Jump to content

Solving the anonimity versus credibility problem.


david morgan

Recommended Posts

Having read a number of posts on the rating question, it seems to me that it

boils down to the credibility of the anonymous rater. There is a need to

establish the credentials of the rater, where is the rater coming from and

what is his/her level of abiliity. I cannot envisage a huge problem in adding

the rater's personal overall rating alongside the rating he /she has given to

an image. It may be possible to use a symbol denoting the rater's standing.

This would solve the credibility question and preserve the rater's

anonimity.

 

I must admit that I am baffled by the speed of response of low raters as they

invariably hit you with 3/3s before the 4/4s and the rest can react. One could

be forgiven for thinking that there is a rating BOT at work on permanent

station.

 

Clearly I am spending too much time on this site, I must find other places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I�m with you credential is important. If the raters have photo portfolio. The photo it self will speak a thousand words. But if there is none. May be his just a 3 year old kid playing in the net. Regards DSC.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry Dave but I don't see how your proposal makes sense. One can make a legitimate critique even if their own end product is not the most popular. Boob pics get higher ratings. That does not make the shooter of those more qualified to rate. Photoshop effects get higher ratings. That does not make the photographer more qualified either. Abstracts often get low ratings but they are often more imaginative than the fog in the morning cliche shooters. Indeed, your own assertion that the ratings are too subjective shows why ratings are not suitable to rate raters.

 

Since you deem the 3/3s and 4/4s to be inherently invalid, you can merely disregard them and consider only the other ratings. If the objective is to enter into a photo contest, they are plenty around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John:

Did I say that ratings 3/3 and 4/4 are invalid? I hope that I am not so arrogant that I believe all of my posted images are undeserving of being rated low. I need to know what is the skill level of the rater. Even the boob brigade need a modicum of ability to obtain better than average ratings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You did say "I am baffled by the speed of response of low raters as they invariably hit you with 3/3s" So yes, you have identified these 3/3s as invalid. You need not be concerned with them as a result. You didn't seem as concerned about the high ratings even though they are often as questionable as the low.

 

The imperfections of the rating system are simply not going to go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What difference does the perceived skill level of the rater make?<p>

We all make judgements about things in our daily life (perhaps even assigning a "rating" to them), even if it's not a numerical one, without knowing the first thing about how the item we're rating is produced.<p>

In case anyone has difficulty with this concept, then consider the last film you watched, book you read, art gallery you visited, play you saw or even the last meal you ate in a restaurant (this one even has a correlation to the numerical rating - your tip). Did you form an opinion about it? Did you discuss your opinion with anyone else? Do you know the first thing about directing a movie, writing a novel or play, painting a picture or creating a culinary masterpiece? Have you ever even attempted any of these things?<p>

Why should photographs be any different from any other artistic medium? You publish your work here, in a public place, therefore it is open to public criticism, however it manifests, even though the great unwashed masses have no idea how long it took you to get that perfect shot of that texture in the concrete driveway.<p>

The "credibility" of the rater has no bearing here. If you want other professionals to view and rate/critique your work exclusively, then your work has no place here, or anywhere else in public view. You should find a place to display it only to other discerning eyes. The risk we all take, as artists, in whatever medium, is to have our work seen by an audience and, horror of horrors, have that audience express an opinion about it.<p>

Seriously, stop worrying about the anonymous raters and worry more about how you feel about your own work, because if you don't love it, it will show, and chances are nobody else will love it either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

these what happen to me somebody rated my photo 3/3 direct he doesn't leave any comment. so what i did i visit his page i notice he doesn't have any photo portfolio. and he rate 6000 plus 3/3 combine a & o. then in of the thread this morning i saw his name. and i ask him if ever he will share his photo portfolio with other members for learning puposes. another question i ask will he ever participate in the photo critique forum. i didnt get any answer they deleted the thread. i ask same question a long time ago to Don Farra used to be the holder of the most number of 3/3 rates. he didnt answer but my question is still there. i don't really mind getting 1/1, 2/2, 3/3. what i don't like is members open rate other members and they don't even have one photo in their page. and they don't even participate in the photo critique forum and doesn't want to communicate too if you eail the. john i want your opinion. regards DSC.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David Arran. I was working on the assumption that people who join a

photography website would have more than a passing interest in Photography. I have opinions on most things of course, I may dislike

a film because of it's direction but it would be highly presumptuous of me to publicly rate the director on a scale 1 to 10. I would not have the foggiest idea as to where to start my evaluation.

