Who's rating this stuff

[mike dixon]

<i>My comment was based on that, not on a subjective argument like what is important for me. </i><P>

You feel that talking on the critique forum and getting comments and ratings are the way to become a better photographer. Not everyone thinks those things are the highest priority.

[joshroot]

<I>"Tell me how can I get to be a better photographer by talking on all forums other than the critique forum, without viewing the really best uploaded photos and without getting a decent (amount of) feedback (comments & ratings)?"</I>

<P>

You can do it the same way that I did. I started on photo.net in 1998 when I was still a beginner in the overall scheme of things. In between then and now I have shot for ESPN, Disney, EA Entertainment, sports magazines in 5 different countries, bike companies, shoe companies, consumer magazines, ski areas, snowboard companies, and a whole boatload of weddings. Photo.net and it's community contributed a lot to my education, but I have never used the critique or ratings system. The forums, the galleries, and the members were what mattered to me.

 

<P>When I wanted feedback on my images, I sought out people who I knew were good at the photography I wanted to learn. I talked with them directly and learned what they thought I was doing correctly or incorrectly with my images. They did not need to comment on my photos in order for me to learn and they absolutely did not need to use the ratings system to teach me anything.

[jayme]

You're right, of course, Josh. Keeping things in perspective makes a lot of sense to me. There is a lot more available on PN than just the ratings & critiques forum.

 

The TRP "should" be waded through to seek out those photographers whom you wish to learn from. Since I don't really understand most of the forums very well, they would do little to help me, other than getting a few technical questions answered.

 

So I should contact the photographer via email & hope they would help me & not blow me off. If they blow me off, well move on to the next one :)

 

I already do this, I save my favorite photographers as "interesting". Plus, I keep in touch via email with quite a few. But heck, lots of them left PN. So ultimately, I'm going to start wading again & stop whining. Thanks Josh for refreshing my memory about how I made friends on here in the first place, plus a few enemies :) Big Smile!

[sprouty]

Here's a tip: click on the TRP link, search by what ever criteria you want, then immediately hit the previous button. This brings you right the bottom of the slag heap. Continue to scroll backwards through the list (it's mostly crap) but then, every once in a while, you'll find a little gem only you can appreciate.

 

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/6358743

[joshroot]

And by all means, please don't anyone think that I am dismissing the problems with the ratings/critique system. It has problems and there are plenty of improvements to be made.

 

But I have to balance that with the fact that you can say the same thing about most every part of the site. And every area of the site has some group of people who are screaming that their favorite area is the most important.

 

But we are working on it.

[hanna_cowpe]

Josh

 

I think the suggestion of an appointed and "trusted" critique group would be very welcome. I believe the dirth of critiques is a result of the huge increase in membership over the last five years, brought on by the digital revolution. When I joined six years ago there was a predominance of professional and well experienced photographers who were happy to share their knowledge with those of us who were just starting out. But the dilution of the pool has tipped the balance to the point that those who are truly capable of giving a real critique make up such a small proportion of the membership that they can't spread themselves thinly enough. Pick any one of a thousand images and read through the comments and see just how accurate or helpful they are. I don't feel confident in critiquing an image of a photographer who is more experienced and more knowledgable than I am and I would guess that is the way many others feel. I can only say what I like about the image and that isn't necessarily very helpful.

[joshroot]

Hanna,

 

That is a very good observation that many people miss.

[Matt Laur]

Josh: I've mentioned this in other contexts, but I'll mention it here again... you might want to wander off to slashdot sometime and get a sense for how their 'karma' system works. Now, that site is completely infested with trolls and flamebaiters, but it's easy for users to simply filter them out... and that's the whole point. Their system relies on moderation of comments (here, it would be moderation of ratings and critiques), and 'meta' moderating of the moderations. Through those mechanisms, people earn the right to be more visible, or for their own comments to carry more weight. The meta moderation is a check on that, to make sure that people rating other people are themselves not skewing the system. If you tied that sort of system back into a quantified way to measure how often people could post looking FOR critiques/ratings, you might generate some of the behavior you're looking for (a more engaged critiquing culture).

