Nudes: a voracious hole of ratings

Since some months to the date, I've seen the number of rates that my

postings get are gradually sinking. Some time before to get more

than 10 rates was really easy for a non-so-good shot, and to receive

more than 30 in a better-than-average one was relatively easy. Now

those quantities are reduced to miserable 5 to 10 rates, even for

the better ones.

 

On the other hand, a search on the TRP classified by number of

ratings ("ratings" category), shows that a huge amount of them are

going to nudes. Even the first one has got these last 3 days 112

rates! Not only that, but also out of 21, 13 are of nude girls.

 

I would like to know if anybody else is "suffering" from this...?

 

I'm not against nude, in fact many of them are really good and I

like them, but what's the sense in receiving a hundred rates, when

other kind of shots can't even get more than 5? Well or not so well

crafted, a few dozens of rates would be enough to know what viewers

like and what not. I've seen on my own images that 30 rates usually

is enough to show a clear average trend...

 

Would it be better then, to limit them to such amounts, so all the

other rates could go to other category's shots? Is there anything

else that can be done about this? Is the aim of the site's

administrator to do something to allow a more equalized distribution

of rates?

Nestor, what I think you're seeing is, in some regard, complacency of the site administration.

 

Watching what's happened to the critique gallery over the past year has been obvious to many. The Nudes photographers are being "watched" in "favorites" lists, and when the post an image, their "watchers" receive an alert or notice that the photographer has posted, and flock there to view it.

 

This is not unlike the circles of mate raters, who too watch for each other to post so that instead of critiqueing, they can award each other 7/7s to attain front-page visibility in the Top Rated Photos pages.

 

One thing is for certain - you're not going to take the voyeuristic nature out of most of the males who vist/rate/critique the nudes, and you're not going to take the egomaniacal personalities of the mate raters and change them.

 

So, with visibility being directly correlated to such things, more rates and critiques are going to go to photographs in the above circles. In my opinion, the site community as a whole has dropped in integrity and earnestness where the Critique Forum is concerned. Most veterans will now concede, "Ratings are useless here anyway, and the Top Rated Photographs these days are often a joke. I don't really visit the Gallery any more."

 

All that's left is for the site to take action, in some form or another. However, keep in mind that whether it's people peeking at nipples or large influxes of mate raters enjoying their self-induced legends, this does increase site traffic, and therefore revenue for Photo.net. Makes you wonder if the site admins therefore really see anything as "broken."

 

So - are you alone in your "suffering?" Heck no. Would something else be better? Depends whom you ask - folks like me and yourself, or the administrators....

you're right on your points, but before the threads go to the wrong direction, I would like to make an observation: mate-rating is an old, ever-lasting, non-ending problem. Doesn't matter what the site's administration does, it always come back.

 

BUT: the matter with nudes is very NEW. In fact I see it as an explosive process started the day the category was created. It only makes easier to everyone to go and find what they're looking for...

(Not for nothing porn sites are among the best businesses on the web).

 

So: would the elimination of this specific category reduce the voracity of this "black hole"?

Nestor, I think there are a lot of us long-time members of the site who have noticed, especially over the last 3-6 months, a significant drop in number of ratings. I'm not sure the nude section is the cause of this. I'm more inclined to think it's the mate rating--the ratings have risen dramatically for those playing that game: the average is now over six for the first three or four pages. However, I don't think the ratings have increased much for the average user of the site. I expect if you'd start doling out 7/7 and write "Magnifico 7/7!!!!!" and "Terrific 10/10!!!!" for a few weeks your photos would start appearing on the first few pages and garner considerably more ratings. While you wouldn't get any useful comments (try offering a suggestion/critique for a mate/top-rated photo--it's as if you tried to defile the dead pope), you certainly would get more exposure.

 

As for the nude category, I think it was a good idea to put it in its own area. Many of us look at PN in the US, where nudity on the computer at work is potentially grounds for termination. The nude section is a mixed bag: some very good, artistic nudes mixed in with a bunch of snaps of guys/gals who get a thrill out of posting naked pictures.

He's right - while you can try to break into those circles with patronizing, overblown compliments, you won't get critiques in return. I tried the other day, and got slammed by some Spanish fellow's daughter, who also uses the site. I reported it to Abuse, but Jeremy did nothing <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3243196">here</a> <br> or <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3243197">here.</a> <br>

<br>

 

As I said, there seems to be complacency. <br>

 

<br>

So again, the problem really isn't the nudes in my opinion either. It's that the Gallery is mostly now populated by people who are either very new and confused, or on a mission - and that mission ain't to help you take a better photo.

I think the cause is simple. 90% of the viewers who come to this site do it for the nudes, so the nudes get 90% of the ratings.

Don't forget, there's no age filtering here. So anyone can view any image. To give a hypothetical example.