 

I am not ''worried'' about the rating system though the fact that the forum is filling up with posts about it suggests that all is not well and it probably needs to be looked at and adjusments carried out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A rating system, any rating system, will be by definition controversial and imperfect. Scale used, anonimity (of both rater AND author), justification, criteria, certification of rater, etc, etc, etc will always be open fields for debate.

 

We, of course, have the radikcal solution in our hands: not submitting our photos to rating. The fact is that we DO want our photos to be appraised by our peers. That's the purpose of the whole thing !

 

I have a lot of simpathy for David M's point. Me too, normally 2 secs after posting a photo for c+r, I'm hit with at least one ANONYMOUS 3/3. Why is always the first one and almost authomatic, remains a mistery to me. Has anyone ever received an identified 3/3 ? Not me and, believe me, I have collected a few of these on my galleries.

 

On the other hand, I presume that all ratings are validated in some way by the WM's ? How and when is that done, since some ratings from "new members" are kept uncounted for long periods ?

 

I agree there is no miraculous solution in any other site known to me. I would consider two possible modifications to the system -

 

1. Rating only available to members with an active photo gallery. Critique/comment open to all members

 

2. On the rating forum, the ANONIMITY option should be available but requiring explicit action by the rater (tick box)

 

Best regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rating system is designed on the assumption that a single rating does not need to have "credibility". The credibility and legitimacy of the photo ratings as a means of ranking the photos comes from the fact that many people are rating the photos and that each individual photo receives many ratings.

 

Think of it as like an election. No individual voter has to prove his credibility beyond being a citizen and being old enough. The legitimacy of an election is not based on the credibility or wisdom of any individual voter; the legitimacy of the winner comes from being the collective choice. A losing candidate who claimed to be the winner because his voters were smarter, had higher standing, or were somehow more qualified than those of his opponent would be quickly dismissed as an anti-democratic elitist and would get nowhere. The only form of this argument that would get any traction at all would be to question whether some of the voters weren't legally entitled to vote or whether some of the legally-entitled voters had been improperly excluded. But leaving that aside, all votes carry an equal weight. The essence of the photo.net rating system is the same.

 

As for your notion that the low raters "invariably hit with 3/3s before the 4/4s and the rest can react": this is just false. I really must stress that this idea, which is so often repeated in this forum that people now take it for true, is just a flat-out myth. As I reported in another thread, I studied the average of first ratings on photos versus the average of all ratings. There is less than a one-hundredth of a point difference. The rating distribution for first ratings is the same as the rating distribution overall. It just is not true that low raters invariably "hit you" before anybody else. Perhaps it seems that way, but it is not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion - valid, I hope - a name would help.

 

Just like we are doing right now. We are exchanging points of view in a free, open and civilized way, we may agree we mat disagree, I know who you are, you know who I am. What's so different about ratings ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian : Clearly, in a political election the public vote on a huge range of issues and cannot be expected to to be well versed on every single issue. PN, however is specifically a photographic website for people who are interested in taking photographs. The voters on PN range from the novice to the expert and no one is suggesting that anyone should be denied a vote but if photographers are to learn they need to know about the standing of the person they are learning from. Look at it as if it were a school or college. A mathematics

lecturer with zero qualifications in Mathematics would be a candidate for dismissal.

I am not calling for the dismissal of a poor ''teacher'', I merely need to know the credentials

of the person marking my work.

 

I can only speak of my own experience with the response of low raters, and they are

usually first up to knock my work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian compares the ratings to an election. Is this a florida type system where you

disenfranchise people (direct rates do not count)?

 

Surely the TRP is aimed at identifying the better images. If yes then a rating is a

judgement. So like the jury system in America not all are equal, as I understand it one can

object to jurors on a number of basis'.

 

I cannot think of any other field of art where one would treat equally the judgement of a

person knowledgeable, in a particular field, as being of the same value as anyone you

stopped and asked at random in the street.

