tampabaybrokers Posted August 2, 2008 Share Posted August 2, 2008 Engaging my cloak of invisabilty , I bid you all a fare thee well as i have pressing matters of state to attend to .... oh oh ..the secrets out ...I work full time in the white house as a photographer ,,anailizing images for the Bush Library .....:-) I am actually adding some far better gallerys to my web site ... Any who would like to preview and let me know your thoughts i would apprete it .... http://www.tampabaybrokers.biz/30.html As I add to each button , sunsets for instance now i will ba able to simply add all images from each sunset by adding one image from shoot then linking it to that gallery ... I really hope we could attempt to try a few of these things, I do what i can to particapate when i already carry a pretty full schedule , and I am truly amazzed by the wealth of knowledge gathered here and the ideas that a creative photographer can after reviewing this site can generate ,,,It helps to generate and create new ideas I never would have considered had it not been for my member ship here ...admin a special thanks to you all ..and Josh If you are interested in the plan I have devised to help Photo,net generate an additional 6 figure income yearly ...let me know ...and ill give you the plan...dont want to step on any toes ...but you might like the idea ... with that he spins around gathering his cloak of invisablity around him and disapears into thin air ..... Regards jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomadakis Posted August 2, 2008 Author Share Posted August 2, 2008 Why do I have this bad feeling that I wasted time... no way, I am sure someone will convince me otherwise soon... I am sure someone will tell me that this conversation was productive... that somehow we made a bit of difference... that we made Photo.net(the best photography site on the net) a better place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tampabaybrokers Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 Only time will tell , as members we can suggest , ask , plead for changes ...until the powers that be decide to make those changes , we can only voice our opinion and then hope for the best ....Hopefully something will come of this ....Who knows .....ONLY THE SHADOW ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 Antoni, a balance of diverse views from others is not the same thing as negating your personal opinion. Try to avoid falling into the trap that has lured so many others who haunt the feedbag forum declaring: "Photo.net has no intention of changing because they never listen to *my* opinion or implement *my* ideas." The site has made considerable improvements over the years but these are seldom given the same recognition as the negative remarks about certain pet issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_de_ley Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 I think Antoni makes good points about the dubious merits of many ratings, but I don't think the conclusion is that photo.net admin is responsible for inevitable laziness/bias/selectiveness among some of its members and should somehow try to neutralize those. Learning creative skills and talents also requires learning how to filter comments (or absence thereof) from everyone out there, and how to take a step back and pick up on useful suggestions (if any) without getting upset by snubs or easy putdowns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stamos Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 In this rating war some grand masters took trophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virginiamarie Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 I'm fairly new at PN, and still have a lot to learn in the photography world. But I've decided to add my 2 cents to this forum. I don't mind getting a 3 or 4 on one of my photographs. But what bothers me the most as a new and learning photographer is not knowing what I need to do to make that photograph better. I received a critique on one of my photographs recently and it was a huge help. Jeffrey Lee had a good suggestion in posting some of the 3/3 photographs and sharing the critiques on how they could improve. I believe it's the only way we learn. I took a 6 week photography course from one of our local professionals, and every Monday night we all had to put what we felt was our best of the week into a slide show. Then everybody in the class commented on what they liked or didn't like and they told you why they liked or didn't like it. That's the difference. When I receive a 3 or 4 on PN, there usually is no reason attached. So although I know in someone's opinion it's not a good photograph, I don't know why. I think there is much room for improvement on this rating system and I hope the administrators will take some of these comments into consideration. Just my 2cents worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike warnes Posted August 5, 2008 Share Posted August 5, 2008 I don't accept that there isn't an answer to this problem, and lets face it, it's a problem. Why not simply allow those wishing not to receive anon ratings to disallow them? Give us a choice. If someone has the right to rate a picture anonymously, then surely photographers should have the to disallow them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted August 5, 2008 Share Posted August 5, 2008 That would be a mixed blessing, Mike. Leaving a photo eligible for ratings, even via the anonymous queue, gives it greater visibility. Virtually all of my ratings are done via the anonymous queue. Consequently, the vast majority of my critiques are prompted by photos I see on that queue. I'm not sure how many comments and critiques from other viewers are prompted via the anonymous queue, but it seems better to take a chance on the occasional low rating in exchange for greater visibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronda Posted August 5, 2008 Share Posted August 5, 2008 I wish all ratings were seen by the photographer it would help them know if a photo they like is not liked by other people in general. I agree they would have to be anonymous.To save headache for the moderaters. Although I do wish a little advise on how to make the photo better went along with the low rating. ahh well beggers can't be choosers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike warnes Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Thanks Lex. All I'm suggesting is that people be given the choice. I can see from the string, and other debates, that there isn't an ideal solution and that probably the best approach is to develop a think skin and not to worry too much about it. But if some people would rather not have the pics rated anonymously, then that should be their prerogative. If others prefer to have the anon votes, and the greater visibility, then they have the choice too. