My 2 cents on anonymous ratings

[will king]

I?m sure this grip has been posted before, but I just had this happen

to me and I?m pissed.

I?m fairly new to photography and phot.net. I have posted some of my

photos and for the most part have gotten decent ratings and even

constructive and helpful feedback. I posted a photo this morning that

some anonymous $%!* gave a 2-2 without leaving any comments. I have

to say that anonymous people that rate low without comments are lazy,

rude cowards. There should be a rule set in place to prevent such

meaningless behavior. A few ideas are, do not allow a low rating to

post without comments to go with the rating or now anonymous low

ratings. I know that there are jerks out there that just rate low not

based on content but rather just to be mean. Does anybody else agree?

 

Will King

[mbb]

Should people, who write critiques about your photos, use the same style and words you are using in this post? If some do not like your photography and write the comments, are you going to answer them the way you wrote this post? Just take a time and think about it.

 

BTW you say that you are taking photos less then one year. Are you expecting that all your pics are top class?

[will king]

Mark,

 

You said "Should people, who write critiques about your photos, use the same style and words you are using in this post?"

 

What's your point?

 

I am new to photography and I do not expect to get consistently high ratings, however, I do think it is rude for a viewer to rate someone's photograph very low without explanation. I want to learn and giving me a 2-2 on a shot without explanation does nothing. Rating low anonymously is like a hit and run. It's rude, reckless, and lazy. If one does not like a photograph and does not want to spend the time to comment on it, then he/she should not rate it.

 

Let me explain it again Mark. I DO NOT mind low ratings as long as the rater offers an explanation of their opinion.

[mário m. rodrigues]

The same happened to me the past few posts. I think there are a few people trying to upset other members. They will not stop, sad but true. try concentrating on more frequent rates a post gets, thats probably where the "truth" lies. But it is upseting.

[mbb]

......"What's your point?".....

 

That calling another people anonymous $%!* , lazy, rude cowards, jerks etc won't help you. But it will help to create opinion about you by readers of this post. And nobody sane will take a chance to point flaws in your photos risking to be called similar names in your reaction.

[mattvardy]

William, it has been said before... when I first joined photo.net I felt the exact same way, but over the past year or so I have learned to live with the low ratings - they have come to be expected, and there is nothing I can do to stop them. Photo.net policy maintains the notion that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and no one can be the judge of what ratings are honest and which are abusive. Admin have said time and time again, the RFC queue is first and foremost a marketing scheme... an "attraction" - a fast and quick way to see images on photo.net, a venue that sets this site a part from others.

 

I stopped by your community member page and noticed that you, like me and so many others here, enjoy nature - butterflies, landscapes, scenic, flora etc. This is a genre that many people hate. The innate beauty of nature is thought by some to be too easy to photograph, while some people can appreciate the beauty and uniqueness of every nature image they view. But still, some people simply hate the nature genre. I admit I think nature is a difficult field of photography in that creating an original, meaningful image of a flower for example is extremely difficult. I think beginner nature photographers are so often side-tracked by their subject's appearance and obvious beauty that they find themselves shooting without putting much thought into photographic merit, technique, and originality. I have realised the simple fact that a subject is beautiful is not enough to please PN raters - it has to be captured in such a way that sets it a part from the other thousand or so images floating around the CF with similar subject matter. Some people bomb nature images with low ratings as soon as they see them. Other people like myself take a few minutes to study the individuality of any image (nature or what have you) before rating fairly and accordingly, or hitting "skip".

 

The fact of the matter is, everyone has different tastes.

 

The anonymous system protects everyone's right to their own "opinion", and prevents retaliatory abuse.

[will king]

Mark,

 

Point taken. I am just frusterated that viewers can be that reckless with thier ratings. I still stand by my statement that this practice is cowardly.

 

Matt,

 

Thanks for commenting to my post. I have seen your work and it is reassurring that you have had this done to you as well, considering your work is awesome. I have noticed the trend of some to bash nature photographers. There are genres that I enjoy viewing and shooting, and I typically try to only rate the photos I would shoot myself. I have noticed that there are a lot of photographers who bash photoshop users as well.

[john_h.1]

"I have to say that anonymous people that rate low without comments are lazy, rude cowards."

 

Those who rate high without comment are ambitious, genteel bravehearts. If you are looking for feedback and recognize a rating as not providing that, then you can just ignore it. That's what you would do unless your real agenda is to win some sort of rating contest.

[bdpics]

I'd echo Mark's remarks above--your reaction to the low rate (i.e. "stupid, lazy jerks") is unlikely to be tempered much by comments, and maybe even anger you more (i.e. "this image is poorly composed, poorly lit, and extremely dull") would THAT make you feel better?

 

I've had more than a few folks send me nasty emails for giving their masterpiece a 5, so I welcome the ability to rate anonymously without fear of retribution.

 

That being said, clearly there are people here on Pnet who abuse the rate anonymous feature, either to attack people or genres they don't like, or even to boost themselves higher on the TRP pages. Only the Pnet admin can address this issue, and so far they seem largely unwilling to tackle what is admittedly a difficult and time-consuming task.

 

Probably the best strategy is to ignore the ratings all together, and comment on as many pics as you can so your images in turn will receive constructive, helpful feedback.

 

Good luck!

