A rate question

[orensztajn]

When I put a photo for rate I can see that I get low rate by a lot of

anonymous people. Now that is fine but why just to rate low without a

meaningful comment? Aren't we here to learn? That is why I post my

photos for critiques so I want comment when somebody rates low.

What this anonymous rate means ?, are these from non members? In that

case shouldn't they been forced to comment when they post a rate

bellow 4 i.e?

Sorry for the english

[brad_stock_photography]

I am a non paying member with a gallery that is no where near the standard of average on this site so my opinion may well mean nothing. But I reckon the whole anonymous rating thing stinks. I have read many a thread on it now, and listened to both sides but still cant understand its benefits. And yes, a double 2 with no explanation realy can be frustrating. Best way to combat this really is ignore the ratings, and listen to whatever comments you get when lucky enough.

[jmontgomery]

The hard cold facts are that perhaps the anon raters 'are leaving a message' ... that they believe our shots submitted are average or otherwise. As an 'average' submitter myself, I do learn by this in itself. Maybe we should all just accept the ratings and strive for improvements based on our own judgements and what we do gather from the quality of others submittals as well as the occassional gem of a comment left by others on our shots. The fact is that I feel that I have improved the quality of my work from the information that I have obtained from PN reviews as well as from PN as a *resource* ... that many seem to forget.

[brad_stock_photography]

All valid comments yes. The only problem is when receive a low score, it would come across better if it was left with ways to improve. I have now read just about every thread on this matter and it was mentioned that some people are just here for the praise. And when I think about it, I do take everything I am told in, and try my hardest to learn from this, but I can't try and deny that I am actually one of these people. So maybe its just people like me that aren't digging it.

The other matter is though that you might find one thing about a photo absolutely exceptional, but then another may find it missing all the key ingredients. That's the best thing, its an artform with a different flavour for every individual. So really the ratings should be meaningless!!!!

 

Shoot to please yourself and accept your own gratification :)

[laurie_m]

As has been stated in numerous prior threads, when rates were NOT anonymous, and someone left a low rate (based on their own opinion), often, the recipient of the low rate would seek out the low rater and "revenge rate" that person's photos. The result....most, including myself, hesitated to leave a low rate (even with a comment). As a matter of fact, often, a rate of 4/4 was perceived by some as a "low rate" when in fact it's "average" based on the site's guidelines. I've been subjected to nasty e-mails from photographers who felt I was trying to "hurt" them because I left a rating of 4/4 or 5/5 when all their mates were rating the photo with 6's and 7's. Having been the victim of revenge rating and personal e-mail slams, I appreciate the anonymous rates. I can now honestly rate photos through the queue without fear of retribution. Before, I would just skip over any photo that I didn't feel warranted a 5 or better. I'm sure I wasn't the only one doing that. Would you prefer that? No rate vs. an honest average or below average rate?

 

I agree that it would be nice to leave a comment on all low AND high rates so the photographer knows what the rater thought was right or wrong about a photo. However, that takes a great deal of time if someone is reviewing many photos.

 

So, what I recommend, if you want quality comment on photos, is to find photographers who tend to write valuable comments and comment on some of theirs. Eventually, you'll end up with a circle of photographers you respect that will offer you the feedback you're looking for. You basically get out of PN what you put in.

 

Rates can be helpful if you view them with a grain of salt. Frankly, I find the most compelling photos tend to end up with a broad range of rates. If you get all high rates on a photo here on PN it's likely just another cookie cutter calendar photo that appeals to the masses.

 

It's funny how few complaints there are about anonymous high rates. Wouldn't it be just a helpful to hear what you're doing right?

 

The site doesn't require comments with rates. If it was required, the comments might be just a meaningless as the rate that was posted. It would also drastically reduce the number of rates being offered since those that rate 20-30 photos in a sitting couldn't/wouldn't take the time to comment on that many.

[brad_stock_photography]

Now that I understood. All points taken with nothing left to reply :) except for maybe "yes, I believe your right".

[mottershead]

In fact, for a period of several months a couple of years ago, I required comments on 1 and 2 ratings and 7 ratings. This was before 3 and 4 started to be considered by some people as outrageous low ratings also, else I might have required comments for those as well.

 

The result was exactly as Laurie has described: the comments left to explain the low ratings didn't mollify anybody. In fact, people were often incensed more by the comment than by the low rating. The comments were just one more thing that moderators had to clean up.