 

You're a 15 yr old male, into photography. You sign up for a free membership, post a couple of photo's and tell your friends about them. One of your friends decides to check out your work, and does a bit of further browsing through pnet. Finds that there are freely available nudes to look at. Lots of them. Lots and lots. Some that border on being explicit or porn. Said friend then tells all of his friends about this great site that has freely available shots of nude women that is open to everyone. OK, you get the picture.

 

I don't know if this occurs in reality or not. But I could guarantee that if I was 15 yrs old and stumbled on a site with lots of freely accesible nudes, I'd be telling all my friends to join.

 

Keep that in mind.

 

I think that it won't be long until pnet requires an age check to view photo's that are categorised as nude. (Brian - I know it's difficult to implement, and easy to get around, but you may need to legally sometime in the future - this is not a suggestion as they don't bother me)

The interest in nudes is probably human nature and unavoidable. However it appears that many ameteur critics like to slam anything that does not show exposed breasts or some notion of avant-garde edginess. The website would have more credibility if users just skip over genres of photography that they do not like. Handing out 2's and 3's because one does not like nature, macro, etc, is not appropriate behavior. On a positive note, at least P/N does not have commercial adult entertainment businesses posting images in the nude gallery to advertise pay websites.

I have nothing aginst nude photo as animal photos, I can appreciate some, as beatiful shot even if are not my favourite pictures, but it's clear to everybody that these kind of subject will receive always more and better rating than other subject. I am thinking for my next picture: a nude woman with a bird in a landscape with sunset. To avoid strange missunderstanding: I am joking.

And don't forget the sailboat!

Tomaso, don't forget a flower, too.<div></div>

Craig, I don't think the scenario you referred to above is exclusive to males under the age of 18. I'm fairly confident that men of all ages (and women too), visit PN specifically to view the nude category.

 

Some go there so they can give them low rates and plaster comments about how evil they are. Others go there for more obvious reasons. Then....there are those that go to that category because they appreciate the difficulty in shooting a quality nude photograph.

 

The problem isn't the nude photographs, it's the lack of integrity of some of those that view them. I have no problem "losing" rates to nude photos. Without the nude photos, those rates aren't going to then be doled out to non-nudes. The raters will simply stop visiting the site. In general, the nudes might get more views and more rates than other photos. However, the avarage rate seems rather low in many instances. Many of those rates the nude photos get are from simple minded people who spend hours looking at nude photos and then justify their voyeurism by posting low rates-as if on some mission of morality.

I couldn't agree more with these two points:<p>

 

<i>"Many of us look at PN in the US, where nudity on the computer at work is potentially grounds for termination."</i> - Robert.<p> <i>"It's that the Gallery is mostly now populated by people who are either very new and confused, or on a mission - and that mission ain't to help you take a better photo."</i> - Christopher.<p>

 

It seems that unless you have a knock-out photo (usually digitally manipulated nudes, landscapes, flamingos, or pelicans) you're out of luck when it comes to visibility and ratings. If, within the first 15 minutes or so (after being submitted for critique), your image doesn't receive the big "7/7 Wow!" hits, it will gradually disappear from the gallery and will eventually be "lost" in the archives amongst thousands of other neglected submissions. The high rated images will draw in more and more attention and ratings - especially from all the newbies (usually non-subscribers) and mate-raters etc. <p>

 

Because of all this, the ideal purpose for the critique forum is lost, as it becomes a place of popularity and worship rather than a place of constructive criticism and learning. Last time I checked, even the critique-only forum is fading in terms of visibility and participation. So no matter where we turn, the majority of us are out of luck.<p>

 

But we can't forget that PN is a free venue for most, which takes the seriousness out of it all. Notice all of us here, in this thread, are subscribers... I wouldn't doubt that most non-subscribers think PN is just a fun pastime - which it is - but there's no sense of any commitment to improving the site as an intellectual, photographic community.<p>

 

One suggestion I have, which could help with the overall drop in ratings that we notice, is to have a section of the critique forum dedicated to presenting neglected photos with little to no ratings or views. Or, rotate neglected photos through the rate-recent feature before images that have already gained 10+ ratings or 100+ views. This would ensure <i>equal opportunity</i> for all.<p>

 

- my $0.02

Christofer and Edward you are right I forgot also the pier and the snow. Chris your picture is only 9\9 because nude is not so nude.

How I could forget the trees? I am a specialist too !

Nudes getting more than their "fair share" of views. Wow, who would ever have thought THAT would happen...

 

I think we need a rule that all nudes should be male, ugly and older than I am. That would cut their viewings.

 

The only way to reduce the popularity of Nudes would be that, or to have a category for Porno.

Hey...I'm all for a NUDE MALE category. However, I think we could lose the old and ugly requirement unless we apply the same requirement to the NUDE FEMALE category. All those flawless, large breasted naked women are giving me an inferiority complex. Some wrinkles and cellulite would be refreshing!

