Jump to content

"comment only" visibility?


dave_nitsche

Recommended Posts

Are there any plans to give the 'comment only' queue some more

visibility in the future? Seems like the same 20 people keep using it

but it isn't growing. I think people find value in their images

getting 50,000 views vs. 800.

 

Does the site plan on doing anything to help entice people to use this

forum or will it just disappear eventually?

 

I am still blown away by all the people who asked for it but don't use

it.

 

Thanks

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the reason most don't use it, Dave, is really because of visibility. It has been made clear that ratings = visibility, and those who begged for the critique only feature a while back now realise without ratings there's little or no visibility for their images. I wonder if anything can be done to correct this problem (if admin feel it is a problem/flaw in design).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian

First off thanks for the browse option on the critique section. This option has become my

first port of call on pnet after the site feedback forum of course, lol.

 

I wondered if you have come accross the idea I have posted. This would help increase the

visibility of comment only images and bypass the ratings for those who hate them. It

might even become a major part of the site.

 

I would appreciate your thoughts if you have the time. if only to say that it would be too

complex to program or would overload the server.

 

----

THE BEAUTY OF THE FOLLOWING IDEA IS THAT IT WORKS USING THE SITE AS IT

CURRENTLY IS USED.

 

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. I would then see all

the images commented on by Marc, Carl, Rene, Jacques etc together.

 

This selection by ALL my favourite photographers requires no extra work on their part but

would present me with imho a GREAT range of images to view and comment on.

 

NO need to pick judges/moderators etc.

 

The big point is that it is 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 say the last month in ONE gallery.

 

It totally bypasses the rating race and mate raters.

 

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 them

worthy of 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.

 

------

 

Louis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave, amazing isn't it, all those people saying the ratings and visibility on the top pages mean nothing to them, but when they get the chance to participate in a ratings free forum do they? Like hell they do.<p><i>"What kind of "visibility" would you propose?"</i><p>Brian, I'm not sure if the number of comments on the Critique Only Forum is included in the comments sort for the TRP, but if it's not perhaps it should be?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian and all, thanks for the response. I had a feeling you were going to ask 'well what do you propose?'. The first thought I had was exactly Keiths idea. Not sure if that is possible since the images need some ratings to be available for the TRP's.

 

How about instead of just a list of images available in the critique only list, a thumbnail gallery of images available for comments?

 

Brian stated... "How about a Top-Rated Critique-Only Photos page? Oh wait. That wouldn't work, would it?"... Not sure, it might be an interesting idea to try. I bet you would get a bunch of participants then huh???

 

Keith, you said... "Dave, amazing isn't it, all those people saying the ratings and visibility on the top pages mean nothing to them, but when they get the chance to participate in a ratings free forum do they? Like hell they do."

 

I think its sad Keith. So many busted Brians balls about this and no one takes advantage of it. Visibility does mean a lot to most here I guess even if it is just the 'wow great' comments that they so strongly vilified.

 

I have enjoyed my experience with the CO forum. I would just love to see more participation from others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your hostility to this query about encouraging comments is palpable and unattractive, particularly for someone running this site. i wish you would broaden your viewpoint and consider ways to improve the quality of feedback through comments. i've made many suggestions, as i am sure you are aware in recent months; your comment above is the only response i'm aware of to date. its a shame. can't you step back from your own viewpoint and attempt to see the bigger picture? you are running a site whose positive influence on the development of quality photography around the world is potentially great, thing big!

 

here's a repeat of my most recent list of suggestions. feel free to ridicule them if you'd like, but a constructive response would be appreciated more.

 

1. In Gallery, change ?Rate Recent? to ?Rate/Critique Recent.?

 

2. Add a section to the Tutorial on the ?Rate Recent? page suggesting ways to provide quality critiques.

 

3. For individual photo critiquing, include an optional comments box with the ?Rate? boxes rather than requiring a separate visit to the ?Critiques? box; also keep the separate ?Critiques? box to allow maximum options.

 

4. Provide more structure for comments, such as giving people the choice to state in separate boxes what they like; what could be better; and to make additional comments.

 

5. List suggested subjects for comment on the comments page, such as composition, light, colors, etc.

 

6. Provide a checklist of possible feedback suggestions for common photo problems (e.g., too dark, out of focus, etc.) to encourage more feedback beyond ratings for those uncomfortable leaving written comments.

 

7. Allow photograph posters to visually highlight that they particularly seek comments along with ratings for a photograph. A small green check in the corner, a special border around the photo, something.

