8 anonymous raters

[darnell photography]

If there are 8 anonymous raters, in " Photo.net ". They sure seem to give some people, a feeling of Total

Neglect, Disregard, Skipping Over, Ignoring, and " Giving a Cold Shoulder to " .

 

For me, as an Example. I Rarely receive more than 3 Rating from these " 8 Anonymous Raters ". I look at other

peoples' work and see many more ratings from these " 8 anonymous raters " .

 

Sometimes, I wonder if there is " Abuse" from these " 8 anonymous raters ". Do they Intentionally, not Rate some

Photographers and " Tag them " or " Red Flag " them for Abuse or other Incompetent and or Unfit Reasons.

 

I feel that, I know the way of " Photo.net " ways of the " Critique and Rating System " . I believe its' the " Buddy

System ". If you want Critiques and Ratings, you should ( After uploading a picture and submitting it for critique ) go

to the " Critique Forum " and rate and critique other photographers work and, the same, in the " Top Rated Photo

section ".

 

I do this. For every Picture I ask for Critique, I properly rate and critique a total of 8 to 10 other photographers. And

I, do not give Negative " Feedback or Abuse " to any that I " rate and critique ". I might offer Suggestions to Make

their image Better or Provide Advise. But for the most part I try to Encourage them or Offer very Positive feedback, on

their " Beautiful Work ". I usually " Solute a Photographer " for their Brilliance.

 

A photographer should never give a Negative feedback to another Photographer, no matter what level they are at.

All photographers' should offer advise and encouragement, to them ( especially when its a beginner level

photographer ). All things being Equal, we all Started, at the " Beginner Level ". Sure " Objective Criticism " is good ,

for us, all. It helps us " Grow and Mature " as Photographers and Artist. But It should be done with a sense of "

Grace " or " Mercy " involved .

 

I am very " Adamant " about this. You do not " Tear down their Wall " or " Discourage them " from trying to

becoming better. Some of the Critiques, I see in here, are Appalling ! The Way Some People Are Completely

Abusive to Others, with Their Comments, makes me " Sick to my Stomach ".

 

But, my Point remains this : Are these " 8 anonymous raters " Favoring some and Ignoring Others ?

 

Do any Adminatrors what to comment to this? Besides Trying to " Tapdance " around this Issue and Point, of

Matter.

 

Sincerely , Pearce Darnell

[mike dixon]

There are thousands of anonymous raters. Everyone who rates photos in the Rate Recent queue is an anonymous rater. Those thousands of raters are free to decide which photos they want to rate and which they want to ignore.

[lex_jenkins]

You may opt out of the ratings system if it does not appeal to you.

[Matt Laur]

Pearce: if you click on the link at the top of the screen labeled "Rate Photos," and then step your way through ten images in the queue, rating as you go, YOU are an anonymous rater. That's how it's supposed to work. The abuse you're worried about comes when you choose NOT to rate anonymously, but still choose to appropriately mark an image as unorginal if it is unoriginal, or aesthetically poor if it is aesthetically poor. Some people cannot stand that, and will search out the person who gave them that honest rating, and do revenge rating. The anonymous rating mechanism allows you to be honest, even though many users cannot handle an honest reaction to the images they post.

 

How is it abuse to call an unoriginal photograph unoriginal? It's just your opinion, but it's fair because it IS your opinion. We're talking about art, here. How is it abuse to mark an out of focus, poorly exposed, badly-handled image with a lower score on aesthetics? Isn't honesty the best policy?

 

You may choose to separately go back and leave comments on an image - but that is a different activity. The anonymous ratings system serves a different purpose than the attributed ratings/critique feature.

[darnell photography]

Matt Lauer, You miss my point, Altogether. Yes rating and critiqueing can be hard for " Beginning Level Photographers. But, It can be done without a " Total Humiliation of that Photographer " .

You see, My friend, We can do with " Humillty ", that keeps the Photographer : Inspired, Determined, and Deticated ( To push them to the next level ). Thats my Point. You missed it, Entirely.

But still does not, offer an Answer, to the True " Subject " of my Post.

The Valididity of the " 8 anonymous raters " , who are in Question, here.

[darnell photography]

Matt Lauer, also We are talking about the " Staff of Photo.net ". The people that Rate and or add a Critique to your : " Crtitique Request " .

[mike dixon]

The staff of photo.net do not rate or critique photos unless they have the time and inclination to do so (Lex is

the only moderator I know of who does a lot of rating and critiquing). There are no photo.net staff

<b>assigned</b> to rate and critique. As has already been explained above, thousands of photo.net users supply

the ratings and critiques.

[lex_jenkins]

Ditto, I entered the rating/critique fray in March this year after a long hiatus in order to gain a better understanding of the complexities. I do *not* represent the staff of photo.net in this; my participation is the same as any photo.net member.

 

What I have learned is that the system works pretty well. There is no vast underground conspiracy to undermine photographers. The ratings and critiques are a fair reflection of the diverse membership. They can be a tough crowd to impress. Some folks choose to regard tough critiques as personal insults. Others choose to use it as motivation to improve.

[joshroot]

I do exactly ZERO critiquing and rating. Quite frankly, as the person running much of the show around here, it would be somewhat improper for me to rate or critique. There are too many ways that people could misinterpret or otherwise think that the rating/comment was coming from "photo.net" and not "Josh Root".

 

Other than that, I guess I still don't understand what point you are trying to make Pearce.

[Matt Laur]

Pearce, I think you're confused about something. When you look at the ratings you have received for one of your

image, you may be seeing TWO sets of numbers. The people who have gone directly to your image and chosen to

rate it will be doing so while logged into the system, and their name is listed along with their rating in the details area

of your posted photo.