 

Low ratings are infrequent anyway, and they don't really get in the way of the rating system working. The only real problem with low ratings is that they upset people. Since requiring comments ends up upsetting people even more, there is no point in requiring a comment. People only imagine that they will feel better "knowing" why they get the low rating. My experience from several months of having tried it is that the comments cause even more ruckus and bother for the moderators.

 

So, our current approach is this: the entire range is available to be used. This is logical and nobody has to learn that any of the values are really "poison" and can't be used. We periodically look at the ratings people give, manually and with software that runs daily, and if we detect that someone is using the extremes of the scale too frequently, we delete or disqualify the ratings, on the grounds that those rating distributions are suspect, and we have sufficient non-suspect ratings on which to base the photo rankings. But if you distribute your ratings in a normal way, then you can also use the extremes if you wish, and you don't have to justify your ratings with comments. Photographers have to live with low ratings, until they are either deleted, or, in the case of low ratings from people who use the full scale reasonably, indefinitely.

[orensztajn]

Ok so for what I understood (I am new in this site only 3 weeks as member), when you rate a photo in the "rate recent" space, you are anonymous, even if you are a member.

Annyway I would like to know why I get 2 or 1 or 3 just for learn, the person can still be anonymous but he has to leave a comment when rating low.

For me it is more importatn to know what I am missing in my photo than who is the one giving me low rate.

As the most people here, we are in PN to learn from the masters that populate this site.

I think that is the foundation of this site to learn of each other.

[laurie_m]

Gustavo...Here is how it works.

 

If you want meaningful feedback, you need to work at it. I took a quick look at your site. You have posted 83 photos and made 53 comments on photos. Of those 53 comments, many were on your own images. That's not a good ratio.

 

You won't get what you want from this site that way. How can you expect comments on all your photos if you don't offer them yourself. My rule of thumb, you should post at least three comments for every photo you post. Since you're new and want to establish some relationships, I recommend you do even more commenting. Dig deep in the site to see who makes constructive comments, focus on those photographers. If you find someone whose work you really admire, comment on several photos and ask for some specific feedback on your own work. Work at it for several weeks and you'll get the feedback you're looking for.

[guyscrivner]

Isn't it about time we took a close look at the rating system?

<p>

For instance, let's take a look at originality. I have taken the liberty of checking to see what the Top Rated Photo for the month is for Rate Recent Sum and <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3372082">this</a> is the first photo that appears.

It enjoys a 5.37 for Originality or in other terms Good.<p>

 

So, how should it REALLY be rated for originality? If I check the dictionary for the definition of originality I find that it is defined as: the quality of being new and original (not derived from something else)<p>

 

No offense to the photographer or those who rated this image but it is not "new" (there are hundreds of photos of birds composed in this manner) and neither is it original. If I am correct on this then the only conclusion that can be made is that it is not original and should be rated as such but I am not given that choice. I am forced to rate it on a scale of 1-Very Bad to 7-Excellent. These terms do not compute for me.<p>

 

So I would rate it on the higher end of the scale because I must decide on what message I send to the photographer. A low rate means I don't like it and a seven would mean I think it is original, which I do not. I choose five for originality and neither I or the photographer are very satisfied with the rating. <p>

As I said, perhaps it is time to take a closer look at the rating system. <p>

Regards, Guy

[orensztajn]

To Laurie, of 53 comment only between 5 and 8 were on my photos, and I did not comment the photos myself, they were just answers to other comment, like changing somenthing in a photo. So if I say that I commented 45 photos in 20 days that makes 2,25 photos per day.

You forgot to mention that I did comment on 25 portfolios as well.

So I did comment, it may not be much but do not forget that I been here not so many days. So I think it is a good start, I wil comment more but to comment I have to have more experiencie but I will.

[laurie_m]

Gustavo, My point wasn't about how many comments "per day" you made, it was about the "ratio" of comments to photos you've posted. I wasn't criticizing you, and I apologize if it came across that way. I was just trying point out the dynamics here on PN, from my own experience and perspective. It's a tough venue. As you stated yourself, you're new to PN. You posed a question/comment and I offered my honest opinion on how you might improve the quality of feedback you get from the site. Just like rates and critiques, you can use my suggestions or not. I simply offered an opinion and I'm frequently wrong.

[orensztajn]

You're right, Laurie I will take you opinion and I will comment more if that helps.

Thank you.

[ronbudway]

Hi there, I am a newly paying subscriber who has just recently begun to upload

pictures and ask for them to be critiqued. Because I am a little surprised by some of

the low scores I've been getting (please do not interprete that to mean that I think I'm

great, I do not) I've been looking around for info on the rating system and stumbled

onto this very intersting thread. I was particularly interested by the comments Lauri

made about cultivating relationships with good reviewers.