 

8. Give an additional icon after, or change the color of, the names of those who leave many comments.

 

9. Have a featured ?constructive critique? of the month accessible from the main page.

 

10. Give a free subscription every quarter to a person who leaves a lot of constructive criticisms.

 

11. Have a comments-only time (a week a year? a day a month?) -- shut off ratings, highlight the best critique at the end of the period, set the default of the trp to the photos that get the most comments for that time period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said... "How about instead of just a list of images available in the critique only list, a thumbnail gallery of images available for comments?"

 

What I meant in more P.net terms: When I am in the critique forum and all the catagories are listed, if I click on say 'Studio' it takes me to the rating kiosk and I can rate each image. When I click on the "critique only" header I just get a static list of image names. Could there be a commenting kiosk?

 

And on a side note... Was Brian being hostile? I didn't get that feeling. I was actually encouraged that he would ask for input. Maybe the sarcasm was lost on me? I am still suffering from jet lag...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

theres now a sortable browse facility in the gallery (by number of ratings, including zero, and by category, including all) located on the 'newest critiques request' page under 'critique requests' and next to 'recent' and its called '(browse)' which links directly to <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/pc-thumbs" >browse recent critique request thumbs</a>. if you set the sort to "no ratings" you'll get all the recent uploads for "critique-only"

<p>then if you have decent windows pc or mac skills and are reasonably adept at 'right clicking' then you can create separate windows from the TRP thumbnails off their root page, and click 'contribute a critique' and comment on these in succession on their full sized photo pages while still holding your place on the sortable critique-only thumbs page to continue selecting from these

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...I think people find value in their images getting 50,000 views vs. 800..."

 

if the purpose of critique-only is to get feedback in the form of purposeful comments that are meaningful to the photographer then who cares how many views of the image's thumbnail (which in fact what the PN views really are) get tabulated. and wouldnt you rather have 800 purposeful views then 49,900 meaningless ones?

 

"...the same 20 people keep using it but it isn't growing..."

 

if thats a problem then imagine if a lot more upload their images there and then each photo's 'time in the sun' or visible forum time there grows even briefer?

 

"...I am still blown away by all the people who asked for it but don't use it..."

 

perhaps, but they're far outnumbered by all the people who didnt ask for it and use it quite well, or so it seems that way to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"if the purpose of critique-only is to get feedback in the form of purposeful comments that are meaningful to the photographer then who cares how many views of the image's thumbnail (which in fact what the PN views really are) get tabulated. and wouldnt you rather have 800 purposeful views then 49,900 meaningless ones?"

 

I use the forum, so undoubtedly I do feel this way, but this was the argument used by so many when the CO forum was being talked about. I have gotten to the point that I don't care about views, but it seems that a lot here do. If so, maybe we need to look into ways to help this problem out?

 

"...the same 20 people keep using it but it isn't growing..."

if thats a problem then imagine if a lot more upload their images there and then each photo's 'time in the sun' or visible forum time there grows even briefer?"

 

Good point, but having a larger group of people to pull opinions from is always a good thing. I'm not saying the other 40,000 (or however many) members on p.net but more than 20 would probably be more healthy.

 

" '...I am still blown away by all the people who asked for it but don't use it...'

perhaps, but they're far outnumbered by all the people who didnt ask for it and use it quite well, or so it seems that way to me"

 

Have to disagree. There was a pretty large outpouring here in the forums I thought for this. Far surpassing the 20 that use it. And out of the 20 that are using it only a few are using it solely if I may add. It seems that some use it to bounce more abstract or different images off of and don't want to get a bunch of low rates.

 

