Semi-anonymous ratings with no comments makes it hard to learn

[vertigoclimb]

ARGGGG! Well, the changes have been made and I'd just like to throw

my two cents in... When my photo's are rated I very much like to

look at the raters portfolio to see if there is something I could

learn from them. Now, not only am I getting no or very few comments

on the photos I put up for critique I can't even "try" to improve by

checking the work of the people giving low ratings or high ratings.

This makes it very hard to learn anything from anyone on this site.

I was helped a lot by the rating and critique system before. If a

rating or comment was left on my photo I could look at the portfolio

of the rater and if there was something I could learn from them it

was apparent. People left comments on ways to improve or left

incouraging words. Now, I get no feedback and a continuous flow of

semi-anonymous low ratings.

I posted four photo's for critique yesterday and got no -zero-

comments with many "fly-by" low ratings. This makes the rating

system of no use.

I don't ask for crituqes to get ratings (as usually I could care less

about ratings). I ask for critques to get critiques and advice and

by looking through the critiquers and raters photo's I've learned a

lot. Now, this seems difficult if not impossible. If I'm getting no

advice/comments and can't learn from superior photographers what's

the point? Any guidance as to how the new system can help me

improve would be appreciated.

[rich815]

I'm at a loss as to how one learns from superior photographers from their ratings. Ratings are for the site anyway. Participate in discusions and forums, comment on other's images thoughtfully, respectfully and with feeling, invite others to do the same for your images. That's how you can get advice/comments from others and can learn from them. Seems like a far superior way to learn than a number given to your image. This site has numerous other better ways to learn photography than using the ratings.

[mondiani]

Hello Lisa,<p>

 

I had taken a look on your last submission the abstract manipulation and I had seen that some had received a nice feedback (concerning ratings and some not) that will tell you at least the one the photonet audience prefer... but I will not expect to receive a more valuable opinion or critiques from photographers than the average Joe about your abstract... Here we cannot talk about exposure, dof, contrast. I'm lost though I also tried some abstract.

[mike_morgan1]

<i>When my photo's are rated I very much like to look at the raters portfolio to see if there is something I could learn from them.</i>

<p><p>Can you give one example, just one, of something you have learned from knowing the person who gave you a rating? Aren't comments much more helpful? I think so. If you want comments, give comments.

[vertigoclimb]

Thank you Mike. I agree that if you want comments you must give comments. I give them very often along with most of my ratings. As to learning something from ratings... well, I've often selectively browsed the portfolios of people who've rated my photo's and learned much about lighting, technique, equiptment, styles, etc from studying their photo's (there are so many talented photographers here). I've read comments they've left for other photo's and learned from those as well. It's still possible to view raters portfolios but seems much more time consuming if not impossible to try to figure out which ratings go with which rater. I've learned a lot from ratings I felt were too high and those I felt were too low. I guess that people are here on PN for different reasons. Your reasons seem different from mine though no less valuable and you "gain" from this site something different than I as well, or so it would seem. Thank you for taking time to respond and I wish you all the best.

Kind Regards,~Lisa

 

Ps. also, the comments that were mentioned above were left before I asked for a critque not because of the request.

[vertigoclimb]

here are the last few I requested a critque:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=008oP2&photo_id=2490731&photo_sel_index=0

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=008oOu&photo_id=2490723&photo_sel_index=0

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=008oOr&photo_id=2491162&photo_sel_index=0

 

...the issue of matching ratinge with the rater isn't the main topic of this thread. The main topic was that it seems I'm getting fewer comments than I did before the changes and not only wanted to vent my frustration but also wanted to ask if this is happening to others and to see if there is anything I can do to get more comments.

