Too many qualifying TRP images

Sorry for many typo ...in my previous message.. I could nt correct backward. I ve some problem with my browser...

Niranjn<p>

 

I believe Dave was saying that <b>he</b> had posted 3 images.<p>The Critique Only Forum has only been in existence for a while and Keith Laban is still waiting to see an image that grab him by the b*lls :-)

Niranjn, Keith is correct I was talking about my images.

 

Keith, hopefully one of us can create an image that will be worthy of grabbing your balls. You could always tell us what it would take to grab your balls of course.

 

I think Niranjn's point is a valid one. To get the comment only forum to work it will take and effort and reciprocity will be part of that effort.

Jacques stated that he would join my "club". I don't want to mislead anyone, I am not thinking about a club, more a subscriber level that pledges to give and receive honest opinions and agrees to civilly discuss differences of opinion. Rants would get the symbol removed from beside your name. I don't know about the rest of you, but I really don't care about the number of comments or rates, just that it is someone's honest opinion and if I can give an honest opinion without having to deal with being attacked for my opinion I will comment more freely. Does this idea have any merit? Would you be more willing to give an honest opinion if you knew the photographer would be receptive to your ideas? (He/She might disagree, but wothout trashing you) How about feedback from a moderator, is this something that would be possible?

It's a good concept, probably best realized in a critique circle format. But someone has to set it up and enforce it, and that requires some sort of access to the members list. The current climate does not seem to produce members who inspire that kind of confidence.

 

Have we added any 'heros' to the site in the last two years? There are probably quite a few who would help if asked.

 

Catch 22. . . . .

Ah, I misread what you said, Dave. Sorry Keith.

I suppose there's always the risk that people might start to take the mickey out of a <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=009v7m&photo_id=2825749&photo_sel_index=0">critique</a> forum !?! Some people, anyway.

<i>"I think Niranjn's point is a valid one. To get the comment only forum to work it will take effort and reciprocity will be part of that effort"</i><p>Dave, not sure I agree, in fact I'd go as far as to say that the problem with much of the critique on photo.net <b>is</b> one of <b>reciprocity</b>. We've all seen it on the old critique forum, comment for comment, rate for rate, traded favours, platitudes galore. Surely this isn't valuable criticism? I'm also not a great fan of the Critique Circles approach which tends to end up being merely a critique swap.<p>I rather hoped that the Critique Only Forum would be different, not just a ratings free version of the existing one, but a place where people critique with passion rather than a feeling of obligation. Dave, have you in all honesty felt much in the way of passion for the images posted so far to the forum, my own included? This is what I meant when I said I was waiting for an image to grab me by the balls. Actually I believe the best criticism on photo.net was on the "Photograph of the Week Forum" before it was censored and sanitised.<p>I'd be the first to admit that my own record of criticism here on photo.net is piss poor, particularly in terms of quantity and I certainly can't promise it's going to improve much.<p>The "Critique Only Forum" could be a platform for passionate debate, if only it had greater visibility, more passion, better (or worse) images and if sods like me got off their backsides and started practising what they preach.

Keith, great points. But I think for that forum to get the visibility we both agree it needs the reciprocity will need to happen. Since so few of us are using it we all need to 'help it' for a while. Eventually (hopefully) it will turn into the venue you foresee. Just posting images and expecting return won't help the forum IMO.

 

A lot of other posters are still putting up images through the normal RFQ and ignoring the ratings and getting comments that way. I think we need to show them that the 'comment only' option is valid and will supply you with real, honest criticism.

 

Lets put it this way Keith. If you were to start commenting in the CO section I think it would entice some people who really love your work to put an image or two in there to see what you thought. If they find it helpful and are really looking to be helped they will return.

 

So for the time being I think a sence of "having to" might be what is needed to get that forum off it's feet.

 

You asked if the images knock me out in the CO section now. I would say the ratio of "knocked out" is about the same when using the volume difference as a ratio. I can say that I find them infinitely more interesting than most of what is brought to the forefront of this site lately. I also find it real refreshing to say "nah, don't really like it and heres why..." and not get my head bit off or someone taking the time to tell me how wrong my opinion is because it doesn't agree with theirs.