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 It's a complex issue, Mike. I don't see any easy solution that will please everyone. A writer's critique site I participate on has a variation of the anonymous critique: the writers themselves can choose to remain anonymous until after their work is critiqued. Presumably this cuts down on their equivalent to mate-rating. It also opens up more opportunities for ratings and critiques, since the system is weighted to reward reviewers differently based on their critique patterns. Extra credit is given for reviewing work outside of one's intimate circle of "friends". That site's critique and ratings system is extremely complex and I'm not sure that it's significantly more constructive that photo.net's system. They get similar comments about the system on their equivalent to the feedback forum. Interestingly, while there are many complaints and suggestions for improvement, I'm not seeing as much outraged indignation and cases of ruffled feathers there. I don't know whether it's because the system actually works better, or because writers have a different response to criticism than photographers do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
short1 Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Bob Atkins and Lex elaborated on what I think are core issues, matters should be reassuring to the membership - they've certainly changed my view of the ratings system. First, Bob stated that the administration knows who the anonymous raters are, and their rating pattern. Presumably, a member who consistently and exclusively rated with 3's would be approached by the administration, or dropped from the site. That tends to debunk the "rabid raters/inexperienced raters " conspiracy theory. Is that a correct take on what you said , Bob? And Lex placed the ratings in excellent perspective. We are competing, here and in life in general. At the same time, I think we are well intended, and not prone to be malicious. The olympics analogy really struck home - the ratings are from the judges ( the membership), who are not compelled to give a reason for their scoring; while the coaches - again, the members who opt to critique - provide the training. Given this, the rating system becomes a response to a performance ( with a check and balance system being the monitoring of anonymous rating patterns by the administrators ), and critiques become a post-mortem of the performance, with helpful coaching by generally more advanced members. Damn, it finally makes sense, and has become less threatening. One thing I didn't understand though, was the means by which a low rating will bump one up into the "Best of" category. I've seen it happen with my own photos, where a lowly 3.4/3.6 is among the "Best of the Last 24 hours". That really left me scratching my head. I figured just receiving any rating would place one into the "best of..", but apparently there's more to it than that. Could you elaborate Lex? Given my idiotic swan song of a few days ago, I hope I can post again without an adverse response. I admit, I was a jerk. I truly apologize, though I did compliment the membership, the administrators , and the site as being terrific...I was just exhausted trying to figure out who was stalking me...and, as it turns out, it was just the shadow of my ego. And Lex, I doubt you remember, but you said I was a posting junkie. Damn, you're good......Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Craig, I honestly don't know how the TRP works. But it's a fact, depending on the search/display parameters used, it will sometimes give equal or greater prominence to lower rated photos. Personally, I think this is a good thing because it helps level the playing field. IMO, if a photo was interesting enough to prompt a viewer to assign any rating at all, that alone is reason enough to give it some place in the tier on the TRP, if it garners enough ratings to meet the minimum requirements. Folks who are the most competitive and want only the most highly rated photos to appear most prominently may disagree. But those who just want to join the game will benefit, even if their ratings aren't as high as they'd like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
short1 Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Uh...okay. Whatever, I think you and Bob have provided adequate reassurance to the community that the rating/critique system in place works as well as any alternative. It seems a settled issue, and to tell you the truth, you might wish to generate a document reiterating, in brief, what you and he have explained in this forum. Cutting through the to and fro of the "what about this...", a concise and reasonable picture of the mechanism of the ratings has been explicated, and I presume would, if such a document were to be integrated into an introduction to the site, with a forthright: "It works this way, it is tried and tested and monitored, such that low ratings may not stroke your ego, but gain you a position in the "best of"; it cannot be consistently abused by a single member without administrative notice; and no matter what improvemnets you may feel you can make in the system, either write about 20,000 lines of bug-free HTML and submit it in Beta form, or accept the status quo", quell any reservations or objections new and existing members may have. I feel as though you've capped the well, and I appreciate it. Thanks, Craig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard-just-Leonard Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 Someone PLEASE put this thread out of it's misery. 