phule Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 <<What nonsense? I guess you just don't get it. But that is your problem.>> The nonsense that some how the rating system is designed to screw photographers and make the sites owners money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 The rating system has a design? Wow? You could have fooled me, I have only been the founder of an AI software company and have patents in the field. Make money, of course it makes money. You think all those popup ads you see on your screen aren't paying for the space? The rating system may not be designed to screw photographers, but if it is designed to serve them, it is a failure. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 John, If life here is so bad, perhaps you should find your own way. If you can't handle one single website then you should probably re-think the roll of the internet in your life. Get a grip and some perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 Gee, Rob, you really do seem to have a problem. I guess when you were a child (or are you still a child?) you never learned how to deal with constructive criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markboyle Posted January 19, 2007 Author Share Posted January 19, 2007 Apart from the personal asides I think an important issue is raised here and it is not good enough for people like Rob to say if you don't like it leave, which is basically what he is saying. This is a community site that requires a payment from us to participate in any meaningful way so it is important to debate fundamental issues such as "is this site serving any real purpose or value other than making money?" Now I don't know what the site was like 1, 2 or 3 years ago but now it seems to have lost it's way from the original intent. There are definitely some high quality photographs/photographers submitting work and participating in photo.net and I find looking at a lot of the work here quite inspirational but there is something wrong. I think it's reason for being here needs to be re-evaluated and being a 'community' driven site then it is the community that should do the re-evaluating. What about a voluntary survey of members regarding the direction and structure of the site? Oh and by the way I could only get to this forum via the link in the email notifications I receive when a new post is made, it seems to have disappeared from the forum list. CAn anyone tell me where it is? It is not in the default feedback list or any ofthe archived categories that I looked in... regards Mark Boyle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted January 19, 2007 Share Posted January 19, 2007 Mark, I do think that PN has declined over time. It is unfortunate that a series of decisions on the part of the administrator have led to this decline. They have ranged from a misguided effort to be egalitarian, which has resulted in a stifling of the exchange of information among those who are the skeleton of PN; to outright censoring of clearly strong and legitimate artistic expression. Over that time some of the better talent hear has either withdrawn completly or reduced their contributions. PN still has much to offer and I think some of the finest photography I have seen in my 60 plus years is still to be found here. But the exchange between photographers has been diminished. When a superb photographer, like Biliana, has to suffer an unwarranted and unfounded personal attack for expressing a proper and personal opinion, there is something gone wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 <<you never learned how to deal with constructive criticism.>> When you actually provide anything constructive, rather than the destructive comments you so enjoy, I will consider what you have to say as having some value. <<Apart from the personal asides I think an important issue is raised here and it is not good enough for people like Rob to say if you don't like it leave, which is basically what he is saying.>> No, Mark, that's not what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that people that believe that two single and arbitrary numbers on one single website are so important to their self-worth are fools and should be treated as such. People that spend all this time stroking themselves over who got what set of 2 numbers by which group of people have completely lost any sense of perspective. A community is not based around 2 rating numbers. A community is based on interaction of real commentary and sharing. Not picking from two columns. That's something that far too many people that frequent the Gallery can't seem to comprehend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 <<When a superb photographer, like Biliana, has to suffer an unwarranted and unfounded personal attack for expressing a proper and personal opinion, there is something gone wrong.>> How so sadly ironic John, given your previous response to me. <<Gee, Rob, you really do seem to have a problem. I guess when you were a child (or are you still a child?)>> It's always funny to watch people like you claim you're being attacked by someone who's opinion is different than yours and then to turn around and do the very same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Rob, you continue to miss the point. It is not about two numbers at all. It is about who those numbers come from. The rating system is really a quick and shorthaqnd way for those of us here to "comment" on the work of our friends and collegues without taking the time to write a full comment. The issue here is not with the numbers -- the issue is with not knowing who chose the numbers. The value of the numbers is the context of the author of the numbers, not the numbers themselves. This is about communication between members, not some arbitrary value of the numbers. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Rob, I don't care a wit about any personal attack on me, particualrly from someone like you. It was your childish personal attack on Bilianna that I was responding to. You really don't get it! John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 No John, I do get it. A community is not built on a rating system. It is absurd to think so. You are so wrapped up on this issue that you no longer can think or see clearly. I never attacked anyone personally. I attacked their opinions. You are the one that started with the personal attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Tell me, John, when was the last time you went to a gallery? Did you go with friends or was even the artist there? When you were there, did you walk up to someone standing near a work of art and say "4/5" and then walk away? Or did you actually talk like a human and interact within the temporary community of the gallery showing? <<The value of the numbers is the context of the author of the numbers, not the numbers themselves. This is about communication between members, not some arbitrary value of the numbers>> Bull. There is no communication of any value between members here. The ratings are meaningless. When all ratings were known by who gave them, all this did was provide people to hate-rate each other. One person gives one of your photos a 2/2 and you go and give all their photos 1/1. You give me a 7/7 and I give you a 7/7 regardless of what I actually thought of your works. If you think that behavior somehow builds community then you are truly lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markboyle Posted January 20, 2007 Author Share Posted January 20, 2007 I agree John, I am not complaining about what ratings I or anyone else is getting as an isolated point. I am trying to say that the system as a way of encouraging communication and exchange of ideas is completely flawed. It actively 'discourages' any form of real discourse about the work displayed. From what I have seen in my short time the best you can expect to get when you submit a photo for comment/rating is a completely 'meaningless' pair of numbers and the odd comment about how 'great the shot is' etc. which is equally as meaningless, though appreciated none the less. Of course you can just submit an image for 'critique only' but I would love to know the statistics on how many of those get any comments at all, particularly recent statistics. I would bet relatively few and I would bet that even fewer get anything of value. Probably the only images that have any real discussion attached to them are the 'photos of the week', the current one being a good example. I also agree with Rob that there is much more to photo.net than the galleries and ratings, much of which I have perused and been impressed with. However, I think you are in denial if you don't think that the main reason the vast majority of people join this site is to see other photography and have yours seen and the best and only real way to do that is via the rating system. That is why I and others get 'hung up' on it and want to discuss it and want to see it improved, so it becomes something of real value to the photo.net community and not just to the site owners counting the subscriptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 <<I think you are in denial if you don't think that the main reason the vast majority of people join this site is to see other photography and have yours seen and the best and only real way to do that is via the rating system.>> I would love to see you prove that, Mark. I think you are over-simplifying the value and draw of the forums by many degrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markboyle Posted January 20, 2007 Author Share Posted January 20, 2007 In response to your last post Rob, which you posted while I was writing mine. We definitely agree on the pointlessness of the current system, so why do you think we have it at all? What purpose does it serve? Who does it benefit, if not the people using it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 I agree, Mark. The only value the ratings have for many of us is who gave them, not any numbers or rankings, etc. I'm sure there are those who are interested in that, but for me the real value here is the work of those I find enjoyable and, at times, inspiring. For years I made a pretty good living from photography and got to work with some really great photographers, art directors, etc. Forums like PN can provide the same sort of opportunity without the limitations of geography. To the extent the communication systems on the site promote that, it is of value. To the extent they impede it, they are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markboyle Posted January 20, 2007 Author Share Posted January 20, 2007 Well Rob i base that assertion on what this site is all about - photography. What is the point of photography? To be seen. How do we get it seen? By presenting it to others. How do we present it? Well on this site we present it via the rating/critique system if we want it to have any chance of getting noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 <<so why do you think we have it at all? What purpose does it serve? Who does it benefit, if not the people using it?