root Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Looking at the behavior patterns of subgroups isn't really that complicated. You could do it . . unless you too are concerned about having your own preconceived ideas challenged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faith_cohen Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 <i>"I think many of us are of the opinion that a significant number of TRP images, say in the top three pages of the default view, don't deserve to be there."</i> <p>I certainly don't share that opinion. These are what, "last 3 days by number of rates", right? Well, number of rates is number of votes. What else should you expect, that people only rate (vote on) what they imagine that a handful of self-proclaimed "experts" or "elves" think are "great" photos rather than what are reasonably "great-try-and-better" (some truly great, too!) photos, the ones that a real variety of photographers, the ones "like-you-and-me" (and not just the "edgy" ones seeking revalidation of their unique styles) actually take and make? This is not only arrogant thinking but sheer chutzpah! <p>Such is the lobbying by a handful of members who lament the disgruntled ones (whom they admire) who leave because they no longer monopolize "visibility", and who want to turn this site into another boringly predictable fine arts type photo site where many truly good photographers get ignored because their "styles" don't fit in with the flavor and favor of what the "cognescenti" prefer to have you and I view as "good photography"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl smith Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 <I>Similarly, average length of comments hasn't changed for three years. That is a simple fact, rather inconvenient for the folks that think otherwise. Perhaps more complicated statistics will allow people to believe that comments have indeed gotten shorter, except for all those comments that shouldn't count, and which perversely seem to make it look like comments haven't gotten shorter.</i><br><br>That's quite easy to understand really, the majority of comments have always been vapid and useless, however has the number of comments grown to keep up with the increase in size of the photo library? You're not really giving us a lot of information and those of us with some statistics backgrounds would be interested in seeing the data I'm sure. (I would be interested). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith_laban Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 I�ve lost count how many times I�ve heard that <i>"ratings are for the site"</i> but I have to agree. The ratings system is a game show and like all good game shows it�s hugely popular, drawing punters to the site like flies to shite. It�s a popular vote by every Tom, Dick and Nutter out there. Any expectations that it is more than this are bound to lead to disappointment. A brief visit to the TRP pages only confirms the obvious. <p><i>�Campaining�</i><p>LOL, a politically correct excuse for abuse if ever I heard one. Love it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 You haven't been here long enough to understand the myriad reasons that people rate the way they do. Try spending more time in the gallery for a while instead of stalking me from one question to the next in this forum making the same wild comments. At some point, it will occur to you that many rates are a response to a person, and that the image is of secondary importance. Have you run into the phrase 'social currency' yet in your research in the archives on this issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_oneill Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Brian, any combination of the reasons you quote might be the cause, and like I said others mileage may vary, but I've gone from 1 comment per 7 rates, to 1 per 12 rates. Number of rates per picture is constant or even up slightly, no trouble getting people to score but less feedback. I haven't looked to see if it is the same people rating, but feeling they have nothing more to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincetylor Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Your latest image was on the top of the TRP all weekend long. Why do you suppose?? Perhaps because it was one of the few that were actually considered good by a majority of people. Better images will most likely catch the attention of many more people. If you take the time to visit the work of other photographers, commenting and rating their work, you will also receive an even greater measure of attention on your work. It's really not as complicated or out of balance as you might seem to believe. You might want to complain about how few comments are now being posted (in which I disagree) but look at all the comments your latest image received. What did you do differently aside from post an image that many felt was actually worth taking the time to share a thought?? It's not complicated to see what happened here. People liked it. Bottom line is if people want more comments/ratings/attention on their images, then either post quality images, or get more involved with other photographers and their work. Or better yet...do both! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincetylor Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 http://www.photo.net/photo/2284550 http://www.photo.net/photo/1370013 So not to be taken too negatively here Carl. Here are two images from your Piano series. One (your last entry) only received 16 ratings and one comment with an over-all rating of close to 5. The second one here received nine comments but 61 ratings with an even higher average. The point simply is that people are much more willing to get involved on your (my or anybody else?s for that matter) work that is considered as better. YOU might not think it is better, but the general public I can assure you feel differently. Because you post to a website that the general public does have access to and can rate as well as share opinions, you are therefore getting the feedback it truly warrants. If you want some strange committee to rate and choose the best of your work, the best of my work and anyone else?s it will simply be biased according to those few in that position. A view that most likely is even further away from the truth. How much better then to let the masses choose rather than a few. The numbers themselves (or lack of) can speak volumes all by themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Carl, I stated that the number of submitted photos has increased by about 25% while