Jump to content

Image ratings on PN from a new members perspective


markboyle

Recommended Posts

<p>Hi fellow photo.net members</p>

 

<p>I have been an active member of this site for just over a week and would like

to make some observations about the contentious ratings system we have. Let me

start by saying that I have submitted 17 images for critiquing/rating to date

and I am perfectly happy with the responses. The only disappointment in regard

to my own work is the lack of interesting critiques and comments, though I can

understand this when you see the sheer volume of images being posted for

critique every day.</p>

 

<p>I guess the first thing I am not really sure about is why members can make

anonymous ratings. I imagine the logic is that people may be more honest if they

can rate anonymously. I make it a point to always rate with my name and if I am

going to give an image a relatively low rating then I will leave a comment as to

why and my thoughts on how it could have been improved.</p>

 

<p>Now it is not possible to rate every photo that is posted, far from it, so my

approach is to only rate and comment on images that fall within my area of

interest which is landscape/nature. Although I have rated some other image types

that I felt were outstanding. Even so I am still only rating a fraction of the

images that appear just in these categories! I am not suggesting this is what

everyone should do, it is just the method I am using.</p>

 

<p>Finally I would like to mention the seeming inconsistency of ratings. I have

seen some images rated highly that I don't think deserve it and some rated low

that I don't think deserve it. Unfortunately any system for rating something as

subjective as a photograph is going to have inconsistencies. So far though, all

of the images I have seen and considered to be absolutely outstanding have been

rated highly, which gives me some faith. It is just that from my brief time here

there does seem to be a good number of images that have rated very highly which

to me are inexplicable.</p>

 

<p>I am going to use one example I have come across to hopefully generate

discussion. I am not attacking the photographer or his work, I just find it

difficult to understand the ratings for this image, given the criteria by which

we rate, aesthetics and originality. The image in question is <a

href="http://www.photo.net/photo/5167063">

http://www.photo.net/photo/5167063 </a> and is a sunset taken

by Julio Segura Carmona (whose work I admire).</p>

 

<p>This is a nice sunset but can someone please explain how a photograph of a

nice sunset can have an average of 6.41 out of 7 for originality after being

rated over 100 times? Aesthetics is a different matter but surely by any

interpretation of originality a photograph of a sunset should not get anywhere

near this rating. From my perspective this devalues the whole rating system.</p>

 

<p>To finish I think the concept of photo.net is great as it is always good to

share your work with other people, especially people with similar interests.

That is the true value of sites like this and I look forward to a long

involvement and getting to see a lot of great photography. Can I just suggest

that if we are to use a rating/critique system that there be a lot more

critiquing and a lot less anonymous rating.</p>

 

<p>regards<br>

Mark Boyle</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well as far a sunset goes,in my humble opinion evry sunset is an original,kind of like a snowflake.Mother nature works originals everyday.This is what I read somewhere else,I felt the same way at one point then read the article that stated what i just said and it honestly changed my opinion.There are alot of sunset pictures out there but very few (if any at all)that exactly the same.

Cheers :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Sean

 

I appreciate your response and agree that every sunset is different as is every snowflake as is every fingerprint. But the point I was making specifically is not the originality of the sunset in the picture but the originality of the picture itself. In terms of subject matter and the way it has been treated, there is little, if any, originality at all.

 

It is a photo of a sunset (a very beautiful one) over water. An image I have seen hundreds of times before and will no doubt see many times again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you honestly tell me you can find a truly original subject on this, or any other photography website?

 

The rating system is meaningless. It's 2 numbers that are comprised of the experiences, feelings, and thoughts of complete and total strangers at every level of photographic pursuit. This is not a peer-reviewed pay-for-critique website. The rating system is open to the members who elect to rate. Any inference of meaning of the rating values beyond this basic level is without value.

 

And the reason for anon ratings is an attempt to avoid retribution ratings that so many insecure people like to engage in.

 

The very best thing you can do is to not participate in the rating system at all. Ignore the numbers and leave your comments. What you say has far far greater value than the two numbers you choose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, dear Mark,

 

this is a big Needle in the Eye of Photo Net Administration!

