Ratin an Image

[bdogani]

<p >Something has been bothering me since i subscribed to this site, compared to most of the people here I`m new to photography I have only doing this since 2005 and I don`t have as much experience. So the reason I subscribed to this site is to get some feedback in my pictures, (lighting, cropping, color etc.) but every time I seem to post a picture for critique there are some anonymous persons who rate them under average, and I want to know why? They should at least leave a comment explaining why its bad, or what needs change and etc. if you have the time to look and rate an image you should have time to actually comment it. I know that there are a lot of other photographers here that share my point of view, so what I really want to is try to get more people to notice or to think before the rate an image, cause we all want to improve and I don`t think we will be able to without any constructive critiques from other! </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Bulent</p>

<p > </p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Bulent--</p>

<p>You might get more helpful critiques if you give some. Your critiques, if you think of yourself as a beginner, don't have to be technical and they don't have to tell people what you think they're doing wrong. They can just be honest reactions to what you see.</p>

<p>The more you put yourself out there and think of ways to start dialogues and conversations, the more your own work will be critiqued. Don't be afraid to comment on a photo you find really well done and say what you like about it and then ask the photographer to have a look at your own photos and let you know what he or she thinks. If someone does rate or comment on one of your photos, respond to them right under their own comment and then go make a comment on one of their photos, not just as a tit for tat but as a genuine engagement.</p>

<p>Community involvement is your best bet here. It's energy well spent.</p>

<p>On the other hand, worrying about low ratings and even talking about them is not going to get you far.</p>

[Michael R Freeman]

<p>Ratings are not meant to be a "learning tool". Never have been, never will be.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>It helps to ask a specific question about the picture you are putting into the forum. If you primarily want feedback, then use the "critique only" mode; either they'll write back or they won't. An email to somebody, "Hey, look at this photo and tell me how I could improve ________," might help.</p>

<p>Brace for impact when you receive a critique; I don't know about you, but I seem to make one good picture every ten years. Getting a hard critique back is always a kick in the gut. I usually have to wait about a week to cool off and really think about feedback when it arrives.</p>

<p>I have written some critiques; keep in mind, a fair amount of that is subjective; nature of the beast. The amount of color in a photo, for instance. Some folks just love color, color, and more color. I know I'm the type of person who generally prefers more neutralized colors, but strong blacks; a typical fully saturated photo? I break out the flamethrower on those. [i know mine are bad, too.] Meanwhile, others will love it. What's the photographer going to do about a color decision after he gets the feedback? Whatever he wants.</p>

<p>If you are really going to ask for, and receive a critique; it's tough not to take it personally at first, and it takes a while to go back later and consider what people said.</p>

<p>On the other hand, I have met people at art fairs with a look of anxiety and dismay on their faces. This look just says, What's wrong with my photos? Nobody told them, "Too much HDR." Hundreds of dollars in print costs later is not the time to find out.</p>

<p>So, keep this in mind when you write your own critiques. If you like it, tell them why. If you don't like it, tell them why. They can decide what they're going to do about the feedback later. It's their photo.</p>

<p>I'm sure I've cut a few people with critiques; but, I think about that guy at his first art fair and that look on his face. What a way to get your first set of feedback; getting passed by a huge crowd of people. At some point, that was all of us.</p>

<p>It might pay for you to be nicer than I've been sometimes. Yet, I recommend you still tell 'em.</p>

<p>And I also recommend you write about three to five critiques for every request you submit. It keeps them more constructive if you name parts of the photo or techniques you observed that you liked or didn't like and why. I see you've set to writing more comments lately; keep that up.</p>

<p>Good luck, and see you in critique. I'll be challenging you for:</p>

<ul>

<li>an identifiable subject, </li>

<li>a composition that directs our attention to the subject, and </li>

<li>an appearance or presentation of the photo that looks like it would still work in 50 years. </li>

</ul>

<p>Proceed with confidence. J.</p>

[william l. palminteri]

<p>Bulent,<br>

I'd suggest asking specific people whose work you like to guide you with specific photos.<br>

Let's say you like some of my work. You could email me directly, "Hey Bill, here's a shot I'm working on, what do you see going on here that could use improvement ?"<br>

I'm sure there are numerous shooters on this site who would work with you in that way.<br>

Asking for a "critique" on a public forum can be, and usually is, a recipe for disaster.</p>

<p>Bill P.</p>

[bdogani]

