Exclusion from the Gallery Rating System

[jorge_gasteazoro4]

<i>Patricia, well spoken. Your contributions are very balanced and sober - and true IMO.

The more I read this thread the more I think this thing will damage PN heavily. Not only that newbies will stay away and "old cracks" get excluded. Moreover if Anna is serious about her announcements - and I don't doubt it - I see the possibility of high lawyers fees PN would have to face. I don't believe there are financial resources for this.

</i><p>

 

There is no discrimination or illegal singling of Anna P here. If she agreed to the terms of use she should be aware that this is a private site and Brian is free to do as he wishes. This talk about hiring lawyers is just one more temper tantrum from this lady. <p>

 

Since I am what Brian calls a "freeloader" I do not upload, download or do critiques, mainly to avoid using band width and to be fair with the site. I don't pay but I confine myself to the forums. But this thread is funny, so I followed it with amusement. Since Ms. P is often involved in this kind of thread I was curious and checked her photos here and on usefilm. Frankly I can see why Brian is not amused and the reason of this move. Many of her pictures are of flowers in front of a black background. Now how original is that? why do these pictures deserve a 7 in originality? Anybody who has used a camera for more than a few months has tried a flower shot, tell me, what was the background you used?....black! right? Sure the colors are nice, and the flowers are in focus...but c`mon, 7 in originality? 7 in aesthetics? I don't think so. What is wrong with giving people 3 or 4? As I understand it these are middle of the road marks, why do people get upset when they get them? <p>

 

Ultimately if Ms. P is so offended because her portfolio is not available for rating anymore, instead of hiring lawyers I would suggest to her that she spends her time and money submitting her work to magazines for publication and to galleries. Given that her work is so outstanding (7/7 all around)and has such a mark of excellence I am sure magazines and galleries will snap up the opportunity to show/sell her work, as a matter of fact the photographic room gallery is taking submission during the month of July. If this happens then she will become famous overnight and rating her work on PN will become meaningless. If it does not then perhaps the ratings were not as accurate as she would like to beleive....no?<p>

 

God knows Brian and I have had our disagreements, but this move can only be good for PN. Bottom line he is trying to give the site more variety and expose its members to different kinds and degrees of skill in photography. How can that be bad to PN? I am glad I am a "freeloader" and have not done any ratings or critiques, I would probably be the target of death threats from the Anna P fan club since I would have rated her photos much lower, in the 2, 3 or 4 range. If every time I clicked the most rated photos I got to see one more flower in front of a black background it would even be a lower rating....hmm..perhaps I can become an honorary member of the "balancing brigade," I certainly understand their frustration...<p>

Cheers to all...let me know when you all come to a conclusion...so far it has been fun...

[peter_eisenburger]

Brian,<p>

no talk about stupidity. Really. I said a couple of times before that I worship and appreciate your work. I only believe in this case you are going in the wrong direction.<p>

It's not very helpful leaving the subscriber icon "a few months longer". Well, the expiration of her subscription (did she try to renew?) doesn't change my view about the rating arguments but about the announced legal actions.

[charodiez]

I joined this site, like most of us, to learn from other photographer´s works and comments. So I think that the solution is quite simple: why don´t we get rid of the rating system? I rather comment a photo than giving a rating. And a easier way to navigate through the best recent shots could be using the more commented feature, or more views.

 

It´s easier and faster to rate a shot, but to leave a comment or a good critique you need an extra-time. So in the end, we would only comment those shots that, from our �very subjective� point of view, deserve it. And yes it´s true, when I comment a shot I first take a look at the photographer if he/she is an active member of this site, I´ll leave a comment but if that member´s here only asking for ratings, and hardly gives any feedback, then even though his/her work deserves it I simply look for another photographer... so probably, in the end there is a group of photographers, sort of, that are very active and that you become addicted to... just because you get some critique back.

 

Comments my friends, that´s what we all want...

 

By the way, I don´t think that banning Anna is the best solution... why don´t you ban all of us?

[peter_eisenburger]

I won't take part in this thread anymore. The decision has been made anyway.<p>

What really is dumb and outrageous are the Jorge-type of words. She (disparaging: "Ms P") mostly shoots flowers (like me), what can be 7/7 about shooting flowers, why don't she go anywhere else, there are lots of places?<p>

One of the first posts in the thread (meanwhile deleted) stated to another poster: your pictures are (analogueos) trash, not worth to be shown, better delete them all. Gee, these are the people who should be banned who insult other posters with good will.