 

Before YOU there were so many discussions with Dead End!

 

This was a nice site 2 years ago, now it is just a MIX of everything and nothing, art and non-art!

 

I hope you will obtain some useful answers to your question!

 

Biliana

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quoting Rob :"The rating system is meaningless"!

 

So Rob why dont you remove this unuseful rating system? why do you keep it? If we do not participate in the Critique where everybody is only rating without commenting, we would like to choose the other option "Critique ONLY" but this feature does not work! in other words, nobody is using this Critique ONLY feature because they cannot rate!

 

It appears that everybody just LOVE to give Rates/Numbers as you said, and the only purpose of Photo Net is RATING!

 

Very sad!

 

Biliana

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<<So Rob why dont you remove this unuseful rating system? why do you keep it?>>

 

Why would you assume I have anything to do with the administration of photo.net?

 

<<It appears that everybody just LOVE to give Rates/Numbers as you said,>>

 

You have no data on how photo.net is used by its members. Your conjecture is based on nothing but how you use photo.net.

 

<<and the only purpose of Photo Net is RATING!>>

 

Such a claim on your part is absurd. You clearly have no idea what the photo.net website actually contains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I presume Rob that you have something to do with the Rating system, as everytime somebody ask something about it, you discuss it.

 

I am on Photo Net for over 2 years now, and I do know a little about it.

Thank you for asking.

 

B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<<I am on Photo Net for over 2 years now, and I do know a little about it. Thank you for asking.>>

 

You clearly don't. Or you would have seen the hundreds of discussions in the archives regarding the rating system. Nothing you've said here is anything new.

 

If you've been here for 2 years and have not ventured outside of the Gallery then you don't know anything about what Photo.net fundamentally is as a website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me Aesthetics and Originality have nothing to do with each other. When I?m rating an image I try look at if first for aesthetics based on how good I think it is, then I look at for originality, is it a photograph of something unique or was it taken from a different or unique prospective. Example for an image that aesthetically beautiful but looks like 100 others I might give a rating of 6/4, on the other hand I might give a 4/6 to an image that is not as strong aesthetically but shows the subject from a new or different prospective.

<P>

 

Aesthetics

<P>

3 Ok nothing special

<P>

4 Pretty good image

<P>

5 Good strong images

<P>

6 One of the best images I?ve ever seen

<P>

7 WOW incredible image

 

<P>

Originality

<P>

3 Looks the same as a hundred other similar images

<P>

4 Some Originality

<P>

5 Fair amount or originality

<P>

6 A lot of originality

<P>

7. WOW totally new and different way of looking at something. I would have never thought of doing it that way

<P>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am one of those who have given over 10,000 ratings. I think it is part of my paying my

dues to the community. I also think the rating system is broken. As the founder of a

software company I'm quite convinced there are bots giving 3/3 ratings to many photos.

Anonymous ratings inside of a community like this is worse than meaningless -- it is

damaging to the system. This is a community of photographers who are here to exchange

information and have an interchange on their work with their peers. An anonymous person

cannot be a peer simply because one cannot evaluate the basis for their evaluation

because their work is not available to provide context and meaning to their ratings.

 

I no longer give ratings below a 5. I simply do not rate images that I don't think offer

something to me in terms of either originality or aesthetics. I would ban the anonymous

rating process completely -- it contributes nothing and only has a negative impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anonymous ratings were an attempt to solve other different ratings complaints. Note you don't "choose" to make anonymous ratings, just go into the Rate PHotos and it's anonymous. That is the default.

 

Ratings are inconsistent for various reasons. People have different tastes. Some people like nudes, some don't. Mate rating still takes place, and you'll see certain people posting thoroughly mediocre work and getting praised to the high heavens for it by their buddies. Some subjects (flowers, pets) are SO common that it works against them. Things new, different, experimental, etc., tend to get lower ratings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some interesting responses and I am sure for many readers just a re-hash of the same old issues. I just wanted as a new member to give my perspective on the way photos are rated as it is almost the only way to get your photos into circulation and create a 'presence' on the site for yourself.