 

To quote myself: "People left comments on ways to improve or left incouraging words. Now, I get no feedback and a continuous flow of semi-anonymous low ratings. I posted four photo's for critique yesterday and got no -zero- comments with many "fly-by" low ratings. This makes the rating system of no use. I don't ask for crituqes to get ratings (as usually I could care less about ratings). I ask for critques to get critiques and advice and by looking through the critiquers and raters photo's I've learned a lot. Now, this seems difficult if not impossible. If I'm getting no advice/comments and can't learn from superior photographers what's the point? Any guidance as to how the new system can help me improve would be appreciated."

 

Again, thank you for your time and consideration. I'm not here to bicker of have my words picked apart for someone to attack me. I'm actually here to improve and seek guidance.

Regards,~Lisa

[vincetylor]

You are totally correct Lisa. I also understand your frustration. Since the changes I have received ten different ratings, but have no idea who gave them or what they were. They were all on photographs that were posted in the recent past. At least when you did receive a new rating, it was at the very least interesting to see who gave what. Most of the time I would then check out their folder to learn sometyhing about who they were. All of that is now impossible. It has also taken away a very fair measure of enjoyment for me as well as quite a few others. I am however optimistic that this experiment will be successful in showing that things were actually better before, and the names will be put back onto the ratings. Brian has also commented that perhaps to reduce the revenge comments, he will allow the photographer to delete comments on his or her own images/portfolios. There would be no reason to do that if he kept ratings anonymous. So, just hang in there and keep participating like you have been. aloha.

[wilsontsoi]

Got to side with Lisa and Vincent in this case as I can easily see Lisa's frustration. There are good and bad with the change I would say. Good is that the to-be-rater will not feel obligated to rate based on median value, but fairly from the to-be-rater him/herself (assuming the to-be-rater is fair and objective.) The bad is if the to-be-rater is "playing games," then there is no accountability whatsoever. This lack of accountability is a huge mistake in this change, IMHO. OTHO, lets just keep on shootin' and satisfy oneself, first and foremost!

[mottershead]

Vincent, you can still see who rated a photo -- only not what specific rating he or she gave. Are you saying that you were only inclined to check out someone's portfolio, etc, when you knew what the rating was? And now that you don't know exactly what rating someone gave, are you saying you aren't interested in the people who rate your photos any more?

 

Just out of curiosity, previously what were the magic rating values that would get you to check out a portfolio and give a rating in return?

[vincetylor]

You misunderstood what I said Brian. I will *always* eventually get to checking out the ratings and then the folders of that rater on each photograph that I have posted. It does not matter if rated a pair of 7s or a pair of 3s. That ability to check out those who've taken the time to rate my work is still there. What I am saying now is that the last ten or so ratings I received (since you made these changes) were on images posted weeks ago or longer....some much longer. There is no way in telling what these new ratings given were, nor who it was that gave them. I am not about to write down each images average, nor how many 6/6, 4/5 or whatever else I have received just to see what each new rating was.

 

When a new rating is given on a photograph that was posted months or even years ago, it means that somebody is interested in my work. Obviously they are not just looking at the last three images, but getting INTO my folders. When they take the time to leave just a rating without a comment (which is usually par for the course) I have a bit more appreciation for that rating than say for my last three images. Curiosity/interest then has my attention wondering who rated what. In the past, I would always check them out immediately. Now, I simply cannot tell who it was. Those older images have zero impact on the TRP, so the only real benefit of a rating is for the photographer. That would be me. I would simply like to know who took the time. Keep in mind that a few of my images have quite a few ratings. Even if I went through all of the raters folders (say on my latest Yosemite image) there is no way to tell who that *new* rater that came along today was. I'm sure not about to go through all of them again to see who the one new one was. Life or death on Photo.net?? Of course not. Just takes out a little of the fun as well as community connection in my opinion.

 

The point that many including myself are making Brian, is that even though the SITE considers the ratings only as a tool for visibility, the photographers see these ratings as a fair amount more! Thanks for asking.