 

At first I thought this made a lot of sense, but then after looking at some of your

pictures Lauri I changed my mind. When I clicked on your name 3 pictures came up.

One of those pictures "last light" is, in my opinion, spectacular. I love the

juxtoposition of cool and dead with a beautifully warm sunset, I would hang that

picture on my wall. Not surprisingly, it gets very high ratings. Another picture,

however "rock in the surf" looks like you accidentially hit the shutter release when you

weren't paying attention. Forgive me, but I just don't see any artistic value in that

picture. Yet, it too gets very high ratings and has been viewed some 17,000 times.

 

My point is, I think doing your share of rating and commenting is fine, but when you

create some sort of mutual admiration society with a bunch of other people you are

losing the best thing about this web site - the learning from others part. For now at

least I am going to take my beatings and learn from them. I just felt like that needed

to be said.

[laurie_m]

Ron,

 

Welcome to PN. You've certainly been very busy on your first day. I'm glad you found my comments above helpful, or at least worthy of return comment.

 

Regarding the images you've referenced. For what it's worth, I much prefer the image that you say looks like an accidental shutter release to the "Last Light" image. Differing opinions are what make art so exciting.

 

I agree that many images on this site are over rated. Many of mine I include in that assessment. If you'd like a list of some of my other images that I personally feel were over rated, just let me know, I'll e-mail a list of them to you. I certainly wouldn't have rated them so high.

 

I have no problems "confessing" to having a group of photographers with whom I share critiques. If you look a little further, you'll see they often offer constructive/critical feedback on my images-vs. "Wow"s and "Bravo" comments so frequently posted on this site. I'm also critical when I comment on theirs. Several of them happen to be very accomplished so it's often hard to find any real fault. You'll also notice I don't typically rate their images. I also try to comment on at least a few photographer's work every couple of days that I come across in the RR queue or I find through forums.

 

If you want to confirm that I often make critical comments on others photos and get them in return, feel free to ask Chris Appoldt, Kathy Wilson, Robert Brown, Salvatore Mele, David McCraken, or Aaron Falkenberg just to name a few. Although these have become very supportive "friends" here on PN, they are often the ones willing to offer suggestions for improvement. I would use "mutual respect" instead of "mutual admiration" to describe the relationship-respect that enables us to comment honestly and intelligently without fear of causing offense.

 

From the looks of your photos, you're interested in Nature photography. Do you study the genre? If so, you probably read Outdoor Photographer. William Neill, who writes a regular article for that magazine and is a Nationally recognized Nature Photographer has been critiquing my work. Look him up on Google if you aren't familiar with his work. He preferred the "Rock in Surf" image over the "Last Light" image and gave it high praise. Since he hardly needs any positive feedback from me, I don't think he was motivated to give that feedback in hopes of any kind of reciprocity. I think some prefer a more artistic/impressionistic image more than others. Perhaps it's an acquired taste. It's simply a matter of opinion and I certainly respect yours. If it will make you feel better, I invite you to go to that image and rate it as you see fit. If I saw an image I thought was a sloppy mistake, I would rate it 1/1. By all means, you should rate honestly. If that's your impression, I would be disappointed if you didn't rate it that way. Also, feel free to post a comment directly on the photo. Again, that's what it's all about here on PN. I may challenge your comment there. That's also part of the process. As I stated above, for me I typically get more excited by the images that get a broader range of comments and rates.

 

And hey...If you think you'll get a significant number of constructive critiques without developing at least an informal critique circle here, give it a shot. You could be right. Just because my approach has worked for me, it doesn't mean it will work for you. For someone that's only been a member for a day, you have some strong gut feelings. Go with them. I hope you find your participation on this site as helpful and stimulating as it's been for me.

[orensztajn]

Another question is, when you put a photo into the critics forum, is this photo going around ramdomized or how are the photos showed to us?

Thanks

[ronbudway]

Lauri, thank you for such a well thought out response. No

wonder you have a circle of friends here.

 

I wasn't suggesting that I will not be active in rating and

critiquing. I just prefer the honest responses of strangers to

those who already have a liking for what I do.

 

Regarding the rock in the surf pic. If others who have an

established reputation feel it's good, and so do you, good. That's

why the ratings don't bother me too much -- art always has been

and always will be highly subjective.

[ronbudway]

Lauri, couple of other things. I have been registered here for

several years, I just recently started uploading a lot of pics and

requesting reviews. Also, you ask if I study nature photography.