<br><br>

But there is another way to rate photos (see above). When someone simply marches through the "Rate Photos" area

of the site, their name is NOT recorded (publicly) for you or anyone else to see. When you look at the statistics of

your ratings for a given image, those people that used the main ratings system will ALL be shown as part of the

anonymous statistics. When you click on the number showing the total number of ratings a given image has

recieved, that number is the TOTAL of both anonymous and non-anonymous ratings. The people who used the "Rate

Photos" tool and happened to come across an image you recently posted? They will ALL be listed as anonymous if

they just rate on the fly. These aren't the same 4 or 8 people... that's just the number of people who saw your image

in the ratings queue and chose to rate it before it got far enough down the list to stop being noticed.

<br><br>

ANYONE who uses that ratings system is going to be part of the anonymous group - it's not some small, fixed group

of people. You're misunderstanding how the system works.<div></div>

[Matt Laur]

If you use this feature, your own ratings on other people's images will ALSO be marked as anonymous.<div></div>

[tampabaybrokers]

oh oh ....My ears where burnin ,,,and I see my name in type ....Not good ..(kiddin) .....Soooo.....theres a group of 8 that Rate ......eh ......The Great 8 raters .....or I guess we could call em 'The Group of 8 ........or perhaps ,.......Raters of the Lost ark ......:-) have to forgive me still early and have yet to consume my first coffee ......I almost always use my name as I give my best first impression ....Not done in malace simply MY first Impression ......Is all we can offer but the combination of views to rates tell a story for each image as well ......and amount of anoniomous 3-3s can tell a story as well ....1 or 2 ...is one thing ...if you see an image get 5 or 6 rates that are all low .....and anon ...perhaps there is something else that you missing ....

[photobiscuits]

"Raters of the Lost Art" might have a better ring to it.<br>

I am having difficulty focusing on the specific question among the quotation marks, but I'll take a stab at what I think you are getting at by saying:<br>

The last thing I want to see is fluffed up compliments (what you might call encouragement) on a photo of mine that may be in reality, uninspired garbage that has been done a thousand times before. Such a comment/rating would be entirely useless to me personally.<br>

To each their own of course, and I don't purposefully seek out to trash other people's efforts. More often than not I skip by uninspired work without comment - perhaps this is the problem you are experiencing from the "group of 8". Not to be discouraging, but had you considered the fact that you cannot please all of the people all of the time?

[darnell photography]

" Raters of the Lost Art" , That is so funny. A very good " One- Liner ". I'll have to remember that one, for Future Reference. And maybe the Best way to Describe the " Post ". Thank you Jeffrey Lee, Mike Nikolic, and Matt Laur for explaining the process to me. I am " Mentally Challenged " , sometimes. LOL. I thought that " Photo.net " did have " Staff " that rated Images. My bad. I understand the process, Now. But when I meant " Encouragemnet " : It is not " Fluffed up Compliments ". Like you, " Mike Nikolic " More often than not I skip by uninspired work without comment. Anyway, Thanks for all who took Time to Enter a Post, here. Peace !

[virginiamarie]

I don't have a problem with receiving a low rating if the person is willing to explain what they didn't like about my photo, or better yet, what I could do to improve. But then again, sometimes I look at the photo after I've posted it and can see for myself what I needed to improve on! Duh! What I hate is when I post a photograph and specifically ask for help because I really don't know what to do to make it better, and then someone gives me a 4/4 but leaves no explanation! This happened to me a few days ago. I posted a photograph that was obviously not a great one IMO, but because I'm getting requests from the neighbors to do family photos, I wanted to know what I was doing wrong (or right). I got a great response from one person and she gave me a lot of good suggestions that I will use in the future. But then someone else came along and gave me a 4/4. When I looked at his portfolio, he had only posted nature photographs! He left no comment on what he felt was wrong, but felt the need to leave (what I felt was) a low rating. If I don't like a photo, I don't rate it. It's as simple as that. Sometimes I know how the photographer could improve, and if I do, then I try to leave a constructive remark. I very rarely give a low rating. I think Pearce is just trying to say, "don't just leave a low rating, tell me what I need to do to improve the photograph!" If we were in a photography class, with a master instructor, I don't think any of us would be satisfied with him/her saying, "I don't like your photograph." No explanation! Do you get my point? We are all here to improve. Thankfully there are some who are willing to take the time to help us along the way.

[lex_jenkins]

Hey, it happens to all of us, Ginni. The other day I posted a series of four photos as a test just to see if anyone actually paid attention to the critique request. I won't claim my experience is statistically significant, just a casual experiment to test for responses.

 

Rather than ask for comments on the individual, specific photos I invited folks to view the slideshow. Few of the individual photos stand alone as more than mere snapshots, but hopefully contribute to the photo essay as a whole.

 

One person commented on the photo essay as a whole. Another picked out a specific photo and dismissed it as a mere snapshot. Most of the photos submitted received ratings of 3 and 4, which is perfectly appropriate for most of 'em taken out of context.

 

Part of the problem is that viewers who use the anonymous ratings queue will not see your specific requests or instructions. All they see is the title of the photo, name of the photographer and genre or classification. Any requests such as "Please offer suggestions for improvement" will not be seen on the anonymous ratings queue.

 

My advice is to simply ignore the anonymous ratings if they bother you. For that matter, ignore the unusually high ratings. You can opt out of the ratings, but this may decrease the opportunities to receive any sort of written feedback. To improve the odds of receiving feedback, stick with it and don't be too concerned about the numbers.

[martinforget]

lol anonymous raters ... poor them..

 

 

c'était la terre .... maudits singes ...