Does PN want to promote nudity over all other types of photography?

[keith turrill]

Photo.net actually has some fairly strict policies about nudes. Far stricter than some of the other photo sharing and bulletinboard sites. If P/N really were catering to nudes and porn, the rules would be much looser.

[louis1]

...is that the situation with you. You don't comment or post anymore?

[bobatkins]

For some people, "No nudes is good nudes"...

[louis1]

.... no answer to the points and now jokes. I expected better from you.

[mottershead]

I'm not sure which ranking method you are looking in the Top Rated Photos. The default ranking, which is Rate Recent Average does not look like it is dominated by nudes. It is the case that photos in the Nudes category receive numerically many more ratings than other categories. Photos in the Nudes category do not have the highest average ratings, however. The highest averages by category go to Landscapes, Insects, Birds, and Macro photos, followed, in fifth place by Nudes.

 

The fact that Nudes receive numerically more ratings than other categories but not especially high average ratings means that they tend to dominate the ranking methods in which number of ratings are given emphasis. Obviously, Number of Ratings is one of these, but so is "Sum". But they don't tend to dominate ranking methods which average the ratings in various ways, including the default ranking.

[louis1]

Thanks for that info Brian. I was looking at number of ratings NOW versus 3 YEARS AGO.

 

However the main point was:-

 

Are fewer ratings now going to non nude genres compared to 3 years ago? I don't mean in

total for the whole site but on average per image. I have seen a substantial drop in

numbers of ratings per image I post. I quote this only because I have no other stats to

hand.

[laurie_m]

Just a thought...perhaps if fewer ratings are indeed being posted on non-nudes, it's because of all the drama regarding rates.

 

There is likely a segment of the PN population that views and rates nudes, not to offer constructive feedback to the photographer but to make other points regarding the genre itself. These raters are less likely to care about the rating conflicts that so frequently erupt here on PN.

 

I'm referring to the lookie loos (not sure how to spell that) and the morality police. Of course, that's a whole different drama that frequently plays it's part in the drama that is PN.

 

In other words, it isn't a case where the rates are being monopolized by the nude category to the detriment of other genres. It's a situation where many of those who offered considered rates, in the past, have simply grown tired of the ratings wars.

[bobatkins]

Answer what question? The only question I can find is:

 

"BUT with most ratings now going to NUDES does that mean that that is what the site wants as opposed to promoting the best in photography overall?"

 

I've no idea. I don't speak for the site.

[rayfraser]

Senior Editor does not speak for the site?

 

If so then I'd say the site needs a new Senior Editor.

 

Please rephrase your answer or delete mine.

[michaelkh]

I just felt like pursuing the names-as-subject-lines thing to the max.

 

As to the gallery ratings, I have to say I find it amusing to browse on "Ratings": when a

photo there is not of a scantily clad woman, it is almost invariably well above average. The

mass of highly rated nude and glamour shots works like a flesh-toned cut-off filter.

 

Other than that I find that Rate Recent Average is useful and a pretty reliable indicator of

quality within the rating framework, and I am not quite sure what the fuss is about.

 

And can I say, while we are tangentially dancing around their subject area, M.H.'s photos

are fabulous.

[mottershead]

Bob's role as Senior Editor of the site means that he is the main editor (and contributor) in the Equipment and Learn sections. He is paid for this. He is also the main moderator of a few forums, and a backup moderator of most of the others. His only role in the Gallery section of the site is as a participant.

[louis1]

As neither Brian nor Bob want to address the points (ratings per non nude image are

down considerably and how much is that affecting site interaction).

 

If it looks like a duck. walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....it is a duck! PN has

changed.

 

I thought in raising the idea that the site has changed considerably (in posters/images

critiqued/rated) over the last few years and it has not been for the good in terms of

promoting good photography in many diverse genres.

 

As a follow on I thought that more consideration might be given to some better way of

improving on the selection and promotion of the best images on the site.

 

If the best is not recognised then how will those who wish to learn (by seeing the best)

ever move on. We all need to be challenged in how we approach our photography and to

ease ourselves out of taking the cliched shot , the obvious angle or the familiar treatment.

 

I suggest that only from the point of view that if we don't learn and change will our

photography become boring not only to others but ourselves as well.

 

Happy new Year all.

