Jump to content

Anonymous 3/3 Rater


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Personally I think all ratings are useless without comments. However, I viewed a few of your photographs and see you are not complaining about the anonymous 6/6s. Certainly some of your images are more deserving of 3/3 than 6/6. Since it is anonymous ratings that count on this site (although it is something I never do) maybe you should just accept it and use it as a pointer to take better images.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David-you are quite correct; some of my pictures are more worthy of a 3 than a 6 and I am surprised when I get a 6 on a picture that I don't think really deserves it ( it does help to make up for an automatic 3 from a trigger happy person out there who likes to blast out 3/3's as quickly as possible).

You are also quite correct that rates are not really meaningful without critiques-I have left more than twice as many ratings/critiques than the number of pictures I have posted.

I joined 'Five' early on to encourage the posting of critiques hoping that it would have some impact and am sad,but not surprised, to see that most members simply do not bother to leave critiques.

Having said all of that, the anonymous postings of 3/3's is not helpful to anyone; it is the opposite.

BTW, when I get a 6, I'd really like to know why, anonymous or not. cb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Charles; i just took a look at your very interesting porfolio, you do some very nice work, i didn,t see anything i would rate 3/3.

i posted this same type of question in this forum and got chued up and spit out. take it on the chin pal, this place can be brutal.

you know your own work,and you know what it,s worth. there are some very nice people here who will be honest with you,and helpful and incourageing, screw the rateings and look for the comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charles, I left the comment in your picture so that you would have known I had the courtesy to have viewed your images before making comment here. In any case, the fact that you left a complaint about a 3/3 rating on that image was inviting my comment irrespective of this forum. This is a ratings based site. There are other sites that are critique based. Trust me, they are not as user friendly as this one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My head hurts. I teach B/W at the college level! Nobody's opinion of your work is valid except

for your own opinion! If you change your work to satisfy one person, then someone else will

nail your work after that. It's an endless chase leading to nowhere. Learn to shoot for your

own pleasure and ignore the ratings. They don't help most people...they confuse one into

thinking someone else's opinion is valid. You can't win the ratings game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Bruce's advice is the best you could take. However there are surprises and feedback in the form of ratings can be helpful. Should I complain or be unhappy that<a href=http://www.photo.net/photo/3853639> an image I found <b>good</a></b> received under 10 ratings or should I be happy that <a href=http://www.photo.net/photo/3090581>an image I found <b>average at best</b></a> received over 400.<br><br>Posting your images here is only a way of gauging what others think of them. They will rarely agree with you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keith-I'm not suggesting we get rid of 3's; I'm suggesting that we get rid of anonymous 3's and/or 3's without critiques. There is no question about the fact that some pictures deserve a 3 (or a 1 or a 2)but to just give a 3 without a reason or an id is simply not helpful. I have said it before and I'll say it again; an anonymous 3, especially without a reason (a critique) is malicious.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you folks can 'iss and moan as much as you like . . . if it clears your souls and allows you to vent, but now that the 1s and 2s have been taken care of so no one person can doom a photo to ignominy, thanks to Brian's well-thought-out calculus, I'm happy enough.

 

I was not so happy to have anonymous ratings, as I truly liked to judge those who rated my photographs -- I found some friends that way, also.

 

And I find that the anonymous rates often are a good point below the other raters, often PN members of distinction, who drop by the leave a ratings on a photo here and there.

 

And NO ONE can accuse of of being a mate-rater, as I almost never rate and only then just to place an image into my gallery of highest-rated photo of others. (or occasionally, just to accompany a comment, when I'm trying to illustrate a point to a photographer through a lengthy comment.)

 

I'm grateful for each and every comment, even the rougher ones, because somehow I learn from each one, if only about public taste and the range of opinions that one image can generate (and how some seemingly-good images can simply provoke no responses at all, which can also be a surprise to me on occasion).

 

Brian has spent an enormous amount of effort honing a major compromise designed to 'please' no one in this present ratings system, but somehow it works.