 

As you so eloquently pointed out a bit farther back in the thread, NONE of that would bear on people who'd rather just ignore it and look instead for direct personal interaction with well-chosen contacts found on the site. But for those that find personal currency in the ratings/critiques area, it seems reasonable to explore the prospects of making it a bit more of an economy - the better to square people's expectations against what they invest into the system. Subscribers could occupy a slot in that economy where their requests and/or responses appear more in real time, and the freebie-folks would see their requests queued up for a couple of hours or more. Incentives... incent! Thanks for slogging through this.

[woolly1]

.... would be to make all photos put up for critique anonymous, at least for an initial period.

 

The downside is that with such an apparently high through-flow of contributed images they stay 'live' on the Critique Forum that the scores would be too low to an sample period to mean anything.

[les]

In one of the previous threads I wrote:

 

"...let ALL the ratings be anonymous - and do not show them, just show the final weighted rating for the image. It is not unthinkable to "rate" the raters and assign weight to their ratings - for instance: long time member = "+", have own portfolio = "+", comments on portfolios and pictures = "+", has highly rated images = "+", his/her ratings are not strongly biased toward 3/3 or 7/7 = "+", posted a lot = "+". So - all menbers could be "rated" by PN - some kind of script could be used to analyse their history and input. This way, more weight could be given to rating from respected members, while relegating ratings from obviously unbalanced and/or abusive raters to insignificant noise.

 

Personally - I do not care overmuch."

 

Incentives ? Based on the same criteria, e.g. member's rating, his/her photos could be dropping down the que at the rate inversely proportional to the member's rating.

 

Aren't we getting really cretive ;) ?

[anette_tyler]

Jayme

I was one of those who received an "unpleasent" message from you. I do not post photos to get good ratings and I do not have any "friends" on this sight. I post my photos to learn and to get feedback. I hope and beleive that other members are honest. I agree that sometimes the ratings are not "fair", but I think people got different taste and look for different things in a photo. I have never taken the ratings too seriously. I love to look through other members photos, it is very inspiring.

[robert_g.1]

I was on a website that had a very good system , but it also had its problems . I do believe its the unfair practice of individuals that is the main issue "cheaters" a possible solution would be to allow the member to block out other members they feel are abusive in rates or comments, this would only be known by the blocker and blocked person . It makes for a more peaceful enviroment , if the person gets blocked out alot they may get bored and leave! I found this worked very well and I would endorse it . Of course the cheaters will find ways to abuse even this , but the member that blocked out the idot has peace in the end , and no need for complaints to the admins, you should like this Josh ! It would make your job easier too with less complaints ! Robert

[jayme]

Anette- I am sorry if you thought my critique was "unpleasant". It was not meant to be unpleasant, just honest. I explained why I was confused about the high ranking of your image. High pass over done, cut off a finger & a hand. I did say it was a cool perspective.

 

I don't find this kind of critique "unpleasant". I "want" honesty, not fluff. I am also here to learn & get real feedback. I want "brutal" honesty, not the casual "Nice", "Wonderful", etc.

 

I realize people have different tastes, I can accept that fully. I don't take ratings very seriously either, never have, never will. But..... I still questioned "Why" this image of yours was rated #2 on the TRP? What was I missing?

 

I'm taking the advice that someone mentioned above about hitting the "previous" button. I'm starting from the bottom & moving up on the TRP. Admittedly, I might miss a few outstanding images, but I think I might find a few more outstanding images this way.

 

And Anette, I apologize if my critique was too honest, it is not your fault others rated your image high. My ire should not have been directed at you. I apologize for my bluntness, it was rude.

 

Robert- occasionally there is a member who, for whatever reason, does drive another member crazy. But.... to block out those people would also give one the ability to block out others that you don't like their comments or ratings, pretty soon you would only be allowing your supporters to rate your images. Again, just because someone tells you something you don't want to hear does not mean it's not useful. Some of my best learning occurred from those that didn't like my image & had the courage to tell me so.

