although I've had some disagreement with some of Jim V's posts elsewhere, I'm going to side with him here. The move to disengage her ratings was wrong in my opinion.

 

Some of the posturing that goes on on this site is absolutely pathetic. I don't care who you are.

 

I once knew an art teacher who gave all of his students A grades. Why? Because A is for art. Unfortunately, he was soon fired. So I can see where you are coming from, but I don't think I agree.

another example of aesthetic goose-stepping. and all the party members sang hurrah, hurrah.

instead of a numeric rating system, why not two check boxes: yes, i agree with the photographer this is a great shot; no, i do not agree with the photographer this is a great shot? people upload here because they think their work is equal to the best, or worth the risk of being thought so, at any rate. myself, i try to assess the work at hand in terms of its genre, e.g. landscape image, or abstract image, IF I'M GOING TO RATE IT. i usually dont rate specimens of categories i do not like, it's a bother i don't wish to endure, really. i visit photo.net because the images are really stunning, they challenge me, and help me to better understand the medium; i dont visit photo.net because i want strokes (i haven't uploaded any photos because i don't regard any of them in a class with the best here; though i do think i have a better eye than many who do. i dont need to be told what i already know, and i don't think my less than stellar efforts in the medium are going to be of service to anyone, so why do it?), to learn another critical language, or to absorb the wisdom of the masses of no more proficient than i also rans. i do, however, profoundly resent the POW, and some of the photos subscribed under top photos: the POW is uniformly bad photography, i think; and, as an instance of the other, Casas' folio of his gf lucille absolutely revulses me with their artlessness. perhaps some one could tell me how it is these obviously mediocre presentations receive their recognition?

I have only just signed on to both photo.net and usefilm.com in the past week, and have been astounded at the sheer volume of photo's and images that come through this portal. I did not log in I think for 32 hours, and there were 986 new photos, and some 12000 odd new comments, And I wonder, is that a slow day?

 

I like the fact that there is a rating system, because I am here to learn and improve on my techniques, through this site and various outside courses. Now, I realise that not all of the images posted are going to be rated, even if they are commented on, because I sometimes will not rate, but will comment. If someone has clicked the box that says do not rate, I won't, but will leave a comment if I am inclined too.

 

I have read through these fairly hefty threads as much as I can, and it has a lot of peoples (and sometimes numerous) opinions regarding Brian's original subject of excluding portfolio's from the rating system, and I think it is fair when and only when that system loses its effectiveness. I think it also fair though, that an "official warning" is given.

 

I have checked through many of the new photo's that are posted, and am guilty myself of leaving messages in the hope that people will view my offerings. This is but one way to get people to have a look at your photos and hopefully provide the fair comments or ratings that you look for. My hope from this site is that the viewers offer me a fair criticism or encouragement on my images. I will go through a members portfolio if I see shots that appeal to me. Anna's was one that recently did that. Some of her shots I really do like and have included some of her shots as favorites. A lot of the angst that seems to have come from this is that no "official" warning was given to Anna although some believe that there have been repeated warnings. Was there an official warning to her privately Brian?

 

As an amatuer intent on working out what makes a shot, I view some of what I believe are average shots, but usually only where I think I can offer advice based on my limited experience. There are too many I's in that last sentence, but you see where I am coming from. If I can't offer a positve criticism, then I try to leave some sort of encouragement, but as Brian has pointed out, there are so many photos that I get to about page 15 of the new photo's and run out of time, and I have more time than most.

 

I guess after all that drivel that my point is, have the courage to rate all types of photos fairly, and have more courage to view anothers appraisal or criticism of your own work if it is constructive. Perhaps even take some time out to view those images that are not as good and give some advice. If you can help and instruct others, you help to reinforce in yourself that knowledge. You do with advice what you want to do with it, accept it and work with it, or ignore it. I don't know how many members post pictures on this site at the moment, but there shouldn't be any need for mate rating or what-have-you. If your picture stands out and someone likes it or can help you with it, they will. Sometimes it might take a while to find it, as I can imagine there are thousands of photo's that are "buried" past page 15. Patience is a key.