[._._z]

<i><blockquote> Vincent, you can still see who rated a photo -- only not what specific

rating he or she gave. Are you saying that you were only inclined to check out

someone's portfolio, etc, when you knew what the rating was? </blockquote> </i><p>

 

I did. <p>

 

I found it a pretty instructive tool to visit the page of people who gave high ratings to

difficult photos I also liked, to see the work they made. Similarly, I found it interesting

to see the photos of those who gave very high ratings to mediocre <i>dreck</i>.

Visiting the pages of the former, especially their top-rated photos of others, gave me

access to some wornderful, buried portfolios I might not have otherwise found.

[mark_jordan3]

My overall impression is that knowing exactly what rating a member has given often leads to more bad than good...but I think Vincent has a reasonable concern. Like the comments offered to an image, could a date be tagged by each person's name in the list of raters? I think that would help alleviate the problem.

[nikos]

Vincent is right for the most part. What we've already been missing under the new system was a 'new ratings' notification. (like we have for comments) Someon would popo into your folders, find a couple of photos they thought were of particular interest and rated them. You would never know about it, unless you downloaded the CSV file periodically and compared the number of rating received on each photo. Now, with the total tally of ratings we can immediately tell if new ratings have been received. (it's easy to remember what the number was yesterday) Alas, we still can't find out what the photos were and what the ratings were.

 

The new system is alleviating all meaning for ratings after the 3-day TRP period. And as Vincent said, even though you Brian see the TRP classification as the ONLY meaning of ratings, many users (both exhibitors and gallery viewers) were attaching more meaning to them on many occasions. I understand that probably the eradication of this kind of use is part of the objective of the recent changes. I'm not sure it helps though. Unfortunately, I can't see any in-between solution that could maintain the key benefits of both systems.

[vertigoclimb]

Here we go again. Though this one was silly and thrown up just for fun (to make someone smile).... I've had 10 ratings... some very low. and again... no comments (the one comment left was left before the critique request). I've been looking around the internet for other photography/digital art communities... not sure if I'll transfer my photos/images somewhere else yet. I think I'll wait the new changes to PN out a bit longer to see if things improve.

 

Here are the #'s on this one:

Aesth Orig Ratings

1 1 1

2 2 1

3 3 1

4 4 3

3 6 1

4 5 1

5 7 1

6 6 1

 

I was sure this would elicit a comment or two (a small part of the reason for posting it. To see if it would). I found it odd that this wasn't thought original by some and would have loved to hear what was unoriginal about it (maybe they don't like the fact that it's many photo's together instead of one? but, it was in the digital alterations catagery so, that was par for the course). I could have learned something.... Leaves me perplexed. anyway, any insight would be of help.

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/2527367

 

As always, I hope your days are sunny and your nights are full of good company and a full stomach!

 

Smiles, ~Lisa

[obcy_astronom]

I am very new in photography. I love this site, I can enjoy other peoples work.

I strongly disagree with Lisa, she has a problem accepting low ratings on her images and she wants explanations; I am glad when people rate my pictures (whatever the rating is).It means that image attracted someone's attention.

[vertigoclimb]

obcy,

 

First, let me say thank you for posting. But, I'm not sure you read what I wrote. The issue isn't low ratings or my lack of acceptance of them. Low ratings are normal and my ego isn't so large as to expect everyone, or anyone for that matter, to leave high marks on all (or any) of my work. That would be simply useless. Like I said repeatedly above;

 

"I don't ask for crituqes to get ratings (as usually I could care less about ratings). I ask for critques to get critiques and advice"

 

I've come to PN to learn and I really appreciate all the comments I recieve (well, except maybe the comments about my character from people I've never met). If it was praise I sought I'd stick with the galleries who exhibit and show my art and an art medium I'm familliar with. Curators and art reps are always full of praise and grand words for their artists. I've ventured into a whole new territory and artform with photography and am very thankful for the comments that have been left for me making my learning curve much less lengthy.