the number of comments has doubled. This means the nu number of comments per photo has increased also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faith_cohen Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Carl, your ad hominem "wild comments" response to the content of my previous post is a non sequitor at best, especially since I did not address you specifically by it. Furthermore, I have no need of site tenure to participate in these discussions, especially since I've spent sufficient time both in the gallery and reading up on this issue in the archives. As to your belief that TRP photo rates are ad hominem rather than to the image itself, well there is certainly truth to humans behaving as social creatures, especially if you have a ratings system that is not completely arms-length. But, as an example, it seems more likely that one would choose not to rate (but perhaps just to critique) a "mate's" inferior photo rather than to give it a high (or low) rate. I think Vincent's points are as completely on-target (as much as Brian's flexibly evolving thinking on the topic). But one thing Vincent didn't say is that you can give constructive comment without rating and acquire 'legitimate' "social currency" (the non-A.P. way!) by doing so. Oh, and the "interesting persons" feature is an obvious giveaway, too. Finally, it should be clear to any reasonable observer that without a system or forum devoted to constructive critique that is essentially divorced from the ratings system will it be possible for like-minded critics as yourself to feel comfortable interacting with images and their photographers on this site. Now do you still believe that I am wildly naive and clueless on this matter to comment on it? (rhetorical question)... But, to be respectful, I will try to avoid responding directly to your posts if you find that annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 You really do seem to have faith in the validity of the data that the rating system produces. Your popularity obviously reinforces your beliefs. What you don't want to hear me say is that the success of my recent upload and your success in general is due to a heavy dose of color saturation. Anyone who has studied the subject knows that other things being equal, warm colors attract. Should we as a site recognize that any image with red in it will always score better, and then try to get past that to consider issues of more substance? I think so, but it requires a somewhat more sophisiticated understanding of aesthetics than is routinely practiced by a critical number of raters. The roughly five or so highest rated images in my portfolio are nowhere near representative of my best work, not just in my opinion, but in the opinion of a variety of people out here in the real world, including photographers and non photographers. The data you refer to on my two piano images reflects differences in critique list policies. You also don't seem to be aware that many members have uploaded the same images at different times, sometimes with different frames and have reported very different scores. Did you read my proposal from earlier today? I am suggesting that the site offer an ADDITIONAL page of images selected by a different curator every day. Brian says the default page is popular, but of course all default pages are popular. It's what's being offered as the most visible, so it's a self fulfilling prophesy. We can debate who gets to decide what images really are good or not - the photographer, your best buddies, judges, buyers - but what can not be argued is that a curator based default page would have more variety of both style and photographers and would provide a better source of learning than the current ratings based pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 It boils down to this: Many of us would like to see a much higher proportion of comments with analytical content on images on the top pages than exists now. Making the game more fair and promoting more diverse images would attract those who can facilitate that change. They're connected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_daalder Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 <i>the success of my recent upload and your success in general is due to a heavy dose of color saturation. Anyone who has studied the subject knows that other things being equal, warm colors attract.</i><p>My last few uploads are definitely more colourful than previous postings and I too seem to have attracted more than my fair share of feedback. I say <i>fair share,</i> because I very much consider feedback as a two-way street. Just unable to participate at my usual levels right now.<br>I've just visited <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/2344053&size=lg"> Carl's latest <i>winner</i></a> and highlighted part of his own commentary as particularly relevant (to me). There is no doubt in my mind that images rich in colour (call it super saturated if you like), <i>do</i> attract more attention. Vincent's <a href="http://www.photo.net:13170/photodb/folder?folder_id=232970"> Tropical Images </a> folder is a good example of this, imo. Indeed, as Brian M. already wrote in November 2002 (!): <i>"Of course, slavish high ratings of excessively saturated images are epidemic on This Server."</i><br>The context of his comment was probably tongue-in-cheek, but Brian has made the point in other ways too, by siply uploading a red coloured square. It got feedback!<br>Using Vincent's folder as an example is not a deliberate attack on Velvia or saturated colours in general. I happen to like quite a few of his images and although I've never been to Hawaii, I imagine that (just like our local Tasmanian landscapes) it is a very colourful (tropical) place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_daalder Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Oh, and my apologies to Mark Lucas... <p>I'm not interested in any ratings experiment. I'll stick to just leaving comments, with the occasional rating to (indeed) assist with the visibility of a particularly good image.