Apathy in ratings

I have noticed (not just lately) that the number ratings have gone down. If you check "All No nudes" for the

last month there are many with 5 ratings (the minimun to appear on the page) and only 1 or 2 with more

and the most I saw was 10.

 

Are we all that apathetic or did I miss the memo to quit rating?

 

Should there be incentives to rate or do we just not care?

 

If no one answers I guess that says it all!

The amount of junk is increasing? I'd recommend allowing only one post per week. That would make people think harder before submitting, and they would get better comments...perhaps even a dialog among members.

Mr. Safak, with all due respect that is a poor idea. I do not wish to have an artificial limitation on my uploads. To you it may be junk. To someone else it is a gem. To each his own.

 

Robert, you are right. Rating has become offensive to many. I get a fair number of comments on my images, mostly from "friends" and occasionally from strangers. Most of the commentors on my images are totally against rates. They neither give them nor accept them on their own photos. Personally I like ratings. Yeah I get pissed off sometimes, but however imperfect the system is (and it is very imperfect IMHO) I enjoy it as a kind of game. I think of figure skating or gymnastics, for instance. How would that work out if there were no rates? And to the howls of protest, I do understand that photography is not a competitive sport. Bottom line is "to each his own."

<i>"I do not wish to have an artificial limitation on my uploads."</i>

<p>

I think you may be confused. Emre is not advocating limiting uploads to photo.net, he is advocating limiting the number of images that one can send to the critique forum. These limits already exist, but they are currently too high.

<p>

Too many images are being run through the critique forum. Something on the order of 1000 a day. Add to that the fact that too many people "take" from the system without "giving back" (in the form of leaving ratings and comments/ratings on other photos, and you get posts like Robert's.

That may be so Josh, but that does not change my perception of what I'm seeing. And that is that most of the people who comment on my photos do not accept ratings nor give them. I've got about three or four regulars who do rate. The rest feel that it is a funky and unworthy system and refuse to participate. As to limiting the critique forum, I don't have much of a problem with that, and know that it is already limited.

 

In regard to your comment about the takers that don't give back, I couldn't agree more. I will comment on someone's image a couple of times and if they do not acknowledge the comment and do not appear to comment much on others' work, I drop them. In a few cases, I have made a comment on their portfolio and suggested that they have some excellent work and it would be seen by many more folks if the individual would only make an effort to be a part of the community. Most the time they do not even bother to answer that. In some cases its a real shame because there are some talented folks out there. But they don't wish to be part of the community, so I assure that they are not part of my community. When I post to the critique forum, I generally make a point to scan through it and comment on a couple of images as a payback for their viewing mine. I'm also partial to commenting on the work of people who have paid their dues. Without income Pnet will not survive for long. If someone is genuinely impoverished and cannot afford to pay, that would be understandable, but I fear most of those folks are just users and abusers.

<i>"But they don't wish to be part of the community, so I assure that they are not part of my community."</i>

<p>

Without defending the state of the ratings/critique system (which I have long agreed needs help), it is worth

nothing that many members of our "community" do not care at all about the ratings or critique system. They are

here for he discussion forums, or for the static articles, or for the no-words threads, or just to have a place

to present images. Just because someone doesn't participate in the same way as another user, does not make them

any less of a member of the community as far as the site's administration is concerned.

<p>

That having been said, you are on track with the lack of effort on the part of some people. Perhaps the time has

come to force those who wish to use the system to also participate in it as well.

Josh said

 

 

Too many images are being run through the critique forum. Something on the order of 1000 a day. Add to that the

fact that too many people "take" from the system without "giving back" (in the form of leaving ratings and

comments/ratings on other photos, and you get posts like Robert's.

 

 

 

You might want to check how many ratings I have given if this is reference to me. I have rated over 13 thousand

and received 3 thousand. Someone owes me 10,000 ratings! (joking of course)

 

 

I advocate any type of limit or incentive (if possible) to induce more of either rating\comments even to

non-members but it is evident that there is a problem of takers vr. givers.

I am not complaining about the system but I am trying to give constructive criticism and hopefully a better idea

will manifest itself .

No Robert, not pointing the finger at you at all.

Seeing the same shot over and over, one right after the other clogs up the photo critique area. For example Joe Photographer submits a woman frowning, smiling, looking left, looking right all within 1 minute of each other.

 

Who on earth would take the time to critique and comment on all four? One shot per day is ample. and for cheapskates like me who did not pay for a membership, one picture post every couple or three days would help too.