 

I have written a bunch of comments now and have gotten very positive feedback as a result. It is actually pretty fun.

 

I dont' see honest reciprocity as a bad thing Keith. I see it as a necessity at the moment or that forum will really die. If it just ends up that 10-20 honest people are exchanging ideas and thoughts so be it. God, imagine how lucky we would be if that happened!!!!

Keith, I think the biggest problem is volume. When people upload four at a time, that distributes the available critiques rather than concentrating them, as is the obvious case with the POW. (I disagree with your assessment of the 'new sanitized' version. I think Mary only cuts comments that digress from the image itself.)

 

In my experience, there's alot to be learned from offering a critque, even if it's not one you think is particularly strong. Maybe the critic is missing something that other will mention later in the discussion. The process also helps critics dissect an image to figure out what makes it weak as well as what makes it work, but it only works if you have a fairly large number of bonafide critiques.

 

Where are the images that grab you? Are they buried in a folder or are the makers reluctant to upload them because of all the ignorance and abuse they see every day.

 

They won't upload them to the new no-rate section because the mates have in fact found it, so your balls picture will only be seen by critics who check that section on a daily basis. Just a couple weeks ago, an image would still be up after a couple days.

 

Not enough incentive now, I suspect.

Mike.... (ugg) I did not "pretend" to say "Russian mafia"...yes i really did say that. I did i did. Its been explained to you Mike how you have taken that term out of context. I erred in thinking that everybody in the community would understand that context. Living in such a "politicialy correct" area such as Tennesse must make you a bit sensitive on such issues. Again i'm sorry. I'm sorry, i'm sorry. ok now?

 

Had the head been screwed on properly i woulda termed them "wild and crazy guys"...from saturday night live..the Steve Martin classic. Isn't that guy he portrays actually named Yuri?

Dave, Carl.

 

I think we are all agreed that the Critique Only Forum needs greater visibility and more incentive to participate. No doubt this can be achieved by more people getting actively involved (myself for instance ;-)) but I also feel that having created the new forum the administrators should ensure that it has better accessibility and visibility. Perhaps more links to it would help. Any other suggestions?

 

BTW, apologies to Mary for my "sanitised" comment. Moderating the POW can't be an easy job and perhaps my passion got the better of me yesterday ;-)

"more links to it would help", said Keith.

 

Yes indeed. And perhaps a forum announcement somewhere. Had I not read the feedback forum a couple of days ago, I wouldn't even know there was a thumbnail page of critiques-only critique requests. Not everyone enters the gallery via the critique request page...

Fine tuning - posting a notice, for example - is better than nothing, but changes like the one made yesterday which limit the number of 7s you can offer to eight per day are an attempt to placate the complainers, not achieve a desired result. Brian made it clear that he saw no benefit to the no-rate section and actually lamented people (he mentioned you specifically, Keith, as I recall) using it because that would take some good images out of circulation.

I see now that it isn't even eight per day. It's eight of the images uploaded in a single day. . . . but we're getting off topic. I still wonder why everyone is allowed to upload so many images in such a short period of time that qualify for TRP views.

Why is everyone so worried about TRP and how many comments people are leaving and so forth? We're all looking to improve, and any input to that effect is great. I'm not going to lose sleep over how many comments I'm getting and who is on the TRP page and who is "rate mating". If I like a picture I rate it highly, if not I rate it lower or skip it. I would hope that others rate my pictures the same way. Any comments I get that are helpful are appreciated, but if people don't feel the need to comment, so be it. And as for the TRP, I can't say that I spend much time there. Once in a while I scan through some of the pictures, but I'm certainly not ready to raise these people up to demigod status. If I can learn something by looking at their pictures and comments, great. If not, great. There probably are people who are out there with alterior motives, but I'm not going to let them bother me.

Michael, I agree with you in that the TRP is no more useful to me than the sorted categories on the Newest Critique Requests page. But being a distinct sort, the TRP was presumably intended to be more than just useful; enlightening, perhaps - and this is something it doesn't achieve.

A repost of an idea to bypass ratings and which neither expects/nor requires ANYONE to

change (hoping people will change or trying to get them to change is madness in this size

of site).