 

Here's what I think. A critique should be dispassionate. Tell me what you like & don't like. What you feel I should keep in mind the next time I shoot the same or similar subject(s). I personally learn very little from telling me how wonderful I am :) Are you listening Tim Holte? I want your critiques. I admire your stuff, I'm just irritated you blow me off :) I don't automatically give you 3/3's, actually I enjoy your stuff immensely. So.... give me some feedback so I may learn, be brutal! I CAN TAKE IT! I am not a namby pamby baby, I'm a tough, thick skinned inspiring artist :) Remember, I'm old (52) & I only have a few years to get this right before I risk senility :)

[jayme]

Tim- "inspiring" was a typo, should have been "aspiring" :) Although I guess I could be "inspiring" to some :)

[jimadams]

"<i>I find it particularly aggravating to have to wade through 400 images in the TRP to get to the more interesting images that I feel actually have some artistic value.</i>"<p>It seems that the operative words in your statement are "<i>that I feel</i>." I'd guess that there might be a lot of photographers (myself included) who don't look at photographs and photography the same way that you do. Everyone shoots different things in different styles and using different techniques. Whereas you shoot primarily digital and do lots of post-shoot processing to "enhance" your work in order to make it more commercially viable, others shoot film and do almost no post-shoot processing. What appeals to <i>you</i> might not appeal to others, and vice versa. Just because you don't like a photograph doesn't mean that someone else might like it and rate it according to their own tastes or feelings about it.</i><p>It's ironic to me that you include Picasso's "painting as I think things" quote on your Photo.net page, while not seeming to be able to accept the fact that photographers might do the same thing.</i><p>Your comment really just sounds like another of the hundreds of mini-rants against the Photo.net ratings and TRP system...a system that I've found to be pretty worthless except to those people who are more interested in getting their work in the TRP, rather than receiving potentially helpful critiques.<p>Your statement that Photo.net "seems to have gone to the snapshot and what I call the 'Hotel Art' crowd." is a pretty offensive blanket comment. There are lots of outstanding photographers on this site who do some amazing work. Just because they don't cater to the tastes of everyone and don't get their work in the TRP doesn't make them and their work any less noteworthy. <p>If you're so aggravated about "wading through the TRP," why don't you simply browse by the categories that interest you, rather than whining about the quality of other photographers' work and a system that's probably never going to change anyway?

[anette_tyler]

Jayme

I appreciate constructive criticism such as "High pass over done and cut of one hand". It was the last bit I found a bit "unpleasent". By the way I do not think that the image you commented was ever #2 TRP, may be in the "childrens" category.

[jayme]

Jim- of course you are right. Boy, I really ticked you off didn't I? :) Low blows, Digital vs. Film a tiring argument. Did Ansel Adams not play constantly in his darkroom? I guess because he shot film, he didn't manipulate his images? Right :)

 

Most of your statements are just ridiculous & a poor attempt to provoke me. I will not be provoked by you :) At least I stated "I feel" explaining it is how "I" feel & don't make definitive statements that sound like they are facts. "Whereas you shoot primarily digital and do lots of post-shoot processing to "enhance" your work in order to make it more commercially viable, others shoot film and do almost no post-shoot processing". This is definitely not a fact! Obviously, you know little about my photography.

 

So, I respectfully ask you to back off. I do not want to debate you, when, in reality, we are on the same side. I too want those "outstanding photographers" on the top of the TRP, not in the middle somewhere. That's why I asked "Who's rating this stuff?"

 

Anette- again I apologize. If you would like me to remove my comment, just say the word. And yes....it was #2 at the time I made the comment.

[anette_tyler]

Don't worry, I don't mind. Good luck!

[jayme]

Thanks Anette, seems like I'm going to need it :)

[lorilafs]

I came to read this thread seeking answers to how and why photos are rated and chosen for top photos of the week/month. Some of my ratings are as good as or better than those that remain there for more than 2 or 3 days. Why?