 

I am a member of photo.net to get away from generic automatic praise. As I'm relatively new to photography, I'd like to hear from the many people who see my photo's as to what they think. Be it good or bad comments. They all help me improve. I know not everyone will comment as it's time consuming but, I was wondering why with the changes to PN many less comments were being left. I checked your portfolio and see that you're new to P.N so you wouldn't have been effected by these changes or even realize they happened. Being new to this art form I don't have a defined style yet and comments have really helped my skills evolve (in my humble opinion).

 

Also, though attracting "someone's attention" is a good thing, as it means someone looked at my photo and had an oppurtunity to help me learn or better my skills, I have no idea what they thought while looking if I recieve no comments. Maybe it's just me but, I didn't become a member of a "learning community" to simply exhibit my photo's. There are many other places I could have done that. I came to PN to learn.

 

I'd like to welcome you to PN and again thank you for taking time to comment. It is a great place to see other peoples work and learn more about photography. Many changes have been made here and that's what this forum thread was about. I hope to see more of your photography in the future and wish you all the best.

 

Kind Regards, ~Lisa

[reprint]

Lisa,

I am relatively new too but was curious if you have tried submitting a photo for critique without ratings option? I havent tried this yet. Does this result in more comments than if you submit for ratings?

[lars raun]

I think by making the rating anonymous photo.net removed some of the charm it had for me. I didnt mind getting low ratings because it was interesting to go and see what kind of taste the lowraters had. If a rater had an interest in for example macrophotography, I could more easily understand his/her dislike of my photos, or if the rater had a similar taste to mine, I could learn from the photos he/she had given high marks.. Now all the good or bad ratings are just numbers, meaning nothing to me because I can't see which rating came from who. I've not used the forums here so I dont know the reasons for these changes, but I fail to see any logic at all. Photo.net to me seems to be largely a nonverbal rating site. Considering its size, its amazing how few comments even popular photos are getting compared to much smaller sites. By removing the personal touch, I guess the site got rid of the hateful reactions from people who couldnt handle low ratings, but as stated it also lost some of its charm for me.

[mottershead]

The number of comments a photo receives doesn't have much to do with the size of the site. It is more a question of how many photos are competing for attention versus how many people write comments. People write about 40,000 comments on photos per month on photo.net, which dwarfs the number of comments written on most sites. However, they are spread across a very large number of photos, and many photos don't receive many comments at all.

[vincetylor]

You seemed to miss his point Brian. The "charm", the "fun", "more personal", "better connected" etc. etc. is what has been diminished in the eyes of many photographers because of the recent changes.

 

Lars does not even use the forums, yet was compelled to find one and make his opinions known. Opinions that should be of value to you since they are shared my many others. Believe what you wish to believe, but the Photo.net experience is not near what it once was for photographers. (Photographers are the people who create the images, that make up the gallery, that generate revenue producing ads)...........

[mg]

I've been wondering from day one what this semi-anonymity of ratings would change on the site and whether it was a good thing or not. I think I agree now partly with Nikos, that there are good sides and bad sides. And I agree with Lars Raun's post above about the bad sides.

 

No matter what you will say about it, Brian, fact is that 40000 comments a month on about 40000 uploads a month means that a photo uploaded to photo.net gets at the moment about one comment in average. Are you aware that virtually all other sites get you more than a single comment per photo in average?

 

The site where I now upload most of my work (and where I did pay my subscription twice so far) offers a site-wide average of more than 5 critiques per upload. In terms of quality of the comments, I also get far more interesting feedback on this other site than I do here. Finally, ratings don't matter at all on this other site; so, there are no retaliations, no confrontations and no petty folks to deal with over there - whereas photo.net actually rewards mate-ratings with its silly rating system. These are the reasons why my contribution to photo.net in terms of critiques is close to nil for more than a year.

 

How long can photo.net really ignore that friendly sites do exist out there? How long can photo.net be a site that encourages competition rather than collaboration...? In the long run, will an unfriendly rating system and a low number of comments per photo really attract more people...? I certainly don't think so, although it may attract more of those interested in gaming the system, and in "winning" what ever game they think they are playing...