What is your opinion?.

[museebfoto]

<p>I have seen that some hidden people always give a bad rating even for the excellent captures ( mine aren't from those ), and even those hidden peoples didn’t have the courage to say any critique words.<br>

What is your opinion about this attitude?.</p>

[phule]

<p>My attitude is: if you don't like bad ratings, don't put your images online to be rated. </p>

 

[alejandro_peralta]

<p>Museeb,<br>

I am going to be a bit general here (i.e. some will apply to you, some might not, only you will know).</p>

<p>-First thing is that some times photos are posted expecting the "Awesome/amazing/20 thumbs up, 27/3, etc...) and my opinion is that while it is always nice to have some positive feedback, it might also create a false idea of where you stand as a photographer and where to go from there.</p>

<p>-Second: Then there are those that simply can't like even their shadow and consider their time so precious that not cannot comment or give useful critique on a photograph. Yet, they stopped and rated your photograph. There are others that simply rate you bad for the sake of rating bad.</p>

<p>-Third: Rob, said it clear: for those that prefer not to get bad ratings, it's better to stay away from requesting critique. But if you most, because sometimes it is a way to learn, then forget about ratings and just read the comments (+ & -) and see how they can help you improve your photography and forget about those that don't help at all (+ & -)</p>

<p>-Last: Sometimes you can be your better critic. Sit alone, where nobody can "hear your thoughts" and look at the photo and ask yourself: "Is this what I wanted? Is this what I was seeing/feeling when I decided to press the shutter? What is it missing to be what I wanted to be?" sometimes you'll find the answer, some others, you won't. And then you'll keep searching until one day you do.</p>

<p>p.s. We don't appreciate everything in the same way... thanks god to that, otherwise we will all be doing one kind of photography and marrying the same person, dressing, eating, and reading the same... get the idea right? But I guess I am just stating the obvious...<br>

Cheers</p>

[peter_daalder]

<p>Never mind about the hidden people and their 'bad' ratings. It is the visible people with their 'good' ratings that you should beware of.</p>

<p>BTW, <a href="../site-help-forum/00WzJw" target="blank">questions like these,</a> belong in the Photo.net site help forum.</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Really simple positive comments aren't worth all that much more.</p>

<p>Everyone has different standards, and because people can get sensitive, some prefer to be anonymous. Ignore whatever you want...it's not a competition. Be a better critic yourself and you <em>may</em> attract those who are like-minded to spend more of their precious time on your images. This is not a service where you're paying people to critique your images--consider any other forum member's time spent on you a gift.</p>

<p> </p>

[john_tran14]

<blockquote>

<p>hidden peoples didn’t have the courage to say any critique words</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Many people like and hate things but they can't explain that clearly and logically. If you don't count opinions of those people, ignore the ratings</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>some hidden people always give a bad rating</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Then it's still fair in general, the better pictures still get better ratings average. Only that we don't have a perfect ratings ... is there any perfect work?</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Museeb: ALL users who go to the Sharing -> Rate Photos area to rate images are doing so "anonymously." This is how most people rate images. If you deliberately go into a member's portfolio and <em>then</em> rate an image, you name will be attached to that rating. But for people who take some time to walk through the ratings queue and mark images one after the other ... those will always be marked as anonymous. It's not people trying to hide from you.</p>

[museebfoto]

<p dir="ltr"><strong>Thanks a lot everyone.</strong></p>

<p dir="ltr">Really, I have to compromise between anonymous bad rating and <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=2294844">Andrew Gilchrist</a> response.</p>

<p dir="ltr"><strong>"Ignore whatever you want...it's not a competition. Be a better critic yourself and you <em>may</em> attract those who are like-minded to spend more of their precious time on your images. This is not a service where you're paying people to critique your images--consider any other forum member's time spent on you a gift".</strong></p>

[jim_j2]

<p>Museeb,<br />I agree with most of the previous posters. Yet, I have only recently started putting more and more of my work in to be critiqued, but was not "educated" on the Ratings and the way it works.<br />In my opinion, for what it's worth . . .</p>

<p>I appreciate the ratings/and or critiques, and more so those that are identifiable with someone. I just ignore the ones that go through and anonymously rate 3/3's. It does happen!<br />No, I'll never have a POW (Photo of the Week) or have any of my stuff displayed on the front pages other than the new "Most Recent Critique Request" area for more than a moment. Otherwise, it appears your photos must have an average rating at, or very near a 6/6 or above to be displayed on the front or home page. Very reasonable prerequesite as it is the "Top Photographs!"<br />Mine will never make that front page as I am basically a 4/4 photographer/hobbyist! However, it does mystify me that I have had some of my better work receive 4 ratings at a 6/6 or above, then find that someone anonymously comes along and rates at 3/3 or lower to "bust" the photo's overall rating down below the 6/6 and end up with the photo being rated a total of 5 times with 4 of the 5 ratings at 6/6 and the 5th rating at 3/3 or below. So, . . . "it is what it is!" . . . and the Folk's here at PN and the Moderators have done an excellent job of providing a rating system to be as fair as it possibly can be!</p>