Now, I just read about 2/3 of this blow by blow. While some, if not most, of what's being said can be helpful, the back and forth attacks are just irrelevant and should have no place in a forum like this. As a relative newbie this is disheartening and it makes me want to withdraw from seeking ratings and critiques that so far-for me- have been written in a positive slant, and I find very encouraging. I've gotten a couple of negative comments, but their point was well taken. To hear you seasoned photographers say this site used to be great but it sucks now doesn't instill a lot of confidence in this site and may even make me put little value in some of your comments. Jayme, you gave me a suggestion today that I cannot adopt because I don't have that program...but I do appreciate your taking the time to do what you did and to stop by my photos. I looked at yours briefly and was very impressed! I will value your future input.

I am trying to learn how to improve my tecniques and I need all of these photographers opinions who think my photos are worthy of their time and words. Or that I have enough talent to warrant encouraging.

But,this childish bickering needs to stop. It will turn newbies away and that would be a shame. I think this site does have a lot to offer to people like myself and I am grateful to those who care to share their expertise w/me. I respect corrective criticizm.

If you must tear each other apart, could you please do it thru emails, or create a bitching and moaning forum where only those who dare will tread!

I believe there is a place for everyone and everything. This is not the place for this stuff.

Just a newbie's opinion...

[robert_g.1]

Jayme , I agree about learning from some of the negative things and thats life, but people do cross the line , and I think a member has the right to make that decision when its just abusive and should be able to block them out. I think its a great option we should have .

[jayme]

Lori- of course you are also right. I apologize for my part, I guess I was just in a strange mood when I started this thread, then Jim pushed a few buttons. I am ashamed I allowed Jim & Tim to get under my very thick skin :) I love Newbies, especially those that like to learn.

 

Generally, I'm pretty happy, go lucky. Live & let live. I love to give & receive comments of any nature. But what I see happening is basic "drive-by" ratings with very little constructive comments. I think this does everyone a great disservice, including the newbies & the site.

 

For example: I posted an image this afternoon & before I could even get back to look at how it posted, it had 3 fairly low ratings. I know it wasn't a Rembrandt, but how could anyone evaluate an image for rating in less than 5 seconds? So my original question of "who is rating this stuff?" still stands.

 

I think a lot of the more seasoned photographers have stopped rating or only comment occasionally. I don't know about the rest of you but I tire of the fluffy, flowery, "wonderful" "Stupendous" "Outstanding" one word evaluations. Give me substance. Even if it's, 'I don't like your image, I hate motorcycles." I can live with this :) I know it takes time to write a comment/critique... that's the point. I've learned more about composition & lighting from critiquing than I remember learning in any of my Art & lighting classes.

 

To critique makes one really look at an image, not just slip on by as you hunt for your friends newest posts.

 

So again Lori, don't get the wrong idea, for the most part we all get along. Some are easier to get along with than others, I'm not sure where I fit into that scenario, but hopefully I'm generally easy.

[bigginger]

Maybe we should look at why people don't critique. It is a lot easier to give praise on a picture you feel to be both technically and aesthetically pleasing without suffering the wrath of a fellow photographer.

 

I am less inclined to comment on a picture that I think has faults because I don't feel confident and sufficiently qualified to say what is good and what is bad. Anything I say would just my personal opinion and what do I know?. If I am honest I do like to get good ratings for my pictures as that helps my confidence in establishing that my pictures please some people some of the time. A benefit of a high ranking is that the picture is more likely to be viewed again after the intial critque period has passed. and thus more people may get to view my work.

 

If I started to express my opinion about pictures I really didn't like then my fear is I would suffer the retaliatory 3/3 ratings on pictures that had previously ranked well, should I care? possibly not, but the fact is I do.

 

I think it would help if the only people that could rank shots were a chosen team of experienced crtiquers who themselves would have their critques subjected to periodic review by their piers to ensure some sort of consistency. Ordinary members like myself could then critique without fear of revenge ranking. I would hope this would then encourage honest commentary and discussion between users. This would be more akin to submitting work in camera club competitions where only qualified judges mark work.

 

Is their any guidance on writing critiques available on PN?

 

Regards

 

Mark

[stephenfenech]

Excuse my ignorance but what does TRP stand for and where is the link for it?

[woolly1]

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00MyGt