[valter_filippeschi]

I think we're on the wrong path with this discussion and the real problem is another...

 

I remember that some months ago the rating system has been changed from "average ratings" to "number of ratings" to give more visibility to the other photographers who couldn't reach the top pages due to " few people always high mate-rated " . A lot of prices have been received for that change.

 

Now photos go in top page because the number or ratings , good or bad, but again I see complaints with the level of ratings and a lot of statistics on average.

 

I think something's wrong.

 

I wonder if the decision to exclude the capability to rate Anna's pictures is due to the fact that she often got high ratings ( 6 or 7 ) or due to the fact that she often got a high number of ratings. With the actual system we shouldn't complain with the average level of ratings so....where's the problem ?

 

I still remember the enthusiastic comments on the change and now if the system doesn't work the answer seems to be the easiest one , remove not the problem ( people don't rate photos they don't like ) but remove the photographer.

 

best regards

[StuartMoxham]

Here is an Idea. Rather than change the rating system ban people or such like (bad ideas) why not change the way the gallery displays picture. Instead of highest rated photos why not highest rated photogs. eg todays highest rated photog instead of todays highest rated photo, yes I know that there will still come the same favourites appearing in the top spots but they will only take 1 spot instead of 3 or 4 so then other photogs would have a space too and everyone is happy. There is a filter photogs highest and photogs average and this is much better way to find things as you don't get presented with many photos by the same photogs just 1 then you can go to their folders and look at everthing else. This would be much fairer because one gallery page would feature 21 diferent photogs thats 63 photogs over 3 pages much better IMO. I must add that most of the pictures in the gallery are of high standard and deserve to be there, but the present system does not allow exposure of so many photogs.

[jhenry]

Without tools to surf around this website would be a jungle. What tools are at our disposal to find our way here: RATING and COMMENT. Rating is quick and easy to operate, good comment need more attention

<p>

Rate mating is quite natural, and rate-what-you-like (... who you like...!?) is also quite human, so is retaliation.

<p>

But if some are being the most active in rating their friends whatever they achieve, and ignoring others, then starts a big problem, many rating are becoming totally meaningless and are extremely polluting the database when searching for really interesting, original and god picture. So if those mate or retaliators get too much abusive in their appreciation, if they cannot discipline themselves, I do think that is the role of moderator like Brian to implement such corrective action.

<p>

What apply to rate also apply to comment. If sort by number of comment is also very much biased (so many WOW, Great catch,...).

<p>

And I personally think that it is helping photographer to rate them with more attention, if you dont want to see their pictures excluded from rating. Then also, those high-mate-rated photographers wont be mad and shock when then they get a 3 or a 4 in a while. Wake up can be hard for whom living in wonderland.

<p>

So for the sake of smooth searching in the database and discovering new talent and picture, let's try to not pollute it with too many nice and easy ratings and comments to always same people whatever they might achieve. I you love them send them an e-mail, create a web fan club and ask them autographs...

<p>

[roberto4]

The discussion about the "Exclusion from the Gallery Rating System" is now a discussion about the rating system and how to behave as a censor/user. Here my suggestion for newcommers .<br>

 

<b>How to get to the High Rated Pages (cook recipe)></b>

<br><ol>

<li>look who is the most active rater and commentator in this forum->rate him/her low and high leaving a comment<

<li>look who is the rater giving the most 7/7->rate him/her with 7/7 leaving a comment like :beautiful

<li>look at a picture with a low rating ->comment it: Oh I find this is rated too low

<li>break into a group of friends->comment in a friendly and critical way, rate carfully

<li>look at an interesting picture ->comment in a high sophistic way

<li>if you have difficulies with the english language->comment short, rate high

<li>help newcommers with advices,critic and rate them honest

<li>make walk-through interesting portfolios rating low and high pictures you like or dislike

<li>laugh sometimes

<li>do not forget to post your own photos and be aware of getting a 7/7

 

<br>

or don't play the game,enjoy the photo.net,read the articles,comment without rating,discuss a lot

and use the portfolios

to order you work, and make a link to it from your own home page.