89 Replys and more than a week and counting... not like ratings hasn't been hashed over about a couple hundred times on this site already. and when did pnet start limiting non subscribers (such as myself) to 4 critique requests per week? grrrr.... I looked through all the recent feedback, casual conversations forums and found no notification that would be happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomadakis Posted August 13, 2008 Author Share Posted August 13, 2008 Sorry for my absence, just came back from a trip to Canada were I had no time for internet commentary. Lex (8/3) I agree with you. I believe that Photo.net is a great site that has improved over the years. I am sure that PN listens to member's suggestions. My comments should not be seen negative, only constructive. Paul (8/3) Admins are not responsible, all I am suggesting is to improve the learning experience of the member that wants to learn. Ginni (8/4) I have come to the conclusion that what is most valuable is not the opinions and ratings of the average member(even though appreciated) but the advise of the experts. See above the suggestions for an expert panel of judges. Are 3/3s or 7/7s worth more if they are given by a less experienced/talented person than you or by a professional/artist that makes his living creating photographs or lives and breathes with a camera? Mike (8/5) A choice is a good thing! You are correct that there is an issue, which by the way has come a long way over the years, all these comments on this thread prove just that ! Ronda (8/5) Lots of people "wish a little advise on how to make the photo better went along with the low rating" but then people would rate a lot less. Photo.net and its members thirst for more ratings! Lex (8/7) Again good points and perspective. By the way you deserve a big hand for being here at PN. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daved1 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Here's my take on this. I (Dave) = Citizen. PN (administrators) = government. I dont need or want PN stepping in and removing my low (or high) ratings because they feel that they are unjustified or whatever any more than I want them killing a thread under the persumption that 'it's going to go bad'. Ratings are nothing more than a means to tell me WHERE I stand overall as a whole. Critiques (if you can get em) may tell me WHY I stand there. It's that simple. 3 = doesn't like it. 4 = ok. 5 = pretty good. 6 = really good/ they like it. 7 = excellent. Now, give me the critique with any of those numbers and I'll learn why you hate/like it in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Dave, photo.net isn't a government, a country or a democracy. It's more of a private club. You join, pay your dues, abide by the rules of the club. Regarding using critiques to explain or justify ratings, I've yet to meet a single photo.netter who consistently explains every rating. As of this writing you've rated 3388 photos, assigning a number of 3's. You've tallied 512 comments on photos. That seems like a reasonable balance. But consider how long it would take you to comment every time you left a rating. I suspect that, like most of us, you regard the ratings as a valid form of commentary and sufficiently self-explanatory that comments would be superfluous or not helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daved1 Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 PN is not the government of Photocastan? I simply was trying to point out the difference between a rating and a critique, in my mind. One never will get 100% rating and critique from everyone. Even as a 'private club' I see no reason for PN to be expected to toss out the ratings I feel aren't reflective of my obvious talent. :)Comments are helpful, if you can get them. My total overall percentage of 3's is pretty small. I average about 5 for the 3388 photo's I have done. When my rating is in line with pretty much everyone else, there is no need for a verbal comment. If I'm way low or high compared to the norm, I try and say what I like about the photo or give some constructive view of what I feel could make it better. Like I stated, ratings tell me WHERE I stand, Critiques tell me WHY I was put there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 I want a communist propaganda sweatshirt with some sort of "Hail the dictator of Photokistan" slogan on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lizweisiger Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Lex, I think I might be one of the few who consistently leaves a comment with my rating. It's just something I always try to do. It's not that hard. But I think most PN'rs don't feel they should HAVE to. It has to be an individual's choice based on what they believe Photo.net is. And we are all so differently made.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richterjw Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 i just read this whole thread because the book i would otherwise be reading is crap. jr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tampabaybrokers Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 ok the garment printer is here and taking orders for new sweatshirts eblazened with the new photo.net wear /....+ 1 shirt that says " Hail to the dictator of Photokistan " rest will all say Photokistan Member .... Sizes ?.....:-) ps ....Perhaps we should turn this into a short book ...?heheheh I cant believe this is still going ....must be the ENERGIEZER BUNNY ..EFFECT .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naturegirl99 Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 In Response to Charles Mastrovich--"Do I really stink or is someone just having a bad day. I can't answer that because I'm not receiving any relevant info". May I refer you to one of your critique requests, "Keane Glacier - HelioTrek", in which someone gave a detailed and constructive critique on your image. Very little stinkage included. I resteth my case. 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