 

It is this dumbing down which raises hackles.

 

Of course no one rate is significant, averaging will take care of that but how many rates

are needed for a good average?

 

Are the rates all of equal value. I do not think so.

 

A while back I suggested that we have a gallery of images our favourite photographers had

rated/commented/posted in the previous month. This is a subset of images which would

give me a 'qualified' and fresh set of images from my own choice of 'experts'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rather think, Brian, that you're wasting your time explaining the rating system yet again. Why don't you just add the following in large block capitals to the submissions page:

 

RATINGS ON THIS SITE ARE USED TO RANK IMAGES FOR DISPLAY. THEY ARE IN NO WAY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PHOTOGRAPHER AND DO NOT CONSTITUTE SOME FORM OF COMPETITION.

 

Of course, you'll still get plenty of people complaining but at least you can just point them back at the one explanation that counts.<div>00HqWX-32033284.jpg.0596f8dfa34ba8637e7e46c3aab1c14f.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an election. With no qualifications on the voters other than being able to register on photo.net. Specifically, a valid email address. One person one vote.

 

I keep saying this, but nobody likes this answer. At least not the people who commonly participate in this forum. If your judgement is different than the outcome of the "election", well that just means your judgement is different than the outcome of the election. As if that never happens with elections for public officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joao, if Brian (and those that think the current rating system is as good as it is ever going to get) is right about something, it's this: not all photos get that 'instant' 3. I had some of my own shots starting out out with 7s and 6s, and then collected the usual 3s. A gaussian distribution, I think. <p> I'm also not sure about the idea that only people with an active portfolio should be allowed to rate; I've encountered many.. well.. serious photographers who just didn't have their images uploaded on p.net. <p> I've also noticed that there's been some talking about judging the rater's competence by the general score of his own shots -- in this case, who and how decides what level is good or bad? Does my general 4,6/4,7 make me a mediocre or aspiring 'photographer'? <p> The anonimity tick box would be a welcome and perhaps effective (not miraculous, though) upgrade (I, too, suggested it, not a long time ago), though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

D, obviously not all and not always my photos get that 'instant' 3, just like you said.

 

The rule is one member one vote and the condition for voting is an active PN account, regardless of an active portfolio. Fair enough, I just thought that the purpose of being a PN member was to participate in this comunity as a photographer. What is the point of being just a voter ? And why keeping the votes from new members (are they members or not ?) on hold pending review ? And, if this is an election, why not open the vote to the general public, members or not ?

 

I fully agree with you that judging the rater's competence by the general score of his own shots would be even worse, how do different styles and aestethic options compare ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I keep saying this, but nobody likes this answer."

 

There are none so deaf, so the old saying goes, as those who will not hear. Console yourself with the observation that, for everyone who complains, there seems to be a thousand who don't.<div>00Hqcx-32034784.jpg.2dffdb7bb9f67b6ce82485d5df53881c.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really, if photos are a 3 in someone's mind, then so be it. That's what a critique is about. I think that people need to realize a critique is someones opinion about your work and should be honest about it. I looked at some of your work and would maybe rate some of it lower than 3's on originality.

 

Just think of your work in terms of photography as a whole...a 1 being crap, a 7 being work hanging in a museum or printed in a magazine or other high quality work. In those terms, a 3 or 4 is just the average photo- good-well lit and composed, but not exceptional or life changing.

 

If this is hard to take, then don't post images or ask for critiques. Maybe you've just had a wakeup call as to the mediocrity of what you're doing...and maybe there are jerks rating low for fun. But I would look to myself first before pointing a finger saying "how preposterous, my work is amazing!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Louis, your post describes the shortcomings of the selection process quite clearly. There are plenty of qualified critics on this site who could collectively select a better group of images on a daily basis. There's no debating that point.

 

The only reason the election model is being defended here is not that it's a popular pasttime among the long time members, but because it's considered an indispensible marketing activity to attract newbies - a fun thing to do.

 

And somehow that gets translated into the best of all possible ways of selecting images. . . . breasts, sunsets, faux reflections and all.

 

A question to ponder: What percentage of regular site participants rate from the RFC queue as an integral part of their activities?

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...