<br>

;-) robertO

[bob_pictaker]

1.After joining photonet be sure to rate 2000 images within the first month. This shows you put a great deal of thought into your ratings, and people like that.

 

2.While rating these 2000 images remember to use only 6's and 7's.

 

3.If any photographer repays you with a 6/6 or 7/7 on one of your images remember to continue rating that photographer with more 6's and 7's.

 

And that's it! Within a relatively short time you will establish friendships with people who will continue to rate all of your work highly. Every image you post will be rated as one of the best of all time!

 

See, this photography thing is easy! :-)

[roberto4]

You are right, I only wanted to limit my recipe to 10 point.:-)

</b>

[chris_hawkins]

I hope this <a </b>turns the bold off.

[roberto4]

<b>Marc</b>don't forget the fact that Anna used to delete low rated photos. somtimes I could see how fast her postings disappeard after geting a low rating. This effect can be observed also on other portfolios. So only photos with rating 5 and higher are in the folders. You mentioned my name as a member of the group of friends. I become frien after I saw the discrimination of her. I don't like when people are treated that way. I have no proble to delete all mate-ratings when Ann could come back <br>

<b>Bob</b>

if you refere to my rating of more than 2000 works during the last 8 weeks so consider the time I spend in photo.net looking and commenting. in average more than 2 hours a day. That makes

pro rated picture some 10 minutes per picture!? And there are a lot of people having an average rate of more than 5.6 !?

<br>

But you are stil right it's PR-work and Show-Bizz ;-)

[root]

Some people don't like Emil's work. Some people really do think in

their heart of hearts that Anna'a work is of the highest caliber and

deserves to be in galleries. It boils down to personal taste. What I

know about personal taste is that when I have visited four living

rooms every day for the last thirty years in the course of my work, I

make note of what goes up on the wall.

 

. . . . and it ain't pretty. Actually I mean it is pretty, and

that's all. Anyone who has studied art even a little bit knows kitsch

when they see it, yet that's what people put on their walls. We're

having a good discussion about 'essence' over on Mike Spinak's page,

yet I'm sure you agree that essence is very much lacking in your

opinion and mine from many of the popular images on the top pages.

 

By now several of you are really ticked off at my elitist tone because

I've implied that my taste is somehow 'better' than yours. All I'm

saying is that my tastes, and those of many other members judging from

what I've read, tend to run in a different direction from what 'most'

people like. If you want to listen to Brittany Spears and I want to

listen to Charles Ives, how do we resolve this?

 

The solution is to let Elves or Curators play a much more active role

in determining the visibility of more images on photo.net. They won't

flood the site with Emil's work. They won't ban all the flowers with

black backgrounds. But they can achieve a much better balance in

terms of number of photographers represented and types of images

viewed than the current 'pop' photo views permit.

 

When long time members whose work appears in REAL galliers and other

venues where professional standards apply start to reconsider

uploading photos onto this site for general viewing, only then will we

have accomplished what this forum was really intended for. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

[valter_filippeschi]

Mr. Gouguenheim

 

I never gave the idiot to anyone. My comments I think have been always polite. I never used the worlds you normally use. I never rated nor commented one only of your photos. I wrote a comment and I see ( and everyone can ) the level of the answer.

Coming to personal : yes I'm proud to have had Anna Pagnacco as teacher and I will always thank her for the emotions she has been able to give me.

[mg]

No, sorry. Don't force me to prove you wrong, or this thread is going to turn really nasty, but let me just tell you this: no, not all mate-raters rate honestly what they like all the time - not at all - and it's very obvious. And yes, I agree that "some people don't like Emil's work" and yes "some people really do think in their heart of hearts that Anna'a work is of the highest caliber". And that's fair, I suppose, but there are limits to blindness that would surprise even someone like you who can see...:-) I'd almost refer you here to the example posted in the present thread by Bob Hixon, but I've seen even more convincing cases. I just don't happen to believe that someone who takes fairly good pictures would actually love such image to the point of rating it a 7. I just don't. Everybody has a brain and 2 eyes, and subjective tastes don't justify EVERYTHING. Sorry.