<br>Carl, don't expect the <i> default selection</i> of the TRP to change (again). It does work, in a fashion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincetylor Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Sure images rich in color are often pleasing to the eye. But it still has to work. I've also seen more than just a few colorful images on this site that did not work at all. Also, you will see quite a few B&W images on this site that are very popular as well. In fact there is a thread discussing the alleged bias selections of the Photo of the week being disproportionately B&W. Either way, to be successful in this business or to just improve our craft, composition, subject matter, tones, sharpness, lighting ALL play a key factor. Anybody that says otherwise is fooling himself and can perhaps never expect to grow much or amount to a whole lot in this hobby or profession. It is a fundamental principle in life that any tradesman knows his craft well...not just be one-dimensional. A Quarterback might indeed throw the ball 80 yards, but how are his touch passes? Can he read defenses, handle the pressure? Sure an experienced MD might be the best at diagnosing an unusual medical condition. But does he have the human element...kindness, or how about a measure of empathy?? One or two visits to the opposite will have one looking for a new MD! You just use can't blanket statements like above Carl and believe you actually hit the nail on he head. In fact you�ve missed the nail entirely and might be in need of a good ole MD now for that thumb that got in the way. One of course that has a good measure of empathy as well.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajpn Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 I given this quite a bit of thought since the last time this ratings discussion made its rounds on the forums. I don't believe it is something that is going to change. You either live with it, or you spend a lot of time being frustrated by it. In the meantime I had a picture go all the way to the top, and I must admit it changed my perspective somewhat. It actually inspired me to get out and shoot, gosh; I lost count, but probably 15 times in the past 5 weeks. And I know it increased my visibility quite a bit. I've never had a problem not getting enough comments. If I'm not getting any, I usually go out and find someone else's picture to comment on... it comes around. And I get regular visits from some of the people on this site I respect the most. To me that is the greatest compliment of all. You know who you are. Along with the people on my friends list I exchange comments with, I find myself content with the number I receive. I do try to comment on at least 60 to 75% of the pictures I rate. I believe that is also going to generate some return interest. And I think it's a good thing to let people know that I gave their picture more than a passing thought, even if it is only a few words. Personally, I'd rather have someone rate my pictures the way they feel about them, than not rate them at all. The exposure might get your image seen by the greatest constructive criticism youﾒll ever receive. On the other hand I also believe that if you rate a picture a point or more, above 'or' below the average, you should make a point of commenting. It's just the decent thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajpn Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 I given this quite a bit of thought since the last time this ratings discussion made its rounds on the forums. I don't believe it is something that is going to change. You either live with it, or you spend a lot of time being frustrated by it. In the meantime I had a picture go all the way to the top, and I must admit it changed my perspective somewhat. It actually inspired me to get out and shoot, gosh; I lost count, but probably 15 times in the past 5 weeks. And I know it increased my visibility quite a bit. I've never had a problem not getting enough comments. If I'm not getting any, I usually go out and find someone else's picture to comment on... it comes around. And I get regular visits from some of the people on this site I respect the most. To me that is the greatest compliment of all. You know who you are. Along with the people on my friends list I exchange comments with, I find myself content with the number I receive. I do try to comment on at least 60 to 75% of the pictures I rate. I believe that is also going to generate some return interest. And I think it's a good thing to let people know that I gave their picture more than a passing thought, even if it is only a few words. Personally, I'd rather have someone rate my pictures the way they feel about them, than not rate them at all. The exposure might get your image seen by the greatest constructive criticism youﾒll ever receive. On the other hand I also believe that if you rate a picture a point or more, above 'or' below the average, you should make a point of commenting. It's just the decent thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pradeep1 Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 My 2 cents - I subscribe to the point that getting the initial views and ratings is the most important when it comes to further ratings and views. if a picture catches quite a few eyes to get you a rating, that photo will typically do very well in the next few days. A case in example is my recent photo - <a href=http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=0089RQ&photo_id=2335114&photo_sel_index=0>'Look into my eyes...'</a>, i got an overwhelming response for the photograph, though it didnt have a saturated red which is mentioned in a post above, it was actually a pretty desaturated image except for the eyes (the saturation in the eye was not visible in the thumbnail). <br> One big problem i have seen on the site is that of not being able to accept a low rating, i was really angry the first time this happened to me too. but now it does not matter to me, i look forward to the comments more, because thats where you learn. I believe we are all here to learn the tricks of the trade and would love to hear from fellow photographers views on our work.<br> This brings me to my title - 'Get Turked!'. How many of us just hate people like Thomas Turk comment on our portfolio? We live in a predominantly democratic world and people have their views and the right to express it. I think we need more people like Thomas Turk here on this site. I was Turked quite a few times, and the first time, it was tough to take because he rips apart a photo (There is a lot to learn from this man). I think we need to appreciate the fact that the poor old man takes the time out and writes a long comment on your photo. Dont take everything to heart, the basic reason we are all here is to have fun, learn, and make new friends.<br> I make it a point that i comment on every photo that i rate (dont get the time to rate too many though). Every photograph that catches my eye is something i learn from, and Mark is right, we need to see the other photos too, other than what catches our eye.