[ken_thalheimer]

I really don't see PN promoting nudes, though the amount of nudes in TRP has risen. But consider the proliferation of digital, affordable SLRs in the recent few years. It makes it easier for someone to shoot the nude in complete privacy without lab techs viewing during processing. So now, many think they can shoot nudes. In fact on PN there are few really good nude photographers. The nude form being about the most difficult subject to light. Many of the nudes on the site are so-so or not all that good. PN does, in fact, give you options. Select aesthetics or originality and the amount of your nudes will drop significantly. Just a thought

[mottershead]

I have addressed your first point, which is that the number of nudes in the TRP is up versus 3 years ago. It could be true, depending on which ranking you are talking about. I said the Nudes category gets more ratings, but not higher ratings. This means Nudes tend to dominate TRP views that emphasize number of ratings, such as "Number of Ratings" and "Sum". They don't dominate other ranking methods, including the default ranking, which emphasize the average rating, because contrary to common opinion, Nudes don't get higher ratings than some other categories.

 

A few years ago we didn't have a Nudes category, so we didn't have the phenomenon of some people regularly going through that category rating every picture; so Nudes didn't get as many ratings as they do now. People wanted a Nudes category, and so I created it. More ratings on photos of nudes is the consequence, since it easier for people to find them and systematically rate them, to the exclusion of other categories. People go through the other categories also, but photos of Nudes are the biggest recipient of "Rate by Category" ratings. Notice that "Rate by Category" ratings do not count for the default TRP rankings, which are based on "Rate Recent" ratings.

 

As for the average number of ratings on photos going down, I've addressed this issue before. People often say this, based I guess on the ratings on their own photos, but it isn't true. Actually, it depends on how far you go back. If you roll back to 2000-2001 when the Gallery started, the number of ratings per photo was about 6. By early 2002, once the Gallery was really rolling, the number of ratings per photo dropped to about 4 to 5, and it has held there ever since, fluctuating up and down a little month by month between 4 and 5. There has been no change to this in recent months. People are always saying that the number of ratings on photos has been going down "recently" but this isn't so. So, you have to go back five years, when there were many fewer photos being submitted, to be able to say "number of ratings per photo has gone down". If you go back only four years or less, it isn't true.

 

If the overall average of ratings per photo has held the same, and the number of ratings per photo on Nudes has increased, does this mean that other categories' average ratings per photo has declined? Perhaps, but the number of nudes compared to the number of photos overall is small enough that this effect is small and washed out by random month-by-month fluctations.

 

The nice thing about phenomena that don't exist is that the administration doesn't have to explain them, take a position on them, or do anything about them.

[louis1]

You maybe missed this:

 

"I thought in raising the idea that the site has changed considerably (in posters/images

critiqued/rated) over the last few years and it has not been for the good in terms of

promoting good photography in many diverse genres.

 

As a follow on I thought that more consideration might be given to some better way of

improving on the selection and promotion of the best images on the site."

 

I have no interest in nudes just that their prevalence now is an indicator of changes at

PNET for the worse. I do not need advice on how to avoid seeing nudes.

[jhenry]

Seems that Louis you posted a remark in form of a question but u don't accept a single answer!<p> Yes, There are more picture of nudes, averagely rated though. and No PN doesn't promote over others, there are everywhere else, there is obviously a demand for that, in quantity rather than quality if I see the figures! <br>next question-remark!<p>and welcome back in the real world Louis!<br> :o)

[louis1]

Thank you for taking the time to reply in such detail.

 

Therefore so long as I avoid any "ratings related" TRP I will see as much diversity as

before.

 

Cheers

Louis

[lucas82]

I believe that there should be a TRP for each category, as well as the overall TRP. However, I have never had the problem of having to sort through page upon page of nudes. Partly because I rarely look at the photo ratings, but when I do, I actually notice a healthy helping of many different categories.

 

Personally I think this site has done a good job at representing all different genres.

[paul rollin]

Although the Nudes have ruined the rating system,...There is Not One Heterosexual Man on this site that doesn't routinely check the Nudes catagory to see the hot babes that some lucky photographer has talked into getting naked in from of his camera. I would never vote to have the Nudes removed.

 

I wonder what line they use to get the girls to strip off their clothes. Please tell the rest of us perverts. I doubt that they are telling the girls, "Look, If you take off all of your clothes, I can take your picture, and post it on the internet for the whole world to see your beautiful body." I already tried that one, and got punched in the mouth. So, tell us what the trick is. Is it Money? I suspect that many of these women are volunteering to strip off for nothing more than a compliment. The rest of us want to know.