I know what you are saying SW. Some is better than none, quality not quantity, and I agree, but 'healthy' has to kick in sometime. I am a member of PT here on P.net and the membership has changed over the years and it is always really appreciated. New opinions are a nice change and help a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am one who "begged" for the critique-only feature mostly because I do not want to receive what I consider to be meaningless ratings. Is visibility less? Of course. Do I care? No, not really. And since August or so when I started posting images again I have gotten dozens of comments on my images. And it was not through any kind of "campaigning" of asking for comments either, nor from any kind of massive commenting on other's images with hope they would look at mine. Perhaps my images were attractive enough on the newly-posted list to bring people to look and comment but I really think not. Many comments came later on. Most likely from people with whom I "chat" with in the forums, who because of my participation and our respectful discussions they then go and click my name to view my images. To me, there is truly no better way to get genuine comments. Visibility less? Yes. Quality of comments higher? Yes. And that's the way I want it. And the critique-only system allows that for me. Comments are nice, but not "drive-by" meaningless ones which to me are no better than numerical ratings. If more people would expect less, have patience, and participate more, they might find the same satisfaction I have.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the 'critique-only' section would dovetail nicely with my 'IMAGE THIS' ideas (see the two recent threads started by marc g). but as marshall goff indicated (in one of those threads), our ideas are up against the 'priortization' values of the site which are ratings-driven. however 'image this' would require nothing from the site to get it started as it would begin as completely member-driven by the common consent of but a handful to get it going
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<P>Sure, making changes to the site means more work for the people who run it... but I think that certain ideas, like Louis', could bring in more subscribers. I think people might pay extra to have a more favorite-oriented format for structuring the way they view images. This would also give an incentive for people to get more active in commenting and rating images, as some people might like to help others out as "house-critics." Amazon.com's succeess was built on this kind of thing, and so have many other sites. </P><P>Unfortunately, it would require <I>tons </I>more work to implement... and I would completely understand if it never gets done. The site rocks just the way it is. I gladly paid my subscription fee after clicking around for a month or so, and I've gotten my first year's cost back in entertainment value in only a few weeks of use. <I>Content </I>rules features.</P>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richard, thanks for your comments. I created the critique-only section because people said they wanted a place where they could get critiques for their photos without having to concern themselves with ratings or gallery-wide visibility. If the C-O category has created a venue where people are able to do that and get a satisfactory number and quality of critiques, then it is achieving the goal. I'm not on a mission to increase the number of people using that venue as long as the people who ARE using it are getting what they are looking for from it, which I assume is ... critiques.

 

To be honest, I'm a bit surprised that so few people seem to be interested in that venue. At the time I implemented the feature, I didn't think huge numbers of people would be interested in it, but judging from the number of people who were calling for it at the time, I thought more of the high-quality photos on the site would end up in that venue than have actually done so. I was concerned that a high percentage of the Top Photos would disappear into a the "critique-only" venue, that I would need to figure out some new systems for making photos in that venue visible again, since the "visibility systems" on the site are all ratings-based. That doesn't seem to have happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I was concerned that a high percentage of the Top Photos would disappear into a the "critique-only" venue, that I would need to figure out some new systems for making photos in that venue visible again, since the "visibility systems" on the site are all ratings-based. That doesn't seem to have happened."

 

But how would you know if significant numbers of these have disappeared if the ONLY definition of "Top Photos" comes via ratings? Come to think of it, how do you know that significant numbers of Top Photos have not disappeared and their vacuum filled by photos just nearly as "Top" ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And many have long argued in this forum that the ratings system has excluded "Top" photos under varied definitions (controversial, experimental, whatever) from visibility. So really, for a Top photo site, what is the point of this exclusion? If there is a significant venue in PN where a significant number of unmeasured "Top" photos are exhibited, as they seem to do in "critique-only" then isn't it to everyone's benefit that these get showcased more visibly? I think that is part of Dave's point.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i visit the critiques-only more to provide comments than to post because my experience has been the feedback is slower and less than i need, particularly for feedback on photos that i need to get out the door within a few days of posting to their real-world recipient. i realize its a chicken and egg problem, but i find i get enough -- and quicker -- feedback by posting to the larger community for comments and ratings, and by providing substantial comments to the work of others, who sometimes return in kind with meaningful comments on my work. i tend to use the critiques-only forum to post when i am having trouble with a photo and need help, and i think its a good resource for that. and of course, as evidenced by my posting above, i think more can be done to encourage more meaningful feedback, in addition to and not in replacement of, ratings, which i have accepted as a modest way of letting me know quickly if a photo "works" on some level.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the structure of the Critiques Only section has greatly limited its impact for precisely the reason Dave mentioned, visibility. Listings are not even thumbnail for ease of viewing. Nor is there any access to the TRP even for images that are significantly commented upon. One idea might be to include the highly commented images when people use the "by commented" filter on the TRP. That would be a start.

 

Its the ratings system that people using the Critique Only section want to avoid, not visibility. Give this section some greater visibility and I assure you many more people will use it. This attitude of "I gave them what they asked for and they don't even use it" reflects the assumption that you created what was asked for. Perhaps you didn't. Asking for some improvement in the visibility here is not unreasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Dave I have thought about this some more and came to the realization that the lack of visibility for the Comment Only section gives us an opportunity to have a self-selecting group of photographers who really are interested in a more satisfying exchange with one another. Hell who cares how visible it is? What does that mean? I appreciate the effort you are making over at the CO. That is where I will be posting from now on exclusively. I bet we could help build an interesting community over there and again the lack of visibility make work to our advantage. Just some thoughts...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...