>> I think the rating system benefits no one. I would love to see it go away entirely. I think a true photography community should interact on a level above two columns of numbers. But "measurebaters" love to see numbers and they love to compare themselves against other users, regardless of how little to no discernible and usable information can be gathered from said numbers. In this respect, a site like flickr has a better system. Allow individual users to "favorite" images from other photographers and leave the rest of the interaction devoted to comments only. It's certainly far from perfect but it decouples that overriding emphasis on "numbers numbers numbers" photo.net is large, very very large. There are photographers from every walk of life here. No system of rating will ever be implemented that even a slim majority will like. Peoples emotional involvement with their images will always prevent this. I've been of the opinion since I joined photo.net that the very best thing you can do in the gallery is to leave a constructive comment for someone that asks a specific question or asks for a specific critique. The flip side would be to be able to ask photographers how they captured a particular image. Learning from both directions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Well, Rob, you and I do agree. i think the rating system, as it exists, serves very little purpose other than as an appendage to a means of exchanging images. If it went away, I think it would be a plus. However, it could be valuable if it served as a vehicle for real communication between members -- not strangers. Peer juried exhibits are always fun. The value is in the peer jury. If there is no way of knowing who the jury is, of what valoue is the rating? I have no doubt that some of the ratings are coming from malware bots, that have infected the system. The rating system is broken and either ought to be fixed or removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markboyle Posted January 20, 2007 Author Share Posted January 20, 2007 Well said Rob... Do you know if photo.net has ever tried it without a rating system, just relying on comments etc.? Also I think 'measurebators' is a bit harsh on, I suspect, many of your fellow members. We all like to get approval in one way or another, don't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markboyle Posted January 20, 2007 Author Share Posted January 20, 2007 <p>Here is a good case in point from my own collection I submitted ten minutes ago - <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00JawM&photo_id=5441473&photo_sel_index=0">http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00JawM&photo_id=5441473&photo_sel_index=0</a></p> <p>On last viewing it has had 6 anonymous ratings. 2 at 3/3, 3 at 4/4 and one at 5/5 and no comments</p> <p>Now what I find frustrating is not that it is getting relatively low ratings, but that no one has bothered to provide any feedback whatsoever. And that is the point I have been making from the beginning, this system 'discourages' comment or discussion of images, and in particular it discourages critique.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 I am a 'rater.' I see it as part of paying my dues to the community. I have rated over 10,000 photos and have probably viewed five times that many in the process. A long time ago I stopped giving any negative ratings. What I look for today are images that really show me something of the photographer. A pretty image of a pretty place that was captured simply by showing up is not much. An interesting image that exhibits a new approach to a mundane subject is much more interesting. An image does not have to be one I particularly like, but if it shows some real creative effort and thought, I'll rate it, and rate it highly for creativity. Not all creative efforts produce great results. You could get a 7 for creativity, but only a 4 on the results. I will post images here that I would like some reaction to. They could simply be things I'm trying out and would like to see the work of others who have tried the same thing. I remember a conversation I had nearly 40 years ago with Ansel Adams during a summer I got to spend with him. In those days he surrounded himself with other photographers, newbies and the famous. We would get a chance around dinner to all exchange information. Ansel loved to encourage us to through out for examination things we might otherwise discard, to see if there was something the rest of us could take away from the effort. I remember him saying all successes are born of earlier failures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb1 Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Rob, what is exactly your problem? Apart you are pushing me away for saying my opinion, it seems that you are pushing everyone away, and you told me previousely that you dont have anything to do with the Site, so what is your problem? Biliana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb1 Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Well Rob, you said that you are only attacking the opinion, but with what arguments - if you dont like it leave - is that so. You leave the forum if you dont like our opinion ! Thank you! Quoting you :"A community is not built on a rating system", so on what is it built? on what if not rating? if not rating, why dont we remove it? What is exactly your problem Rob! Anytime somebody said something about the rating system, you are there to argue! WHat is it to you this rating system? What is wrong with you Rob, dont you have anything better to do, instead to pursuie all those who complain about the rating system! Are you a guardian of the rating system, and most of all, you can not do anything to change it, so why are you bothering so much! WHy? Biliana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johne37179 Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Biliana, I hope you don't take Rob's comments personally. Your contribution here is greatly appreciated. I value that you share so much of your work and I realize the effort that represents. I wish I could spend more time reacting to it specifically. I do truly appreciate your effort and your work. That is how this site should work. I wish the rating system could help that system as a vehicle for quick communication, instead of providing a vehicle for abusers.l Removing the anonymous ratings would go a long way to eliminating the abuse of the system. 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