 

Chris, I think you should post your composite for critique. It has all the ingredients to be on the first page of the TRP. Technically, the flower is a little too centered. You might consider moving it a bit to the left.

I think there should be a mathematical bias rating for each category. Nudes, solely because they are nudes, bias high. Other categories will tend to bias lower. This is not a complicated process mathematically to post the ratings with a separate mathematically derived "bias" factor and an explanation of it. There would still be the given rating. But doing it this way would level the playing field.

Mr. Appoldt, I read diagonally over your disagreement with the Cano's, and I can see that you have reasons to feel gravitated by them. But could you please refrain yourself from making remarks and generalizations over user's nationality?. Could you not say some fellow instead of some Spanish fellow?.I've read several threads this afternoon just to find several references you've made about other user's nationality.

When did mentioning someone's nationality in a non-derogatory manner become offensive?

 

This is like when I was a child and the teacher asked me what school bus I rode. I didn't remember the number (I was very young), but I knew it it was the same bus as a girl standing a few feet away with some other students. I didn't know her name, and the only thing to differentiate her from the other girls she was standing with was the fact that she was black.

 

I said that I rode the bus with "the black girl over there" and a parent-teacher conferance was underway the following week.

 

Unless "Spanish" is an insults, then I don't see a problem.

Laurie lol

 

Since I am somewhat new here, I will refrain from going to the point of how I think things should be!

 

But when I joined, I thought this site would help me gain some fresh insights into exploring my own creativity and helpfull thoughts by other members to help me improve, but so far, for the most part, about all I have gotten is a very few varying coments and a small amount of and wildly varying rates, and on one of my photo's a coment that said it wasn't a photo!

 

So, now Im wondering if joining this site, was such a good idea or not!

 

I will say this though, it seems to me the most honest rates that I have gotten have come from paid members, and no, I dont have any nude photo's in my portfolio, but Im thinking of doing a series on nude sheep to help boost my overall ratings though! "Wha do ya think"

 

Ken.

I think you'd be better off not getting attention from those raters looking for nude sheep images...

Well we do have a very large sheep farm nearby, and if I remember right, this is shearing season!

 

Ken.

"Nudes getting more than their "fair share" of views. Wow, who would ever have thought THAT would happen... "

 

You've missed the point, Bob. It's not about some "fair share", but a matter of no-rates, no-feedback, no-visibility for most of the shots that aren't nudes at the advantage of nudes. And as I stated above, it looks like this is a process that have been taking place since the implementation of the nude category.

 

It's not a matter of "justice", it has to do with the aim of the site... And I'm meaning this not only as images-poster, but also as a viewer.

 

It's not only a problem of mate-rating: rates are becoming a scarce mercancy, so let's try to distribute them in a smarter way. If one category like nudes is taking too much of them, then let's do something **different** to overcome the legal problem in some countries.

Laurie: I will begin approaching men for nudes tonight, no worries. Will report to you from the ER in the morning on progress.<p>

 

Cristian: I like to think I politically police myself well, and apologize if I have sounded deragatory in any way. If you follow my comment trail long enough, you'll find that my present belief is that due to Photo.net's lack of translated user/rating guidelines, many ways of participating on the site by non-English speakers are mis-used due to lack of understanding. <p>

 

That said, especially where the gallery is concerned, it would seem as though many non-English speakers - particularly many SPANISH speakers (regardless of origin) - seem to think the Critique Forum is a popularity contest, having never read the Rating Guidelines <a href="http://www.photo.net/gallery/photocritique/standards/">here.</a> <p>

 

To further illustrate that point, I'd be happy to provide you with a (confidential) list of rather high-profile Spanish-speaking photographers on this site who are consistently highly rated by one another, yet do not participate in any forums, giving or taking, aside from "7/7!!!"-type comments in the Gallery. How could they? They have no idea what they're reading. Numbers they understand, though. <p>

 

It's not derogatory, it's merely an observation. Further, please observe I have frequently suggested that the site admins translate many portions of this site to a variety of other languages, as its international community has quite obviously grown quite a bit. <p>

 

I have made reference to a "Spanish Photo Mafia," which is a result of my photos (and many others') being occaisionally attacked by Spanish-speaking photographers and their friends (and even their children)who feel that a "4" on a rating or any kind of honest critique is an insult. I use "mafia," an Italian term, as rumor has it that historically, in order to profit, some Cosa Nostra -involved hoods have been known to demand appeasement payments (in this case, 7/7s) in order to keep them from harming you (in this case, down-rating). <p>

 

Capiche? <p>

 

If you feel my assertation is flawed, please feel free to continue the conversation with me here, on a new thread, or on email - you're most welcome.