 

BD

[will king]

B Diamond,

 

""this image is poorly composed, poorly lit, and extremely dull""

 

Actually I would prefer comments to go along with a low rating, even if there are negative. I'm so new and eager to learn, I don't mind constructive critism. As long as it's done honestly and tactfully.

 

Again, it's not the low rating I mind, it's the intent that bothers me. If a view takes the time to rate, especially rate low, it's just respectful to offer feedback.

[orensztajn]

William, I think this happen to all of us. I get also 1,2 3s wiihout a comment, you will get used to it.

Rgds

[nomade]

William, why should anyone loose even 5 seconds in an image that doesnt like the rater?

 

Anyway just keep waiting, p.net uncover anonymous raters from time to time, so by then you'll be able to counter-attack!

[will king]

I wouldn't want to counter attack. I would just ask and expect an explanation of their rating. That's all I'm asking for.

[keith_van_hulle1]

Advocatus Diaboli - if someone wants to rate your pics low, why does it matter so much whether text acompanies it? You really haven't given any REALLY good reasons as to why someone CAN'T anon rate. Either (a) they're not worth listening to (b) whatever they say probaby will not help you improve your photography or © will bait you into threads like this. I really see nothing wrong with it. Are you taking pics for others or yourself? Why should the opinions of others here upset you that much? If you want to grow in your shooting, it's doubtful text ratings will make that much of a difference compared to other things you could do. Peruse the threads over the past few years on this subject and you'll find nothing that hasn't already been said on this; might provide some perspective for you on this issue. And remember what they say about how arguing on the Internet is like competing in the Special Olypmpics . . .

[bens]

are you practicing what you preach? you've left 48 ratings of 4 or less for aesthetics, but only 45 comments total. i checked the first 15 comments, and those that are on other photos are all favorable.

 

rather than leave a rant like this, just start commenting as would like others to. what goes around comes around.

 

sometimes i comment, sometimes i don't. i totally agree that comments are preferred, but time and words are not always available.

 

but i know this: best way to get comments is to leave comments. ranting like this changes very little, if anything. its a free world and it ought to be.

[will king]

Keith,

 

"Why should the opinions of others here upset you that much?"

 

I think you're missing my point. It's not opinions that upset me. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and I'm not here to debate opinions. It's the intent of why the viewer left a low rating. If it were truly because the viewer found flaws in the photographic technique, lighting, angle, composition, subject, or whatever, than in my opinion, he/she should have the dignity to provide some comments or feedback. I do realize that there are people on photo.net that rate low for selfish reasons or quite frankly just to be rude, and that's what I have an issue with.

[bens]

oops, that's 45 for originality; you've left 55 for aethetics, including 25 of 3 or less. have you really commented every time? i seriously doubt it.

 

instead of ranting, give to receive.

[bens]

btw, your work isn't bad, and i think it shows a real passion for this new found hobby. i understand your anger, i have felt it, hell everyone here probably has at one time or another, and will again. but if you really want to learn here, really, you have to have a thick skin, and need to make connections with people willing to take your work seriously. that's my experience (about 3 and a half years here). give to receive the feedback you want. this kind of posting is really a waste of time in my opinion and experience, sorry to say.

[will king]

Ben,

 

I don't consider a 4 a low rating. (3is borderline, 2s and 1s are low....in my opinion) The very few I gave a 3 or lower on, I did comment on. I have been a member for only a month or so. 48 comments is pretty good in that time span. BTW, I'm not ranting, just voicing my opinion.

[bens]

can lead a horse to water, can't make him drink. good luck.

[will king]

Ben,

 

Thanks for your comments and thanks for viewing my photos. I actually have made connections with other photographers on pn, and do appreciate their constructive critism. I'm eager to learn and any comments from a veteran photographer is helpful. BTW, I took a peek at your work too. Very impressive.

[bens]

william, i threw my back out and so i can't move, and i'm admittedly in a VERY grumpy mood, and can pretty much only lie here and surf the net. so i admit, i am being a bit blunt and persistent. but come one william, there is NO WAY you have left a comment on every 3 or lower you have left! i've gone through every one of your comments. maybe you mean for aesthetics, but that's a big stretch too. certainly not on your originality ratings.

 

my point is, be honest with yourself. is it really so hard to understand that someone will leave a 2 for something they really do not like and won't comment? "lazy, rude cowards" -- that's not a rant? that's not, at times, a reference to yourself?

 

william, this will be a very unsatisfying site for you if you follow your anger instead of your generosity. because i take you seriously as an emerging photographer, because i've been there myself when i first started here, i suggest you look in the mirror, ask what you really want to get from others around here, and then give it in spades in the hope it will be returned. i am telling you, that can be very satisfying, but it takes a fair amount of work. this won't do it.

[bens]

btw, i left the last note before reading your last one. thanks for the acknowledgment and understand i write out of respect for your intentions. feel free to stay in touch. we do somewhat different types of photography, but i sense we share a similar interest overall.

[will king]

Ben,

 

I'll take you up on your offer. I'm sure you could provide valuable tips for a newbie like me.

[fochoa]

Well, yeah, u have some reason here, when i went to photo.net for the first time, i received decent ratings and that was til it turned to be the anonymous raters, several people rate low without leaving a comment at least and they are anonymous, i dunno if its just for bothering people, but then, i really dont like the new rating system, i agree with the sevens rule that has been implanted recently, which forces to people to makeup a criticism of the real value of the photo, and as a measure for mate rating. So, thats my 2 cents at this.