Some people drop by my pages and leave a rating and a comment, so I drop by theirs and leave a rating along with

my comment. Other folks drop by and leave a comment but no rating, so I drop by and leave a comment but no

rating. Seems fair to me. I do not have any strong feelings about ratings, either for or against, they are only

numbers. Really, how exited can you get about numbers, unless they are on a cheque and it has your name on it.

 

FWIW I just sent one down the tube an hour or so ago to check. I got 4 ratings, one with a comment 3 without and

a comment with no rating. For me at least, this seems like a typical trip through the CF as of late.

I have gotten a little more proactive lately. There are a few photographers whose work I've followed regularly, and have

commented upon over the months. They have submitted a lot for critique and rarely rate or comment. Lately, when I notice

a new submission, I go by their page, comment on the photo if it strikes me, and add a line saying that I think they could

be a valuable asset to PN if they participated more by looking at and commenting on others' work. I've gotten a couple of

thoughtful and nice responses. Some people seem honestly just not to think of it until reminded. There's always hope. That

being said, a little nudge from the system itself, somehow (I know not how), to get those who submit a lot and don't critique

nearly as much to play a little more fairly would be welcome.

There seems too much of the "You rate me and I rate you mentality". It's just another form of "Mate rating" that used to be rampant.

 

I agree with L.J Leonard that there are too many similar photos that people just post for critique. There should be an emphasis on selecting an image instead of "running it up the flagpole and see who salutes it"

Nah, it's not the same as mate rating. Cultivating a group of peers who share similar interests and aesthetic appreciation for a certain genre of photography does not guarantee high ratings or unfettered praise. If anything, you can count on a well cultivated group of peers to give honest criticism, since such a group is less likely to retaliate or respond immaturely.

 

As for the numbers of ratings, I've heard a few folks indicate they've grown tired of the complaints about the entire ratings and critique system. These people are spending a lot of personal time viewing and offering feedback. When their efforts are continually disparaged as meaningless, useless, mindless, mean-spirited or the work of bots, they don't have much incentive to continue.

I must say that since the icons have appeared I have seen a huge increase in the number of ratings and critiques that my

photos have gotten. I've also seen a large increase in the number of helpful comments instead of the like your work, kind.

I've also seen a lot more comments on other photographers photos. Maybe I've found my way into a group of people, but I

doubt that. I think that there is an increase for us beginners, but maybe more of a spreading of the same number of

critiques over more photos. Who knows... - Lex

I think there is a large and rather obvious distinction between behaving reciprocally and deliberately conspiring to skew the system. Mate rating was before my day, but I assume it to be a deliberate attempt to commandeer the TRP.

 

Lex; I would add " being accused of mate rating " to your list of disincentives. If the point of posting for critique is not to get the response of other members, in other words " running it up the flag pole" then just what exactly is the point?

Lex, if you know any of those groups please introduce me. The pattern I have noticed is that someone gives a

comment or a rating non anonymously it seems they expect a return favor. That does seem to me a "form" of mate

rating. I can't state it as fact but ever person that receives a lot of ratings and comments seem to dish them

out as well.

 

I could care less if I get high ratings or glorious comments. I just want an honest critique.

 

Once again, I don't have a solution but I got a problem.

I'm not personally involved in any such group now, altho' over the course of 10 years on photo.net I've tended to interact with a handful of folks on the few occasions when I do critique photos. Pete Daalder, Mary Dineen, Margaret Meehan and a handful of other folks have occasionally commented on my photos, usually with pointed questions and honest feedback, never effusive praise. I'm very fortunate to have "met" a half dozen or so folks over the years who even take the trouble to comment on my photos.

 

While I've rated more than 2,500 photos via the anonymous queue I haven't written many of what I'd call "critiques". Usually when I do it's to explain why a photo with potential missed the mark and to offer suggestions. Accomplished photographers don't need additional praise from me. And some folks are frankly so clueless they don't need critiques - they need lessons. Besides, as a part-time moderator, it seems less inappropriate for me to participate on the anonymous ratings queue rather than attributed ratings or frequent critiques. No one should feel any sort of pressure one way or another to respond to my feedback simply because I am a mere janitor on a couple of forums.

 

Composing a true critique is very time consuming. If I get a handful a year I count myself fortunate. I'm particularly grateful for the comments on my portfolio as a whole. It's actually rather astonishing that someone would take the time to look at more than a handful of my photos, considering the image-overload we're subjected to.

 

I try to reciprocate occasionally on photos displayed by those who comment on mine, but not to return a favor. In every case, they offer something that catches my eye and have at least one photo that I would gladly have critiqued under any circumstances.

 

I'm a huge fan of a handful of photographers or, at least, specific projects and genres of certain photographers. While I've occasionally been fairly lavish with praise for their work when I admired it, I can't think of a single instance when they reflexively reciprocated either out of a sense of obligation or desire to try to wheedle me into becoming a mate rater. It simply hasn't happened.

