erin_____grasshopper__rice Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 Well, Doug I'm sure you have your 6 people. In fact I'm sure you have well over 6 people. There are tons of people on this site; who, like me, always "rate their conscience". You just need the top rated or closely followed photographers to "rate their conscience". That includes you, Marc, Margaret, Anna ,Bailey Seals,hmmm..who else? Oh, go ahead and pick someone. Theres your 6 people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzerwolf Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 the "open to all" rating system cannot work properly as long as there are people who will take <i>revenge</i> for a bad rating... and surely this will never change... <br>for obvious reasons (you mentioned) i don't really care about the ratings i get, or highly rated pictures... <br>i post my pictures here mainly to get <b>constructive comments</b>, to learn... a good or bad rating isn't much help without explanation... <br><br>of course a working rating system would be nice to get the top pictures all in one place, but then people would get lazy, only check on the good ones, and no beginner or average would get comments and learn... and omg, no one would view MY pictures anymore!!! *fakes a tear* since they don't show up in high rating or number of comments, or wherever... <br>your idea about the pod is interesting, but i*'m not sure if i'm fully getting this... ok, so someone chooses a picture to be rated by a group of people considered honest by themselves, only this one picture can be "selected for the best images to represent Photo.net" (since other ratings don't count) if it gets good ratings by your select group... you can cover one picture per day, which means that about 1000 of the other pictures uploaded per day don't even get the chance... isn't that about what the elves are doing at the moment, or am i mistaken? since i'm quite new here, i could be wrong... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_menegatos Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 "the "open to all" rating system cannot work properly as long as there are people who will take revenge for a bad rating..." Uhm... how about the people that complain that any rating they get that isn't one point away from their average rating is a revenge rating? Some people really need to get over themselves and stop emailing abuse@photo.net. I think I contacted them once and I can't remember the guy who was doing that. very nice guy but I wanted one raters identity because I was getting viruses from the same ip and I new the rater was bogus. All I got was the ratings deleted. Also asked if I could get another raters ratings deleted and this was obviously a real person but there was no problem having them deleted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzerwolf Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 umm... i wasn't speaking of myself... i got one (real) revenge-rater on the first day, who didn't like my (maybe a bit too harsh) 1/1... we solved the problem between us... nevertheless, i still try to rate and comment honest, i don't care anymore... but it doesn't work, because many people fear for their own ratings... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_menegatos Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 "umm... i wasn't speaking of myself..." See what I mean... everyone takes everything so personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougityb Posted June 17, 2003 Author Share Posted June 17, 2003 Good Point Tom about accepting ratings that are below the standing average! <p> Carrier, I don't know who came up with the POD idea, it just sort of appeared in the thread, but here's the way I see it as it pertains to my question: <p> On a trial basis, an image is selected from the database that is grossly overated. Particpants link to the image, comment and rate it. By "according to their conscience" I mean without respect for whose image it is, or fear of retaliation, etc. I mean to judge the image on its photographic merits. <hr width="200"> <p> Erin, when I ask for people to judge an image according to their conscience, I agree with you that there are scores of members that already do this. The problem is most of them do it only on images they like. My problem is that hundreds of images are slipping into the database with inflated scores because members are not listening to their consciences. They are refraining from challenging these inflated images because they don't want to be the bad guy, they don't want to go against the flow, they don't want to be retaliated against, etc. <p> This is not being a curator. If the curator system ever does become a reality, don't expect to get selected if you only rate what you like. That's not curating. (The word derives from a latin root meaning <i>to care for</i>. One definition I found indicated its meaning was <i>to protect</i>.) Think of it this way: Curators protect the database (the collection) by removing/discarding unworthy images, thereby leaving only images that reflect the values of the collecting entity. Right now, you can go into the database and pull up images with extremely high ratings, such as <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=1525270&size=md">this one</a>, and <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=1397246&size=md"> this one</a> This first image has 50 ratings and is holding