laser Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 why do so many people leave low ratings but do not explain why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mendonphoto Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Shame, ignorance, low self esteem, spite, laziness, and rudeness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael R Freeman Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 I would guess for the same reason so many give 7/7 high ratings with no explanation. What do you define as "low"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Because they are just rating photos. This is an activity which the site requests people to do, and it is regarded as a contribution to the site, with or without comments. No comment is required with any rating. If comments were required on ratings, the comment that would accompany low ratings would be variants of "this is no good", or "this is boring", or "this is pointless", or "this is a picture of a snake, and I find snakes creepy", or "too much photoshop", or possibly even more sarcastic or stupid. Would that be an improvement, do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen hazelton Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 David, part of the reason is that it is easier to critique good photos than it is bad. If you see a photo that is just wonderful in every way, except for one teensy flaw, then you point out that one flaw and your critiquing is done. If you see a photo that is of no special interest (say, somebody's cat sitting there and looking like every other cat), where do you begin? "Should have been a tiger instead of a cat" or "should have gone outside and taken a picture of something else" aren't very helpful critiques, but that's what a lot of it would boil down to. Or, say, you see a photo that may be considered as artsy by some, but just absolutely not to your taste, what do you say there? "Should have done a landscape instead of this portrait" is equally unuseful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john falkenstine Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Try and rate in "rate recent" AND leave a critique...it does not appear to work well or at all. That might be some of the cause. Also in rate recent I react to the image, and don't spend that much time with it. I assume that others do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laser Posted September 18, 2005 Author Share Posted September 18, 2005 I look at pictures on as many portfolios as I can, and what I see is a credit to all of you. I have not been taking Digital Photos for long and just want to improve. If somebody does give me low ratings I will not hold this against them. Getting 2 and 3 ratings with no expanation why is not helping, I would like to know were I am going wrong so that I can improve. I must thank all that have helped and I have gone back to have another go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mendonphoto Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Honestly, I rarely leave suggestions because many people don't want to hear them. They only want to hear how wonderful their photos are. When I request a critique, I specifically say that I appreciate suggestions. I usually get at least one or two. Also, sometimes people post a message in one of the forums saying that they are specifically looking for people to critique their portfolio or certain photos in particular. They usually get some feedback. Although you technically shouldn't have to do this (a submission for critique should be enough) I think it lets people know that you are serious about wanting feedback . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdpics Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Hi David, Of all the things that Pnet is, one thing it's not (nor was it intended to be I believe) is a photography class/school. There are a lot of very good photographers who post their work here, and for me the best way to learn and improve is to look at their work and then compare it to my own, asking these questions: What makes a strong composition? What lighting methods/situations seem to work best? What is the right amount of post-processing? How best to utilize DOF? What filters achieve the desired results? What change in perspective could I make to an image to improve it? In short, I try to find those on Pnet who create the type of images that I like, and then I follow their work by checking in on their galleries from time to time. The TRP pages can be helpful for getting ideas about what works and what doesn't, but it's important to remember that what's popular may not always be the best images. Finally, there are many people here on Pnet who really go out of there way to be helpful and take the time to leave constructive comments. But with 10,000 or so new images a day posted to Pnet, obviously not all images will be commented on and people generally don't want to be mean by telling you why they think your photo sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith turrill Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 I study other people's work that interests me and then attempt to replicate. If I am successful, I see 6's, if it is a blooper, then sometimes 3's. For that reason, low ratings are sometimes useful. Unfortunately, low comments frequently evoke a lot of BS either in the comment threads or by e-mail. Hence, many people do not leave comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laser Posted September 19, 2005 Author Share Posted September 19, 2005 thanks everyboby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiglezan Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 frustrated users who cannot get a good picture by themselves... I maybe will stop upload new pictures... See my last two pictures and the difference between ratings. But it should not be a problem if they should explain too... I bet there are a lot of idiots who try to destroy for other users... and they succeed too... http://www.photo.net/photo/3740756 http://www.photo.net/photo/3737265 Teh photo.net staff maybe can do something to this issue. Why do not fire those anonymous low raters? I don't need high ratings, I need constructive critiques specially when I get 2/2 or 3/3. Must this site to be like the others? Where idiots do what they ever want to destroy for real amateurs or even professionals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiglezan Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Only minutes after my posting above I got an 1/1... What is this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiglezan Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 if I were such an idiot like many others here, I would go and rate 1/1 all new pictures here. Maybe this is an artistic terror on Photo.net... Or plain idiots and childish figures whom I should ignore... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randall paul Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Ratings are as subjective as your own interpretations of how you like to create images. There are quality people/photographers here who have the proper etiquette and apply as much constructive help and or suggestions as possible. Then there are the P.net Groupies who don't even have portfolios and possibly don't even take pictures, who will for their own strange satisfactions scan the photo's and just put a low rating for the hell of it. I never look at ratings as they don't fuel my Shelby and or contribute to my busy schedule as a photographer. I agree that you can't have a rating commented on as suggested above. This would be a waist of time. If the rater had to be identified with each submission, then this could create an all out photo.net ratings war. lol. Again... Don't get sensitive if you receive low ratings. I get them all the time even when I haven't requested them. Sometimes, just recently in fact, I received 5 ratings of 4 something but in details 0 views. So figure that one out. Just take your pictures and enjoy it. I tell ya what I think is better is how many views your image has inspired. If your photo is crap it will not get viewed. Just my humble opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgarity Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 That this question gets asked at least three or four times a week on here never ceases to amaze me. All you have to do is experience a spate of revenge ratings and the reason will become crystal clear to you. Trust me you won't have any difficulty understanding why people are reluctant to tell you your photos suck. The other thing is lack of time. Take a look at the in basket of the critique forum at almost any instant. I'm willing to bet that you are going to see more bad photos than you will good ones. There is not enough time in the day to comment on any more than a fraction of them. Maybe everytime you get a bad rating, its NOT just some kid being an ass. Could it be that maybe your photo is not as good as you think it is? I firmly believe when you put up a photo for critique you have asked the world at large what it thinks. When you get a low rating some part of that world has told you loudly and clearly what it thinks. Worrying about why is usually futile. You want to improve your photography. Thats a worthy goal which I suspect most Photo.net patrons share. There are a ton of resources on here that will help you to do that. But the rating system is not one of them. It never has been and its very unrealistic to expect that it ever will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agnieszka_iwasiewicz-wabni Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Well of course the lack of explanation of the low rating hurts, but I got actually more upset about one low rating with the explanation. I have a friend who is posting his photos on photo.net. I personally like them a lot, but I understand that someone might be of opposite opinion. The last photo posted by my friend was a little experiment and he put it there not for praise but clearly asking for help with improving it. Apparently many people liked the shot as it was because it made it yesterday to the top rated photos. And there came a rating with a comment: "I?m impressioned with the most people on this site, loves landscapes and animals. Ok, there are many nice landscapes as this one, but i think to pic deserve to be between top photos, needs to have a great originality and different soul. All of them have the same perspective, and it makes me tired about. I would like to see a very original landscape, but its not easy. 3/3" This is I think a complete misuse of the system! First of all that guy gave the bad rating just to take away the shot from the top rated list. And because it was a landscape photo. Even though he writes he liked it. Well, what perspective of a landscape does he want? His and only his? Why this guy is trying to manipulate the deserved position of good photo (since it was rated anonymously)? He clearly was not giving any constructive feedback. Rather a show of jealousy. That is why I would rather see people like that leaving (even bad) ratings without (even worse) comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loldhoff Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Still, when I receive a rating 3 or lower, I just want to know what the raters head space is. If he's jerk and spiteful, well that is an explanation and rating I know I can dismiss. If it is a genuine critique, then I can learn something from it and move on from there. I'm frustrated when I get a bunch of decent ratings and feeling good about the impact my picture has had, and then there is that low, silent 2,2, and I'm left with, 'What up with that?' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinekr Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 I recieve many of that kind but we can't do anything about that. Anonymus raters are the one who don't have the guts to say it out loud and they act simular in the reality- they only speak behind backs. Well this will not change a bit while we are talking about it and how crazy it would be this world if all the people would be polite, honest, friendly and last but not the least happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tibor Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 I would say don't rate anything under 4 (OK maybe 3), you just can't waste your time with that. Rate 2 or lower only if it is undecent or not what it claims to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drewhendricks Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 This might be a dead thread, but I am a new member and would like to throw my 2 cents into the ring. I have no problem with anonymous low ratings within reason. However, if a member deliberately clicks on your photo and rates it well below the average of the other raters, it would seem that it is only reasonable to leave an explanation. I have no problem with criticism. In fact, that is why I decide to post. I rarely comment on photos that I give 4's to. I comment on almost all my 7's and definitely comment when I give them a 3 or lower. Thankfully, I haven't seen a 1 yet. If there were only a way to require non-anonymous posters to leave some sort of feedback when they give a 1, 2, or 3 that would be great. We could all learn something from their critique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickniko Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 I am also new and already have the impression that many guys here with really very individual style unfortunately give ratings much too much weight. Art doesn't know any "objective formula" to be rated. And things like "nice", "awful", or "bad", "not interesting" are always subjective. Everybody has his or her own "rules" and many times we ourselves can't explain why we like or dislike something. Accepting that art cannot be quantified and that anybody applies the own rules of perception, one has also to accept that those people who rate low have their own ideas about what is nice or not. So perhaps it could do good to consider ratings as a kind of diffuse measure about what *others* think about a photo and continue doing the own thing just as if nothing happened. The suggestions that come along with the ratings can't be thought as guaranty for making "good photos" because all photos cease to be good for the photographer if they don't obey his/her own gusto. Suggestions are for me that part of the discussion that occures in arts in general. And this discussion also contains destructive elements of arguing. Another thing is of course not to argue at all, that is to rate low and don't explain why. Perhaps it is because the photo-catalog is full and life is short? Perhaps also, there are indeed guys that enjoy giving low rating just for the fun of it. So let them be. This can do no harm if you are really convinced that you did a good job, even if the rest of the world doesn't share your opinion. The own imagination and creativity is the important thing here. Remember, when Bach was composing, the rest of the musicians of his time had the opinion that he "coupled disharmonious tones". Thanks heavens he was not influenced by their ratings. So just shoot *your* photos, even if nobody finds them good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niksoric Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 Very smart conclusion,Nick!I agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickniko Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Nice you agree. Or else I would give you only 2s and 3s ;-) No, seriously now, even schools start wondering about ratings - how much more difficult it has to be in arts to find "an adequate rating system", since there are no "measurable standards" that can be applied. So we stick to the currently used rating system and to our own work. Cheers, Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 I really don't pay much attention to ratings from photographers whose work I don't admire. I'd much rather get 4/4 from an outstanding photographer than 7/7 from someone whose work is not something I appreciate. It is who is doing the rating that matters much more than the numbers. I could not care less about ratings not attached to names. 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