<p>When you go to the "Photo Critique Forum" area, if you click on the individual photo's and rate them from there, then they are not anonymous and your name will be displayed.<br />If you choose to "Rate" from the upper right hand corner of the page by clicking on the "Rate Category," then those ratings will be anonymous and you can turn on/off the "Auto Submit" feature. If the Auto Submit is on, then after you rate a photo, the site will display the photography you just rated as a thumbnail in the upper left hand corner, showing the previous ratings totals and how you just rated the photograph along with the next photograph in the "Critique Forum," until you have completed that Category. You can not rate the same photograph multiple times.</p>

<p>If you want to see how any given Member rates, you can go to the bottom of that Member's "Community Page" and scroll down to the very bottom and click on the "See this user's ratings," there it will show how many photo's this Member has rated (and recieved) along with the totals for the ratings of 1,2,3,4,5,6 & 7 in either Aesthetics or Originality, whether identified or anonymous.</p>

<p>If you want to see how your specific photo was rated, go to the photo in your Gallery, or wherever it appears, click on it, click on the "Details" tab and click on the total number of ratings. ie., "Ratings<strong> 4</strong> ratings, Aesthetics: 6.00/7 Originality: 5.75/7" . . . Click on the <strong>"4" </strong>it's a link.</p>

<p>Don't know if this information is useful, but took me awhile to figure out. For me it's useful to see how many rated what for Aesthetics or Originality to see where the specific photograph fell short.</p>

<p>Best wishes,</p>

<p> </p>

[starvy]

<p>The bad comment should allow you to learn more about your limitations. Such ratings should also account for aesthetics being a relative measure.</p>

[museebfoto]

<p dir="ltr">Dear friends</p>

<p dir="ltr">Three years ago, when I was participated PN I know that this site community doesn’t play with kids to give him a gift. Actually, members comments, are the every day big gifts, as well as the hundreds every day splendid photos one can see. This is the real gain and from which I have learned so much.</p>

<p dir="ltr">What I want to say, and in what I think, no body have problem with the bad rating if it is associated with at least one words of a motive. Otherwise, it mean nothing and no one take it as a fair.</p>

<p dir="ltr">Thanks again to all contributors, thanks to the PN Moderators for my continues free subscription.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

[dbcooper]

<p>IMO, ratings shouldn't be anonymous, and no rating should be able to be given without a comment about what one liked or didn't like. To me, the level of sophistication in critiques is much less relevant than accountability. Consumers of photography (buyers/customers) and newbies may not know why they like an image in technical terms, but they <em>can </em>express themselves as much as they're able. It'd be useful information for a submitting photographer, or at least interesting in terms of market acceptance. More responsible ratings would come along with accountability. Anonymous ratings encourage cheap shots and false praise, and that sure doesn't help anyone.</p>

<p>If a photo is crap, it's crap, but a lot of people don't know how to say that constructively and offer suggestions on how to improve it. Or, maybe they're squeamish about saying they don't like a given image, but that just sells the requester short and encourages mediocrity. How can one improve if one doesn't know why, or how? Learning constructive criticism is a great tool for personal growth. There's no downside to it. OTOH, If someone really likes an image, they at least ought to be able to say why. Right now, comments with high ratings are mostly about a feelgood without much substance. Seems to me the ratings were started to encourage improvement toward excellence, but that's been all but officially forgotten. As it is, the ratings system is a joke. I gave up on it a long time ago, and I'm not alone. When participation erodes, quality degrades.</p>

<p>Speaking of which, I've also noticed that the general photographic expertise available here at photo.net has steadily eroded. I think the rating system is a leading indicator of that. I've joined and actively participate in other sites, and have witnessed a gradual exodus of top-notch regular contributors from photo.net over the last five years. Pursuit of personal growth and high standards is a sustainable business model. A standard of mediocrity is not; water seeks it's own level.</p>

<p>I'd like to see a system where members would be required to critique x-number of images a month (about 5 wouldn't be a burden). Non-subscribers should have to do more (like 20/mo.), since they're pretty much getting a free lunch (other than less gallery space and exposure to popups) as things are. I'd also like to see subscribers be the only ones allowed to rate photos or request them. I think it would help all the members as well as the rating/critique requesters by growing their viewing/critiquing skills that could then be applied to their own work. With a more meaningful system, I'm sure rating expertise would rise, to the benefit of the entire photo.net community.</p>

[ashton_boni]

<p>I agree with Rob<a href="http;/www.boniimages.com">.</a></p>