PN force extreme ratings to make comments, please!

You just had to go and poke the sleeping 500 lb. gorilla, hmm, Jeffrey?

hmmm ...you may be right ,,,,never wake an old sleeping dog on the porch ....hey Lex keep an eye out gustav may be

heading your way ....

I have been a member of PN for a couple of months now. I don't think someone should be FORCED to make

comments based on extreme ratings. It does tick me off however when I get an anonymous rating of 3 but now that I

think about it, how frustrating can that be for that person to be giving me a 3 and then hoping I will be able to read

their mind and hence stop summitting crappy photographs to the critique forum? The system as it exists now may

not be perfect but despite its flaws, I am learning from other members who choose to comment. Some of the rules I

have learned already are: (1) The subject in the photo should be in focus. (2) The photo should be neither under or

over exposed. (3) The background should be free of distractions. (4) The rules of composition should be followed. I

may not like it when I get a rating of 3 but when I do, I go over the "rules". Many times I make improvements and

resubmit and then I get positive comments and I think I do get respect. When I submit a photo to the critique forum,

I am EXPECTING to be critiqued and if I didn't like the ratings and feedback, then I have no business submitting a

photo! Right?

I kinda agree with Kathy. It my not be perfect, and I'm sure with all the great minds here on PN it probably can be improved but for now, it works. If you force posters to add a comment, they will just stop giving bad ratings. Let's be honest, not all images on PN are good (just check out my portfolio :-)) and some of us thrive negative an hopefully constructive feedback. If it is only negative feedback, I still know that I did something that is not pleasing to some viewers. Absolutely acceptable.

 

One comment about the current system; we have a rating for aesthetics and another for Originality. Aside form a very few really original pictures, pretty much everything has been done so how are we really supposed to use the rating for originality?

If anyone else besides me is old enough to remember American Bandstand, you will recall that numerical ratings were given to songs that were played and to which guests danced. The ratings often took this form, "It's got a good beat and it's easy to dance to; I'll give it a 90."

 

Any attempt to establish a meaningful, valid numerical rating system needs to begin by specifying criteria for the ratings. Otherwise, the ratings will be just as subjective as applying evaluations like "good" or "bad". Obviously, the ratings on PN are numerical. They are in two categories - aesthetics and originality. However, unless laziness or stupidity have allowed me to miss something, I have not been able to locate any criteria that support awarding a 7 as opposed to a 4 for aesthetics or for originality. Therefore, the ratings are purely subjective.

 

One of the world's greatest philosophers stated, "Concepts without percepts are empty; percepts without concepts are blind." PN ratings without stated underlying criteria simply are useless and unhelpful. (I have addressed ratings without corresponding comments on another thread.)

 

I hope this helps to address the issue constructively. Please don't hesitate to contact me via my PN email if you feel like having some more dialogue on this.

 

michael

Let's hear it for American Bandstand (I chuckled at your scenerio). Great idea, Michael, and great analogy. I

think this suggestion should work easily and successfully, except that - oh well, you know.

From someone's bio: "I look forward to growing creatively and technically, and I am especially anxious to receive feedback from those whose expertise far surpasses mine"

-------

As mentioned above... It would be nice to have a panel of experts rating and commenting in addition to the existing system!

<i>"It would be nice to have a panel of experts rating and commenting in addition to the existing system!"</i><p>

 

It would be even nicer if the experts were also masochists. They'd need to be to endure the certain abuse that would result from honest, informed criticism.<p>

 

There's a reason for photo.net's peer review system. What sane, self respecting professional photographer, museum curator or gallerist would subject himself or herself to the inevitable abuse hurled by artistes who cannot accept that not every photo that drips from their camera is a gem deserving of nothing less than unfettered praise?<p>

 

Note that the Photo of the Week is selected by an anonymous panel of "elves"? Even the elves are often collectively criticized and ridiculed for their selections, despite the continual explanation that the POW is *not* a prize or reward (some say it should be renamed Punishment of the Week), is not intended to select only the best photos but is intended to foster spirited discussion. Nevertheless, for years the POW process and collective elves are reviled by a handful of determinedly noisy gremlins.<p>

 

There's no reasonable expectation that an anonymous panel of expert critics would fare any better.

Lex, they could be called EMTs (Experts with Masochistic Tendencies) :o) . I am willing to bet that 100 qualified people can be found that will commit to 365 minimum reviews per year (1/day). Not all photos will get judged by the ANONYMOUS panel, only the ones the experts/judges/EMTs feel like selecting...

<p>

The POW is misunderstood for good reason. It is viewed as a reward since it is attached to the photographer as a rank symbol. People relate POW to the rest of the world as the "Employee of the Month", etc... I saw it as such for a while until I read the repeated arguments and explanations. It should be called Conversation of the Week but COW is not so attractive... :o)

<p>A new idea: IMHO we should not be allowed to rate photos in the category that we have recently posted a request for critique.<br>

It occurred to me that some people post a Request for Critique and subsequently may go to the "Rate this Category", which is anonymous, and rate others with low numbers so that they remain at a higher level...<br>

The system can do this automaticaly for a specific number of days.<br>

Food for thought...</p>

<p>It really doesn't help the conversation to post to year old threads. At least not if you want an admin to see it. I have a hard enough time keeping up with all the recent "help" threads.</p>