I'm jumping on the bandwagon too! (again)

[nanette]

Yeah, what's up with the rating system and the critiques here? I don't even like the rating

system anyway, it's not of real value to me. Aestethics and originality, isn't that pretty

much the same thing with a very fine line in there somewhere? If people are coming here

to learn, don't you think that maybe the technical aspects of a shot is one of the most

important here? People respond to photos in different ways and maybe, just maybe, the

image doesn't affect people in the same way? Who would've thought? It's no wonder

ratings are left, right and centre. Can we just get some technical ratings perhaps? Go

ahead, leave in the other two but they don't tell me much, aside from the way someone

might be feeling that day or maybe it's their retaliation to the crap ratings they received

without any reason. It doesn't matter if no one else agrees with me but isn't technique one

of the reasons people ask for critiques? I know not everyone here has nailed it (including

myself). Thanks for listening to my two cents. ta ta :)

[grenex]

Agreed! Expanding the rating types would add more value.

[pawel_czapiewski1]

It's not as easy as it seems. Technical aspect is the least important for some, others don't like their images altered in any way, and some get offended when their suggestions are dismissed. I could go on and on. Regards,

[alexis_neel]

I happen to thing that you have a good idea. I have always said, believed and acted on the premise that you can have a great image, but executed poorly and its nothing. I've given a total of 4 ratings in my 2 1/2 years here, but offered many technical "critiques"...hopefully so the photographer will better "see" their image, and work on those technical aspects that can make or break an image. Since this is what I do for a living, pretty successfully, I can only hope that the photographer takes it as it is meant. Some don't and of course get upset, but most do, and I've gotten emails from them thanking me for my help.

 

Aesthetics is subjective to the individual, and no one can/should disagree with a rater on what they feel about an image. However, most do disagree when the number is low, and when they do, tempers flare. That is one reason for the current rating system being anonymous...to stave off the fights.

 

Originallity is scarce...its very hard to find, especially in photography these days, and should be the lesser of the 3. To me, if you get a 3 or above here, you've accomplished something. A 7 is gold (if you have to keep track of numbers to begin with).

 

Anyway, good idea, and since the current controversy is about people rating without leaving comments, this might help the people hollering about people not writting something to hold on to. Heck, make it so you have to use all 3 or the rating won't work, and have a space, also required, for a technical comment...anonymous of course.

 

Seems like this might be a solution the majority can relate to.

 

Of course my opinion means nothing, since I'm not a paying member. So disregard the above

 

:-D

[cappoldt]

Nanette, I think your idea is sound, but it presupposes that all those participating in the rating qualified to make such judgements...I'd think it hard for a beginner to make a numerical statement about tonal range, exposure, post-processing factors, etc. (On the flip-side, being 'forced' to make judgements like that is a great way to learn, if there were a tutorial.)

 

I would guess aesthetics and originality are strictly opinion, and likely why they're used.

 

You'd think that improving technique would be a reason to Request for Critique, but sadly it ain't always so here, at camera clubs, or anywhere else The Human Factor is involved.

 

That said, and having browsed some of your comments on others' photos (and having been impressed by your portfolio here), I'd say your own approach to critiquing is an asset to the site, and want to tell you there are plenty of others like you here - you just kinda have to find them and let 'em know you're looking for the same in return. A friendly approach like, "Would you offer an opinion on my latest?" from someone whose image you just commented on gets the ball rolling. You'll eventually foster some good circles.

 

Stepping up, you're free to shoot me straight every time, I'd appreciate it - I always need the help. Being a novice hack, I can't say I'm qualified to return the favor with much finesse, but I'd try.

[h._p.]

Quite probably, someone who leaves a 3 just doesn't like your pictures. Nothing to do with retaliation or anything like that.

[pmj]

Too much trouble. For the raters, that is.

 

I would suggest we do away with Aesthetics and Originality altogether and instate One Rating That Summarizes It All. For the existing ratings, let's just compute the average. Let's also remove the ratings-breakdown page. Finally, let's just display one number along with a photo: "This picture has an average rating of X.X". Let's make the "3 Days, Comments" view the default view of the Top-Rated Photos page.

 

That way, there will be no more confusion about what the heck Originality is supposed to be, how to take into account Technical Accomplishment. There will be no more complaints about any single low rating. Since the TRP will by default be sorted on number of comments, the inherent value of ratings will be lowered and the value of comments will increase.