 

Thanks for your time, I am off to explore some more.

 

Mike Frakes

I am fairly new to PN but use follow several other gallery sites.

 

I've followed this thread and finally feel compelled to comment......

 

I think it is fair to "hope" others will view and rate your pictures, but I have seen what somebody so eloquently called "date-rate" in a number of portfolios. I would much rather recent a low, but honest rating with a comment, just as I would give the same.

 

I haven't rated much work here yet, more a silent observer to date.

 

Anna (where this all seems to focus) has created some technically great work - even if it not to everyones taste. It will be sad to lose her - but the forums on these sites can get messy at times and that doesn't do much to help struggling amateurs who are hoping to learn (as myself).

 

I totally agree with Brians policy, other sites have done similar rules before - it seems harsh but it tries to keep things honest......

 

Ric

I'm not so good in english, as my photos.

If I have understood people who have photos too highly rated can be "stopped" to be rated ?

So there is no way that the best photographer can exist here ?

 

And, c'mon... There are people here who take seriously the rating system ???

The rating system, for me, is only a way to express individually an quickly opinion about a photography.

 

I thanks people who gives me high rate, and I don't take care about low rates...

 

The only thing I take very seriously is comments. Where people explain me errors, what it's good in the photo, what is bad, ...

Comments are very important.

 

Rating is nothing. I can love a photo whereas another people can hate it...

It's completely subjective, how can I dare to force my opinion are the true on everybody ?

 

So there are people who abuse of this and rate only 7/7.

So you want to take a sanction ?

 

But you will do nothing about people who abuse of rating 1/1 or 2/2 ?

 

I don't understand your new policy....

 

"Sorry dude you have too many photos higky rated, you're too good. If you don't do some bad pictures we will exclude you from the rating system..."

 

By the way, I upload only photos that I think there are passable, not those they don't do nothing to me....

MAybe one day I will be enough good to upload only good photos, and this time, what will happened ???

 

 

(Sorry for my bad english)

Hmmm. Just to throw in my dos centavos: So much vitriol. So little time. There are so many wonderful photographs here. I stop in from time to time because it's always inspring. But with so many, I don't know where to start - so I wander. Except. There was Anna. I may never have noticed her photos in my random meandering but for the big neon billboard erected in the middle of the road by the self-appointed cognoscenti. Thanks guys. As for the whole rating thing - artificial, inane, useless. I'll never understand the fascination some have for such a waste of time and energy. Art is. Get over it. Enjoy - savor - cherish.<div></div>

I've given up trying to read all of this thread, suffice it to say months ago I came across Anna's work on the site and it was some of the most Beautiful and dramatic photography I have ever seen.

 

Today I tried to find here folder to post the URL to someone as an example of my favorite work here and it can no longer be found.

 

THAT is the net result of this action. I have only given 7's twice here and once was for Anna. Your site is a poorer, lesser place without here work, shame on you.

 

I haven't submitted much work myself and it certainly isn't in the same league but already on two occasions a brainless tw*t has rated some of my better efforts 1 and 1, of course they had submitted nothing themselves. THIS is the kind of idiot you should be wiping from the system not Anna. But it looks like it is too late now. You f*cked up big time.

I had almost lost my interest in photography until one day I stumbled on Anna's work. It was very inspiring, and I thought, heh, I can do that. She lit in me a desire to get back into my photographic hobby and I invested in a digital camera and went to work. I recently looked for her and found this thread instead. It is a huge thread and I don't really care about the outcome. I realize that photo.net is a moderated forum...I have faced the strict rap of having my earnest post being deleted, and then seeing a junk post that I feel has little value being archived. It is unfortunate that Anna was banned from this site. Her actions towards photo.net were probably unfortunate as well, but I don't have the details of those to understand, so I will refrain from comment.

 

If anyone is looking to find her, she is here:

 

http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/14061.html