 

The greatest feature added at photonet in the last 2 years was the facility to

view in a Gallery the top rated images of an individual photographer.

 

What about a facility that allowed you to view in one gallery (like TRP) the images which

ALL

your favourite photographers had commented/rated in the last month.

 

The whole site becomes one big critique circle and YOU decide who is in it. Everyone can

have their own individual circle !

 

The big point is that it is one extra option to look at a gallery of NOT JUST ONE favourite

photographer but a composite gallery of ALL the new images commented or rated by ALL

of MY FAVOURITE PHOTOGRAPHERS in that recent period in ONE gallery. This would NOT

be just the ones they rated highly but also lower ratings or just ones they had commented

on but not rated (a lot of people now comment only).

 

This would put comments on an

equal footing to rates. People who comment simply WOW etc aren't in my own list of

interesting members. A mate rating circle could give 7/7 s and WOWs to their hearts

content but the images they give them to would never appear in this gallery selection I

propose unless one of my favourite members had rated/commented on one of the mate

rater images.

 

It would raise visibility for images selected by photographers whose work and critiquing

you respect.

 

The filter would be totally under your control i.e. only those people YOU had selected as

interesting/favourite would be used in this gallery i.e. you would possibly avoid all those

Mate Rated images.

 

It totally bypasses the rating race.

 

It would help increase the visibility of Critique Only Posters as the gallery would be

selecting images on the basis of whether ?your favourite photographers? thought it worth

commenting/rating.

 

It is totally inclusive. No one is excluded. Images do not need to be reclassified. Nothing

needs to be removed or altered in the existing system.

 

THE BEAUTY OF THIS IS THAT IT WORKS USING THE SITE AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS.

 

It tailors the site to an individuals taste.

 

This might be a lot of programming but so far as I can see it is sorting and selecting on

information which is already all recorded in the system. The gallery viewing code is all

available, or am I being too simplistic.

 

It could be a subscriber only option.

Louis

It was probably intended to be more useful than it is, but human nature being what it is, I'm not at all surprised at what it has turned into. Take it for what it's worth. That's life. My point is that worrying about how to fix TRP is a waste of energy. Use the energy to go take some new pictures to share.

Louis,

 

" . . . . a composite gallery of ALL the new images commented or rated by ALL of MY FAVOURITE PHOTOGRAPHERS."

 

Another sort might include images your friends have uploaded, including those with no comments at all.

 

Limits on uploads and rates still need to be addressed, though. The images on public view still greatly effect the culture of the site, including the content of comments. Have any of your friends been 'recruited' and are now no longer interested in serious discussion?

part of this discussion also points out another suggestion that a reasonable limit of one (or two?) photo request(s) in 24-hours for critique-only by subscribers (still allow four total) be done to prevent dilution in that forum view by too many 'sames'

CARL

Why would the limits need addressed. If Brian is happy with the current situation vis a vis

the site loading why bother with them they have no effect on what I suggest.

 

My suggestion is a new way of filtering thru the recent uploads in a given period.

 

"Have any of your friends been 'recruited' and are now no longer interested in serious

discussion?

"

I don' t grasp the point you are making. People in YOUR interesting people LIST are not

recruited YOU choose them with no reference needed to them. You are in my list, you

didn't know that and you had no control on whether I chose you or not.

 

The people I find interesting but who no longer comment or rate will have no effect on the

Gallery option proposed.

 

You can see the images your interesting people recently upload by clicking on their name

from your workspace etc. Your suggestion is an additional option but not the same as

mine.

 

My suggested gallery would ONLY have the interesting person's images IF ANOTHER

interesting person (of my choice) had commented or rated on the former's image. OK. This

is a gallery to make visible images chosen by the people YOU regard as interesting/have

sound views etc. I hope that is clearish!

 

Louis

what the heck is a TRP-image?

some one tell me plz.

 

thx in advance!

TRP = top rated photos/pages (in the gallery)

okay thank you very much.

actually i think it doesnt matter

if there are 21 pictures made by one photographer.

if they are great...why not?

i just cannot understand your problem here.

thats just nonsense.

see you