 

One Rating To Summarize It All.

[peter_daalder]

Too much trouble for the PN administrators too, imo.<br>

Some time ago, we were provided with the following feedback from Brian:<p>

 

<a href="/shared/community-member?user_id=357714">Brian Mottershead</a>

<a href="/member-status-icons">

<img alt="Photo.net Hero"

src="/member-status-icons/hero-small.gif" border="0" width="13"

height="22" align="middle">

<a href="/member-status-icons"><img alt="Photo.net Patron"

src="/member-status-icons/patron-small.gif" border="0" width="15"

height="14" align="middle"></a>, aug 15, 2005; 01:58 p.m.

I don't want to sound negative or dismissive of suggestions, but most of them have been made before. The rating system is probably the most heavily-discussed topic in the Site Feedback forum, and there are all sorts of opinions on this subject, including different opinions from the same people as their views change. There are always plenty of people ready to discuss it some more, so undoubtedly you will get some discussion going here, but probably it won't be any different from dozens of similar discussions already in the archives.

 

<p>

 

I long ago concluded that it is impossible to fulfill all the goals that various people have for the rating system. My goals for it can be satisfied, but they are minimal. I've given up trying to satisfy other goals.

 

<p>

 

The first goal is simply to provide a way to pick out a few thousand "top" photos from the couple of million that have been uploaded by tens of thousands of photographers over a period of five years. Hopefully visitors to the site will find these a reasonable starting point for an exploration of the wealth of photography in the photo.net Gallery -- a better starting point, anyway, than picking a name at random, and surfing.

 

 

<p>

 

The second goal is that the mechanics of the rating and commenting system be simple and absorbing enough that people will participate in sufficient numbers that we can have a commercially viable site. That's it. The system works fine for these purposes.

 

<p>

 

I could certainly design a system that would seem more "fair" or less exposed to abuse or dishonesty. Perhaps I could even design a system that would force people to pick the same photos that I would pick if I were doing it myself. For example, one might make it double-blind, only show the final results, and only count the ratings of people who met some reasonable set of criteria, such as having taste provably similar to mine. Such a system might be fairer, but I don't think it would be more fun or as popular as the present system, and therefore it wouldn't fulfill the goals of the site as well as the current, undoubtedly flawed, system. [end quote]

[john_h.1]

"Expanding the rating types would add more value."

 

And more complaints, bruised egos and calls for reform.

[afs760bf]

I think the number of complaints would rise as the mathematical square of the number of rating parameters, thus providing at least two hundred and fifty-six threads per day complaining about the rating system, rather than the present sixteen.

 

BF

[lee park]

about the same things - whether old or revised - ad infinitum. I see it as a way for the newbies to easily get a grasp on the PN culture without having to scroll thru the archives! Plus, it's also occasionally a refreshing and amusing review...

 

Nanette - several of the people here have given you the answer - it's a matter of finding those who GIVE thoughtful critiques, add them to your "Favorite People" list and then reciprocate. Typically they also have friends with similar habits, who then include YOU into the group. I'm no sociologist, but PN works best like that .. you'll start to see the patterns once you've been here a while.

 

Welcome to PN, by the way...Lee

[jstyles]

Patrick - nice idea about making comments the default view. They'd have to be filtered though so as to only count one person once per photo, to avoid those with extended conversations between mates... then again, maybe those conversations occur because the photo is particularly interesting.

[bdpics]

I wholeheartedly support Patrick's suggestions! ! !

[vivek iyer]

I vote for a ratings forum!

[kathywilson]

Aesthetics and Originality are designed to allow the broadest use by PN guests/members. You may not know the technical aspects of a photo (especially if you're a beginner like myself), but you know what you like. Ratings are at best, a very vague guide for determining worth, and even "vague" may be overstating. Comments are your best guide. Make plenty of them, ask for some from photographers you appreciate here. A number is not going to help you with technical issues anyway - would a "3" or "6" tell you any more about the technical aspects of your photo than the same numbers for A/O? Not really, and it's just as subjective. There are very good reasons for under/over exposing, for determining focus etc that make superb artistic sense, but violate technical rules. It's Art. You're never going to please everyone, and everyone will have a different opinion.