Interesting discussion about the rating system again... I became tired of the rating one and started to use critique only, and fast found out that the site is not happy with it,and wants people to use the rating system.( Critique only,is not easy to find... cached in a corner) I don't find the rating system a good index anymore and prefer to comment( and I invest quite a lot of time doing it) and follow people that I like their work I find what to say about it.

I ask for Critique, and most of the time answer rating given to me with a comment instead, ( if I have what to say) and I always prefer a good comment on numbers.

As David Meyer said, " to each his own".

 

Uploading my work for critique, is also a way to meet works of people that I was not familiar with before.

Starting a thread complaining that there is not enough rating going on and then switching gears to I do not approve of the sort of rating that is going on, is at best, counter productive. If I understand Robert correctly the only acceptable form of rating is to anonymously rate other members work, provided you do not know their work and have not ever acknowledged a rating you have received from them with either a rating or a comment.. With parameters that narrow I would not be doing much participating.

 

I prefer to become familiar with certain peoples work which interests me, rather than the random approach. Robert has left 398 comments on other peoples work in 7 years, while rating 13,389 images. Those numbers clearly indicate his preferences which no doubt work for his purposes. Entering into dialogue with a smaller number of people, over a period of time, is for my purposes, a more productive learning experience.To quote David again " to each his own "

If some of those people request ratings via the critique forum, am I suppose to refuse to give them an honest rating because I am familiar with there work and am known to them?

 

I seldom bother with the TRP page it all starts to look the same to me, strictly personal taste but I only need to see so many oversaturated f.22 wide angle landscapes in a lifetime. I rarely put anything up for rating either. I think Pnina has the right idea. I might as well stop using the CF entirely. Well now there's one less rating you have to worry about.

PN has about 700000 members. Presuming at any given time 10% are on line the number would come to 70000. If one uploads a real good photo in the critique line and has difficulty getting even 10 retings its really poor state of affair. This means members who are logged on are only busy managing their own portfolio.

 

<a href=http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00PRXI>Here</a> I had posted a thread about quality of pictures about two months back. I hardly could put my view across and was infact derided as being "elitist".

With all the respect to PN I think that the rating system could be improved.

I cannot learn and I cannot show my photos with this rating system.

And the respected moderators could see that some photographers (miraculously statistically)

"escape" from the low anomymous rates..

"And the respected moderators could see that some photographers (miraculously statistically) "escape" from the low anomymous rates.. "

 

Stamoulis; If this is true, it is indeed interesting. I have always found that everyone seems to get their fair share of 3/3 ratings. Although I seem to be garnering a lot of 4/3 ratings lately... I don't know what that's about. Maybe my sense of aesthetics has improved marginally.

It is, in general, quite untrue when a statistically relevant sample is looked at. A far larger problem is the wholesale giveaway of high ratings. But nobody ever wants to complain about those.

http://www.photo.net/photo/7462578 check this out if you wonder why?

I'm not sure what point you're making, Necip, but that photo is a good example of the diversity of ratings. Not everyone likes a certain type of photo and may therefore rate it lower. Some folks enjoy a certain genre of photography and tend to rate them higher.

 

My first reaction to that particular photo would have been "It's just another photo of birds sitting in the water, not very difficult or challenging." It also appears a bit dark on my monitor. As such, I might very well have rated it only 3/3 or 4/4.

 

My second reaction would have been surprise after seeing your name, because I've seen enough of your photos to know that you have a very high standard and have demonstrated the skill needed to capture birds in flight, a much more difficult feat. So I would have viewed the photo at the largest available resolution and read the various comments to see whether I might have missed something significant. For example, if the photo had been taken with a pinhole camera I might very well have given extra credit for originality. So it wouldn't be out of the question for me to rate a photo O=7, A=3.

 

But not everyone who rates via the anonymous queue works this way. They may rate only based on what they see on that queue, without consideration given to the name of the photographer, the conditions, or circumstances that might have lent unique characteristics to a seemingly mundane photo.

 

Neither approach is better or worse. I'm just pointing out that this is how it works.

 

Personally, I'm tending to find it a bit ungracious to submit photos for critiques and ratings and then complain about the critiques and ratings. These are gifts. You may not like a 3/3 rating, but someone (bots excluded) took the time and made the effort to view the photo and offer feedback. Complaining about the rating is equivalent to saying "You cheapskate!" directly to a person's face after receiving a gift you found disappointing. Most ungracious. Wait until after the party and *then* call up all your friends and family and tell them what a cheapskate Uncle Lex is.