at 5.84/6.06. Two of its first 36 ratings, were below 6. The second has 19 rates and was at 6.26/6.02 with its first 15. <p>Now, you may like these images, and that's perfectly fine, I have no problems with anyone liking them and giving them 6's and 7's. I have a problem with them being examples of excellent photography, though. Big problems. Are these two examples consistent with your idea of excellent photography? Or are they merely cute? The point is that these images are in the database and possess an unbalanced ratings record and are Photonet's answer to "What is excellent photography?" <p>But the database is supposed to represent the tastes and aesthetics of the COMMUNITY, not those who only rate what they like, and according to non-photographic criteria, I might add. What a sorry place this would be (is becomming) if the database represented the tastes of just the few individuals that award 6's and 7's without thought for photography, but rather for how funny an image is, or how pretty it is, etc. <p> That's why every opinion is valid, because we are part of a community and are permitted as much influence as the next person. If more of us were less afraid, those that retaliate would be too busy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougityb Posted June 17, 2003 Author Share Posted June 17, 2003 According to the highest rated filter, which I somehow stumbled upon, this is the highest rated and best photograph the site has ever seen: <p><p><center><img src="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=1528432&size=sm"></a> <p><p>Average after 36 rates: 6.67/6.69. (35 6's and 7's, one 5/5, (two after I get there))</center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erin_____grasshopper__rice Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 Ok, Doug- I hear what you're saying. But if you jump over to my portfolio right now- you'll see a whole slew of 2's and 3's on my new uploads "The Litchfield Houses". So, I'm not sure if you're right about A. people only rating pictures they like or B. People being afraid to put bad ratings. So, I don't know what exactly the problem is. The biggest culprit- I'd say- is going to be mate rating/revenge rating. Perhaps a test is in order. Someone can set up two bogus PN accounts. Upload the exact same pictures to each account- and then go and put 7's on every picture you come across with one account and 1,'s and 2's on other pictures with the other account. Then, sit back and see what kind of rating's your pictures get. But, perhaps this wouldn't work, being as I always rate my conciense and yet I have about 20 pictures that I'd consider to be better than a cat in a crockpot- all with 2's and 3's on them.. Go Figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzerwolf Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 but who will vote the participants? you? we? the community? in any case i'd be interested if you really get this running = ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erin_____grasshopper__rice Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 Well, it doesn't matter so much who does it- I have at least a hundred photo's that I haven't uploaded yet, I could do it. Doug is spearheading the campaign to reform the ratings system- he could do it, you're interested- you could do it. Just an idea- let's see what other people have to say about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
absinthe Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 I have a problem of ratings with no comments even when I respectfully ask for comments. I don't mind it, but it makes me wonder if people read my request at all or if they are rating via the recent photos venue rather than the critique requests. <p> I know my photos stink, I am still learning & do not have any of my slides yet scanned (just got my scanner today) so I assume my ratings which are on the low end are accurate or a little too high, if anything. While I do not mind the numerical rating on my photos, I value constructive critisism far more & I seem to have to almost pull teeth in order to get it eventhough I make if quite clear in my request that its what I want. <p> I know a lot of this has to do with my stinky photos & I can't blaim people for not wanting to look at stinky photos, but I am in this new hobby alone & how wlse am I supposed to grow if I do't knwo what I can do to improve? <p> Eh, I am venting more than critisizing here. Busy site & I am jsut a microbe floating around in the masses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzerwolf Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 erin, mhmm... i went and figured and many of your pictures are unfocused and almost all have quite low contrast... in this case i'm not sooo surprised by the ratings... sorry... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 The two images you listed are a prime example of TASTE. How do you propose to critique taste? Are they well executed? Are there ways you could have done better? Your hoping that the average photographers' tastes would be more sophisticated is wishful thinking. I learned that from professional photographers judging camera club competions a while ago. The POD idea was mine . . . . and we REALLY need to start calling these POPULAR images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzerwolf Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 the problem with popular images is, how to rate them... of course we can say, this is not art, it's just cheap amusement for the masses (bluntly), but wouldn't this simply be putting our personal tastes over theirs? when they are technically good, this is a problem... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 That's the point. Leave them alone. Promote other images that you think more people should see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougityb Posted June 17, 2003 Author Share Posted June 17, 2003 I don't for one second propose to critique taste, and in fact have defended it throughout my postings in this thread. People are free to rate what they want. To critique taste would be to go in with this attitude: "This image doesn't deserve a 7. Are you people crazy? What do you all know, anyway. It's obviously a 4/4, 5/5 on a good day. clearly Im the first person here with any sense, etc." That's critiquing taste. My offering them as examples is evidence of *my* taste, and I will stand behind my taste and my aesthetic that these two images do NOT represent excellent photography. Carl, How would you rate these two images? The rest of you? I've just compared the list of ratings to those that have contributed to this thread and see that none of your names are on both lists. So, How would each of you rate these images? Do you think they represent the best photo.net has to offer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erin_____grasshopper__rice Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 I'm offended. My tastes run ALOT higher than "Cat in crockpot". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzerwolf Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 o/a: tha cat 4/4, the baby ducks 5/5, the kangaroo(?) 5/5 to 6/5 (would need a closer look here) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougityb Posted June 17, 2003 Author Share Posted June 17, 2003 I see I'm not making my point because I'm reading in the last posts by carrier and carl that this is thought of as a contest. You're not putting your taste OVER anyone else's. You're putting your taste BESIDE someone else's. The database is the winner. Not you, not the image, not the photographer. The database. The database. The database. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougityb Posted June 17, 2003 Author Share Posted June 17, 2003 next to the last by carrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzerwolf Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 you use a 40$ argus point and shoot camera, do you expect it to focus properly? or have a lens system that delivers good contrast and colors? no way! this has nothing to do with taste... even if you know about DOF and how to use it, your camera does not. you can't expect high ratings on technically bad pictures, even if it's not your fault... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 Please upload the urls for the images in question. I'd like to see what you said and how you rated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzerwolf Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 ok, but how do you explain to the people with popular/other taste, that their pictures are not worth being in the database? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mg Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 Hi ! May I join in ? Thanks for inviting me to post again in this thread... After Seven Stuartson's latest insinuations, I must say I'm flattered... <p> Hey, wait...! This is my friend Igor's baby ducks !! Igor is a real nice guy... I don't know personally, but I've got his 7s all over my folders, and he's almost always very enthusiastic. So since he's my friend, I'm not going to tell him that I think this image is an O2 A3 ? Right...? <p> The cat...? Mmmmm... Well the cat is blurry in all kinds of corners and suffer from multiple PShop injuries... On top of that, the borders make me truly sick... Argh... It hurts right here... The colors are truly awful as well... Fortunately I forgot who's the photographer, so it wasn't my friend... So I guess it's a 1 in Aesthetics - no really, I mean it... Originality ? Well, it's not just a cat, it's in a pot, but the Photoshopping in not "clever" at all. It destroys the image imo. So I'd give it an Origiginality rating of 2. <p> As for the highest rated picture of all times, I think it's really A LOT better. Not exactly the most original thing I've seen on the site - Yuri Bonder has something similar and two of my friends do as well -, but it's well taken. 5/5 at least. I'd go for a 6/5. <p> Who's next ? Aren't we having fun yet...? :-)) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick vincent Posted June 17, 2003 Share Posted June 17, 2003 I think the main start up TRP page should be according to # of views. Good photos get lots of view, often in the 10's of thousands. Nobody here has a clique group or mate-rate group big enough to affect those kinds of numbers. SO, LETS DO IT....RAISE OUR HANDS TOGETHER AND ANNOUNCE THAT RATINGS DON'T MATTER. The only other system I can think of, if people are compelled to "VOTE", is to have a simple +/- system that is completely anonymous. You like the photo, give it a plus. If you don't like the photo, give it a minus. The most pluses make the top photos page. The minuses would not play into the total, but just provide a visual to the photographer of the number of detractors. 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