 

The result is not a glitzy rating system, as it bears the marks of a committee, and some of its compoments, like Microsoft's famous operating system, are 'hidden from view' and best not looked at, because if they are known the virus writers (mate-raters and such) will screw it up.

 

It's been two years watching this thing work its way out, and I have to say I'm satisfied with the result. While my own images now seem to be less rated and consequently less viewed on the TRP in general, my comments are holding up excellently, despite it all, and that heartens me greatly and contributes to the feeling of 'community' that is Photo.net.

 

It's been interesting to watch what appears to be Brian's personal growth from all of this, as he's developed a sure and steady hand; less inclined to show his irritation from time to time as he is hectored less and less, and now free to focus on improving the site in new and other ways that are beneficial to us all (rather than focusing on the 5 - 10 % who bitched and moaned and probably upset the heck out of his family life. Who can be chipper when people are accusing him of being a jerk all day publicly for the world to see?).

 

I think the Mottershed family life is permanently deserving of the break it has come into; Photo.netters should respect that the lively non-anonymous ratings which were wonderful in ways will permanently be crippled for the sake of keeping our administrator's sanity, and it is a minor detriment that all we have to worry about is a 3/3 rating showing up (often blanced out by 6/6s also without comment) then all's right with the world. I remember at one time having to check the 'community member's' list for those 'signed in' before I could post an image just to ensure I didn't get smeared with 2 or 3 1/1s when I posted, as I watched certain critics 'attack' almost everybody's images.

 

Now, Brian filters out those who critique without being critical (even if they leave no comment) -- those who hand out too many low (or high) ratings. I no longer have to check out the 'who's on line' list before I post, out of fear, and I simply post whenever I feel like it, and let the chips fall where they may.'

 

I've probably only withdrawn one to three images in the past year for reposting that I can recall (perhaps there are more if there was no response at all to a posting after midnight on early Sunday morning).

 

All in all, my report card is A- for the improvements. Great progress, with room for more, but acknowledging that this great site also works with an overworked skeleton staff and is one of the wonders of the modern cyberworld.

 

(My two cents worth)

 

John (Crosley)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" You are just an unhappy guy that doesn't like 3s on his images. I was the same but I got over it."

David, just because you felt that way at one time does NOT mean that I feel that way now. My objection is to ALL anonymous 3/3's that do not give a ctitique. This post was meant to keep the 'anonymous 3/3 rater rampage' post going and I was part of that before my picture was uploaded.

Constructive criticism in one thing (and welcome), I'm a big boy and can take criticism-it's one of the reasons I joined this site-but someone shooting out anonymous 3/3's with no critique at warp speed is neither helpful nor welcome nor,in my opinion, what he intended.

You didn't get what 'FIVE' was all about ( the committment to leave 5 critiques per visit) and you don't seem to get this either-it is not about a 3/3 rating on one of my pictures;I have received them before and I'll receive them again. It is about anonymous 3/3 ratings,without comment, on everyones pictures.

I really don't know how to make it any clearer than that.

BTW In all honesty, I'm as unlikely to complain about an anonymous 6 or 7 as I am about winning a lottery; I'd much prefer a comment but,if nothing else, they help cancel out the A33's as I call them.

BTW #2-I read in someones bio on this site that they thought that photography should bring a smile to peoples faces-sound familiar?

I fail to see how anonymous uncritiqued 3/3's do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charles-

I have to agree with John & David. Of the approx. 20,000 photos I have rated over the past few years, I have given out some 1,945 3's for Aesthetics & 2,171 3's for Originality. If you multiply the 20,000 x2= 40,000. Of the approximate 40,000 ratings I've given out, approx 4,000 were 3's. That's about 10%. I don't think that's too bad.