Well, this may not mean much to some people, but I have two

degrees in art and I am a public school art teacher in the U.S. I

also enter my work in local art shows. In fact, one of my pictures I

have posted here recently won a prize in a prestigeous show in

my area -- its average rating is 3.7 here. Personally, I think it's a

great shot and I am very critical of my own work. This is why I've

been seeking some clarification on the rating system.

 

Thanks again for your thoughtful comments.

[laurie_m]

Interesting Ron that you feel you can only get an honest response from strangers. I suppose that probably stems from your own persoanl experiences so I'll not try to convince you otherwise. My sister happens to be my harshest critic (also an artist). Your position is certainly unique among all the artists I know (both in academia and the real world)

 

It appears we have something in common. I too have a BFA and have been involved in "Art" (studying, making, selling)for many years. Congratulations on your photo contest win. Which of your uploads won?

 

I apologize for misunderstanding your participation here on PN. Your initial post began by implying naivete regarding the site so I drew a wrong conclusion.

 

Regarding my work and my participation on this site...You have every right to your opinion. Anyone following this thread can make up their own mind. You do what's best for you Ron.

[bens]

Look it, folks, the fact is, you do get what you put in. I suggest a healthy mix of reaching out to new folks and to people you have come to feel an artistic affinity with. Its all good. Truth, honesty, impossible to pin down, all subjective -- the one thing i like most is giving and getting comments about specific things in a photo -- it can be anything really -- but getting at least one layer deeper than wow or no good really helps. even "like the composition" or something like that. over and over, i am surprised and helped by specific comments -- it is amazing what someone else's view of a thing once expressed can do to your own viewpoint and understanding. the photo, like a poem, once released takes on a life of its own and its meaning cannot be controlled nor totally understood sometimes by the artist him/herself. that realization keeps me here, and makes photo.net a valuable resource -- but you have to work it in whatever way works for you.

[mottershead]

I think also that commenting on others' photos is not only a way to get people to comment on your photographs, but is in fact probably the best way to improve your own photography that photo.net affords.

 

In a paradoxical way, your own comments on other people's photos can be a greater contributor to your own learning than their comments on your photos. One of the greatest barriers to improvement as a photographer is lack of objectivity about one's own photographs. Frequently, one finds that by commenting on other people's photos, especially the ones that are good but not quite excellent, one starts to develop objectivity about one's own work. People are always saying they want comments, but a steady stream of photos on which other people have invited objective, reasoned comments, is often much more valuable than the comments you will get on your own photos.

[laurie_m]

You're absolutely right Brian. Critiquing is, in many ways, more difficult than shooting. It forces the critic to really evaluate closely what it is about a photo he/she likes or dislikes and why. The exercise certainly leads to better understanding and often, inspiration, for the critic.

[orensztajn]

Then it is not so wrong what I am trying to say, people rating below 4 shoud leave a comment and still be anonymous when rating photos in the "rate recent". This would be a great input for all of us trying to learn.

[kathywilson]

Gosh, all the reasoned, considered discourse is making me dizzy :) But, since I have been mentioned I could hardly fail to comment!

 

Short version: Brian, Laurie, Ben et al hit the nail on the head.

 

Long version: I've received a lot of wonderful critiques from neophytes (like myself) trying to work out just *what* it is about my photo they like or don't, and from talented-amateur/proto-professionals, and recently (in response to a hissy fit, I do admit)from someone who was just being snotty. Thing is - snotty or not, he was also partly right and being the reasonable person I am (really!) I was almost gleeful to read what he said! The ratings debate will rage on without resolution until the end of time, but good critical commentary simply can't be under-valued. Best way to get that is to offer it (honestly)... and after a bit, *ask* for some of those photographers you admire to take a look at your stuff. You don't have to be an expert - I frequently leave a comment along the lines of "I don't know the technical term/reason X is bugging me, but..." and often get back "that's called ____ and here's why it's bugging you ____" which not only reflects back to the photographer on his image, but educates me as well. How cool is that!? :) So just hang in there... and really - try not to let the ratings thing (or low rates without comment) freak you out too much. It gets to all of us at some point to some degree, but take a deep breath and keep on going.

[jay_patel]

Hi Brian,

 

"Frequently, one finds that by commenting on other people's photos, especially the ones that are good but not quite excellent, one starts to develop objectivity about one's own work."

 

Couldn't agree with you more...But to some extent this is true for rating as well...Or you would disgree?