<p >I appreciate everyone contribute, and I agree with most of the things that have been said, when it comes to harsh critique I`ll usually take in personally but not In a negative way, but more as a challenge I have to face in order to improve, and I also believe that ratings are a part of that challenge. I wanted to know why people will rate pictures anonymously and I learn more or less how things work in PN. </p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>People rate anonymously because, before they were allowed to rate anonymously and their names were seen with their ratings, when someone rated low they were often targeted for revenge. People who didn't like low ratings would then go to their portfolios and rate a lot of their own photos low to get back at them. So, because people were acting like babies, sending nasty emails to people who rated them low, etc., the administration decided to allow the option to rate anonymously, hoping to avoid some of that kind of behavior.</p>

[KyleE]

<p>It is funny I am new to the photo.net community as well and I really enjoy this website and I really enjoy reading the forums. I have had the exact same experience. I receive a lot of anonymous ratings, and a couple not anonymous which I greatly appreciate however the ratings are not all that helpful and the main reason I come here is to learn and try to increase the quality of my pictures each time I go out.<br>

Of all the pictures I have submit I received one comment that I greatly appreciated. It seems when a photo is set to critique only it often sits empty and lonely. I often do find myself wishing that I had more feedback that was constructive to tell me what I can do to improve my photos.<br>

I like the suggestion about becoming more involved with the community and offering critiques of others photos. I will try that and hopefully others will help me out in return.</p>

[leo_papandreou1]

<p>I rate anonymously thusly: If it looks as if you’ve tried to modify the world to suit the final picture, for example arranged artificial lighting, posed the model, woke at the crack of dawn, got down on your hands & knees in the dirt, etc., then you get a 4, otherwise 3 for merely reacting, that is, for taking a snapshot. Those are the baseline scores: 3 and 4. I add points (but rarely to 3s) for aesthetics (framing, composition, etc.) and “story”. No points deducted for mawkish or uncouth attempts at art or seriousness; at least you tried. No points added, either; you failed. Naked breasts and things of that nature are deeply appreciated but don’t add to your score. Unless … never mind. Inane Photoshop effects deduct from your score. Incorrect focus/exposure deducts from your score. No points for correct exposure/focus; cameras are too good nowadays. 4-5 is an above average photograph but not one I’d hang on the wall, unless it was personal. 6 is hang-worthy, 7s belong in a museum. All of my photos are 3s and 4s and so are almost all of yours, whoever’s reading this. 3 is an average photograph. Everyone with a DSLR has gigabytes of the stuff. There’s nothing wrong with it, it may even be significant personally, but there’s nothing particularly right with it either; it’s just the visual record we produce of the people in our lives, sparrows, squirrels, back yard, etc.</p>

<p>Photo.net tells me that on average I’ve rated 3.38 for originality and 3.49 for aesthetics. I think those numbers reconcile pretty well my belief that good photography should be hard (else why bother?) and the fact that approximately one fillion-dillion pictures are taken every day around the world and posted on the Internet.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>every time I seem to post a picture for critique there are some anonymous persons who rate them under average, and I want to know why?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You’re unlikely to get a unanimously high opinion of your photos or the kind of individual attention from critics that you crave. I know that if I had to leave a comment for every time I rated a photograph 3 or 4 I’d have time for nothing else in my so-called life – and I don’t even rate that many photographs! Besides, your photos are rated on average 4.34 for aesthetics, and 4.37 for originality. This is an above average score.</p>

[orias]

<p>I am leaving you some critiques on your photos.</p>

[orias]

<p>Leo, I don't agree with your rating scale, not because you aren't correct that there are a lot of average images on tis site but because of the confusion you create. </p>

<p>It clearly states that a rating of 4 is average while you clearly state you use 3 as rating of average. That doesn't seem to be fair to a member who gets an anonymous rating from you, because the member will take that rating and read it as below average, unless you put an explanation in a written critique explaining that for you a 3 is an average rating. </p>

[bdogani]

<p >David, thank you for your critiques! Its really helpful, and Leo your rating makes sense and it helps me understand how to photo community works, I`m not practically concern about getting “high” rates and please don`t misunderstand me, but it seems like everyone has their own rating systems which as David points out create some confusion in PN.</p>

[manuel barrera houston,]

<p>Learn from the forums not from the ratings (the ratings here do not make much sense anyhow) enter contests if you must, there are tons of contest out there including camera clubs.</p>