 

Having given a bit more thought to the concept of 'originality' as it relates to the creative process I really think it is a poor choice of criteria for rating images on this site. It is just too meaningless and open to too much interpretation.

 

I do like the idea of two ratings as it does tend to make the rater think a bit more about what they are rating but given the choice I would replace 'Originality' with 'Technique' or 'Technical'. That way both the aesthetic, visual appeal would be covered (including originality to some degree) and the technical/technique aspect of the image displayed, which is extremely important when assessing photographic images given its reliance on technology.

 

I also think a '7' rating scale is good as it offers '1 to 3' for degrees of unsuccessfulness, '4' for average or undecided and '5 to 7' for degrees of successfulness.

 

Finally, having had a browse through the 'Top Photos' again using the search criteria "All styles, All time and Photog's Sum (Photos)" or "All styles, All time and Photographers Avg" I think the cream definitely does rise to the top with the ratings system currently used, bar a few exceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephen has a point here!

We can choose to rate anonymously or not!

But ... all our photographs for critique go directly to the >Rate Photos< is this true?

 

and as John E. said it, we have to be more collegial, to help each other , to discuss freely the Photography,

 

so, I think we dont need this Anonymous rating, especially that there is no Reward for the Best :) or please change it!

 

Make us comment first and then rate! Or make a display that when One rate low, he/she has to explain it!

I saw that kind of system on other sites and IT IS WORKING smoothly!

 

Strange competition is going on here on PN!

 

Thank YOU :)

 

Biliana

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Biliana

 

I can understand your frustration when photos you feel to be of high quality, yours or others, are rated very low by anonymous raters with no comment or critique as to why. However that is the natural consequence of a system designed to encourage 'bulk, batch' rating of images with little time for thought or serious evaluation. You should try not to take it personally as I am sure it is not intended to be and as they usually say, "if you don't like the rules, don't play the game".

 

Although I think it does diminish the value and intention of this site, which is to encourage the sharing and discussion of photography, when most members seem to be too busy anonymously 'rating' the ever increasing streams of uploads to have any time to actually look at, think about and discuss what they are seeing.

 

That is not meant as an attack on photo.net members at all, it is just the inevitable result of the current system in place. However, if the system was changed to prevent anonymous rating and/or require discussion of the images then there would be a lot less members and therefore a lot less subscribers but I am sure the overall quality level of photography would improve as would the level of discussion. Hmmm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One simple solution is to include all ratings in the calculation. I can see no virtue in only

including anonymous ratings in the calculations. These are the ratings of the least value to

the photographer seeking the opinions of his or her peers. While not perfect, it would help/

As the system stands today anonymous ratings are valued over ratings from known

photographers -- that makes no sense at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see nothing has really changed in my absence :) John, you have a valid point & Bob, your stats are most certainly correct, but at what sacrifice? (I'm shaking my head :)

 

My experience with PN has been a good one. I enjoy PN for learning & expression. It use to be a site of community, people actually participated & voiced their opinions & feelings. I can not say this is true today. Most of the voices have been silenced, sad. Reminds me of our US government, people afraid to voice their true opinions for fear of ridicule or malicious aggravation by our government. What's wrong with this picture? Lack of inspiration & heart in the quest for the almighty dollar? Of course, as always, this is just my opinion & I am probably wrong. J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While there has been some arbitrary censoring by the administrator of this site, I think the

issue here is that there is a system in place that actually hinders the free exchange of

information between peers who are here to participate in that collegial communication. I'd

like to say that I neither fear my government nor PN!

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, Dear John,

 

you are so right regarding that ONLY Anonymous rating is consider in calculation of the average!

This is a really not Fair :( and sad too :(

 

And I am not only speaking for my sake, but in general!

 

Thank you dear John for your opinion :) but it seems that the Administration does not care about us Photographers, but only for the Money!

 

Too sad :(

 

Biliana

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<< but it seems that the Administration does not care about us Photographers, but only for the Money!>>

 

You just keep rolling out the absurdities, don't you? It must be wonderful to be able to make up random nonsense to spew forth onto your keyboard.

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...