<br> Personally, i have had a very few photos which have done really well with the ratings, espescially the recent <a href=http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=0089RQ&photo_id=2335114&photo_sel_index=0>'Look into my eyes...'</a>, which had an overwhelming response, and in my opinion, over rated ratings, but i guess the members were carried away by the cute kid. Sometimes i wish some of my other favourites like the <a href=http://www.photo.net/photo/2197412>'Orange flower'</a> did so well as this photo, but i guess we need to accept it that luck is an important factor, and so is ones skill and if they both come together, u have hit the jackpot!<br> Hoping for a more peaceful and fun filled future at this site :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peggy_jones Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 as an exercize one should periodically eyescan the "24-hour TRPs by average" just to see if your own "sense" of the first page shows superior images than that of the second page, and then the third page, and so forth. rarely if ever do my eyes tell me that the second or third page ought to replace the first page. true, there will always be a few individual images up to a handful of pages down that I personally would place into the top page. but that's not surprising. and even if a "guest curator" would place such images into top page view, it would be at the expense of images others might feel are more worthy. also, I am not sure many would be pleased that images aside from the moderated POW forum be singled out by some expert or committee for prominent exposure for unmoderated discussion without the photographer's consent. I suspect that's why many, if given the choice, would rather see a voluntary photographer-generated, integrated system and forum for non-rated critiques of photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 ". . . . true, there will always be a few individual images up to a handful of pages down that I personally would place into the top page. but that's not surprising. and even if a "guest curator" would place such images into top page view, it would be at the expense of images others might feel are more worthy." Yes, but which others? It's mostly the same people who rate often and mostly each other. Should we continue to empower them? " . . . . . also, I am not sure many would be pleased that images aside from the moderated POW forum be singled out by some expert or committee for prominent exposure for unmoderated discussion without the photographer's consent." You've gotten right at the heart of the problem. This is a photo critique forum, yet many of us have years of evidence to support the assertion that while a few like to have images on the top pages so they can have a no holds barred discussion of their images, a significant number only want adulation and will not respond to constructive critique. Often as not, the next fan will debunk what you've said as a sign of loyalty. I haven't followed Mark Lucas' comments and rates, nor do I know if he has tried to follow up on any of them, but many, including the 'balance brigade' of a few months ago, tried before him and found that they were hopelessly outnumbered and therefore unsupported. A key point that I think many are missing is that if you create an environment where experienced people bent on diversity are picking images, it will change the complexion of the uploads over time. There's a long list of members who reduced their upload volume or gave up completely because it became obvious that their shooting style did not fit into the pop culture filter where it takes only a few low rates to drop you down the list and out of sight. Brian has lamented that images that aren't popular don't get exposure. Well here's a simple way to correct that . . . and keep in mind that the pages we have now are just one click away. You can play in any sandbox you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jouni lehtonen Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 I think to most important think at ratings is to somehow get tens/hundreds of rates, so it wouldn't matter if some people would give "revenge" or "mate" votes or whatever, because it wouldn't affect much to average. Then you could really say something about your photo by rating. Like in finnish aukea.net, you get easily 100 rates per photo, and you can really say does people like your photo or not. There you can submit only 1 photo/gallery at month, so not so many new pictures comes everyday, and so every photo gives more viewing time at front page... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajpn Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 That's a good point Carl. But I don't believe anyone can predict which will, or will not be a winner every time. Save for, if so and so did it, it probably will have a much better chance. Still, see something often enough, and it becomes banal... What sells may be influenced by pop culture, but I for one, believe pop culture is ever changing. You just need to have the courage to keep trying, until your vision changes it. Something hot this week may not mean much to anyone the next. Anyway, this is all subjective to all kind of different factors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajpn Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 One other thing... go over to the critique section, and check out the photo net featured critics. Do a little comparison on what they find to be the best. It's quite entertaining in my opinion. At least one or two of them haven't even coughed up a pair of 7s in... as long as over a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Jouni, isn't it interesting how the most popular people upload the most images?! . . . . the attention is addictive . . . and we keep right on facilitating them. If I spoke Finnish (and if it went to one per week :-)), I'd be there. Anthony, the whole idea is remove this process from a winner / loser or what is / isn't 'popular' mindset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Funnny you should mention the 'critics'. I was thinking about them earlier today. I'm of the opinion that there is no one on this site who does what the system considers ideal - rate lots of images (roughly 4/4 average) and offer lots of constructive criticism. We'll even make the portfolio optional. Anyone come to mind? Me neither. Same thing with the Curator's page in the TRP. Exactly eight images qualify in the one month sort. Check them out. It's all a joke and being rationalized as OK by definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now