 

I survived the "not anonymous" rating system, it was pure hell. I admit, I was NOT in favor of Brian's change to anonymous ratings. But, I was wrong & he was right. Let me say that again, I was wrong & Brian was right! :)

 

In the time period that ratings were NOT anonymous, if you were honest & gave someone a 3 or below, they mass e-mailed you, sniped at every image you posted, along with their friends. It was absolutely ridiculous. If you think the 3/3's are bad now, this is pure cake. There were people with multiple accounts so as to be able to be honest without retaliation. There were people with multiple accounts to rate themselves high & others low. It was a real mess.

 

Things have pretty much settled down now, but occasionally a robo-rater slips through for a few minutes. The PN staff & computer program usually is alerted & corrects the situation within a few hours.

 

Brian has also put a buffer on the number of 7's you can give in a certain period of time, I also like this, it's a reminder to me, sometimes I get carried away with 7's. There also is a buffer on our ability to rate a 7 on someone who has rated us likewise in the past few days. (An honest attempt to curtail mate rating). I also like this. When I get that error message, it's a smack in the face to "wake up", "what are you doing?". I need reminders.

 

I, like everyone else, get a kick out of others enjoying my images. (it's a head rush to see your image on the top page of the TRP) But, I don't equate the value of my images by the ratings they receive. I evaluate my images by the commented critique I receive & what I think of the image. I comment frequently on other's images, I try to point out both the good & bad. I want the same. I may not always agree, as others may not always agree with my evaluation, that's OK. I'm just grateful they offered their opinion. It's the comments that assist me in improving my photography.

 

I stopped rating images & stopped submitting my images for rating & critique a while back in protest of the rating system, but I re-thought my decision. I realized, not everyone felt as I (maybe I was wrong?) Now, I rate images because I know others like to get rated. Plus, surfing through the rating queue is a wonderful way to see new photographers & update with old members.

 

I still don't agree with the policy of staff review of all 1's & 2's. But, I reserve the right at a later date, to admit I might be wrong.

 

So while a 3/3 might be an annoyance, don't sweat the small stuff. Find another photographer that you love their work. Pick their brain, e-mail them, comment on their images & listen & learn. Forget about the lone 3/3'er, they'll tire & be gone soon.

 

Sorry so long, I'm not noted for being brief :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A point that rarely seems to be addressed in these very dull discussions about anonymous slurs on people's images is that it takes time to leave a critique whereas it is easy to leave a rate. Now if someone is flipping through a lot of pictures on the "rate recent" page, then they can rate ten pictures in teh time they can comment on one. If you get a 3/3 there is no way of knowing that the next picture didn't get a 5/6 and it is unfair [on the rater and yourself] to assume that that person is simpluy being malicious.

 

I rarely visit the "rate recent" page, but sometimes I will. If I do I maybe rate 3 out of 10 pictures and will leave a comment on 3 out of ten that I rate. Those I don't comment on get a rate - be it good or bad (though I admit I usually don't rate pictures I think are bad). When I look at my pictures I am happy to get rates - I used to get annoyed that I got crap rates, but now I am happy that someone either liked or disliked my pic enough to rate it. I find it pretty depressing when you post a picture and get ONE or ZERO rates (whatever the score) and would rather get ten average rates than one good one I think.

 

If you get a 3/3 you have to assume that the rater didn't think much of your picture. Then you have to ask yourself "does he have a point or do I disagree". A critique is easier to disagree with, because you have something concrete to look at (ie "It's blurry" and you can say "I like it blurry") A pure number sould make you look at your pic and think "Why?" and if the answer is "Well I still like it" then you are fine. If the answer is "Hmmm, maybe she didn't like the fact it was a little blurry, that was bothering me too" then you have something to work with. If the answer is "Must be a jerk rater" then who cares ?

 

Personally, I post pictures here that I like. If someone else doesn't, then it's no big deal as I tell myself it is probably someone whose photos I wouldn't like either. If someone does like my work, then I have found a friend.....

 

For what it is worth, it is rare that I have received a low rating (identifiable) from someone whose pictures I dodn't like, and vice versa.

 

robert

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...