[roberto4]

Oops<br>

Marc :"who takes fairly good pictures would actually love such

image to the point of rating it a 7"

so-called good pictures taken by professional top photographers appear often in the

photography journales. Some of us would rate their picures with 7/7

others with 3/2. You can look of so many examples of different styles of

prominent artists and you can be sure the rating scala would range from 3 up to 7.<br>

sorry it is not only a matter of brain and two eyes. But the matter how you use it.

[n_p]

<i>"I would like this thread not to become a discussion of whether the ratings system should be eliminated. That is not on the table for discussion and the rating system isn't going to be eliminated. If you think the ratings are stupid, then ignore them and surf through the Gallery however you please, or ignore the Gallery entirely if you prefer."</i><br><p>

 

It appears that many have failed to take note of "the bottom line", which has been spelled out at the top of this thread - the ratings system is here to stay!<br>Sorry to spoil the fun for everyone!<p>

Personally, I am thankful for that, because it has assisted my <a href="http://www.photo.net/gallery/photocritique/one-critic?rater=729388&period=2000"> search </a> for the very best and the more neglected images in the PN archives.<br>It is unfortunate and amusing, at the same time, that newbies are ignored in these sorts of threads. "nude photographer" only joined photo.net recently, but this member is very much aware of the "ratings gangs" that frequent these pages. My contribution here, is to demonstrate (in a positive way) that it is all too easy to "abuse the system" by opening up new membership accounts under a different name.<br>Nevertheless, I think that my efforts to "dig out" some of the best that this great site has to offer, is as objective as one can be. I apologize for including my particular choice of an Anna P. image in my highest rated 300. It is actually not her best upload, but I was in somewhat of a 'hurry' trying to be "inclusive". AP has (had?) her place at PN and we should all try to be more critical in our analysis of what is on offer in the Top Rated Gallery.<br>Not convinced that we should salute Brian with a "sieg heil". He's doing a marvellous job and should NOT be up at 3am, trying to answer/justify his decisions about the ratings system!

[Landrum Kelly]

zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

[andy_eulass]

Actually, Carl and Marc, I don't see that the two of you are that far apart in your views. I don't think Carl is saying that its all purely subjective. Taste can be built upon objective factors as well. When I joined this place in July 2002, I think all my ratings and comments were driven by subjective things: primarily how the picture made me feel. But now, after getting my legs for photography, I've found that my taste is being molded by a number of objective factors too: how well does the image show control over exposure, is the lighting right for the image, are the colors too saturated, etc. It all plays a part in my views now. Judging Carl by the comments I've seen from him, I'd say that's also going on with Carl's views as well, although I don't pretend to be speaking for Carl. I think, Marc, its the same with you too, but I SURE don't pretend to be speaking for you either.

 

Oh Carl, you also asked an interesting question: "If you want to listen to Brittany Spears and I want to listen to Charles Ives, how do we resolve this?" Easy, listen to John Coltrane or Thelonious Monk. :)

[Landrum Kelly]

Sorry, n.p., that snooze was not directed at you. I actually enjoyed your tour.

[root]

You would never see the photographic versions of Monk and

Trane on this site. At least you didn't pick Kenny G. or whatever

his name is.

[n_p]

Guess what l.k?!,<br> You've just been included in my highest rated selections. No offense taken to your snooze! ;-)

[Landrum Kelly]

Brian, et al.: I withdraw my protests. Certain facts have been brought to my attention. It appears that I came bumbling into the middle of an ongoing fight, much like I did in March, 2002, after which I was banned, unbanned, and then threatened with being banned again by the power that was.

[robert_fleming]

RobertO and BobH you did write THE recipe.

May be i should restart from scratch again using another name but your system.

a great LOL and some fresh air in this never ending discussion. the more I read this thread the more I think Brian Has the final but right approach...

<p>

And i quite agree with JacquesH conclusions ...

 

<p>So i keep on my initial Quest (i prefer `quest` than `crusade`!!)

[vincetylor]

I said I have issues specifically with the WAY Anna was cut off. I do also believe that taking anybody as talented as her off of the top rated pages will only hurt the site as well. However, to make this bold move without any real notice beforehand just does not sit well with me personally. I have also agreed to let it go and move on since this is certainly out of my hands.

 

[ deleted by moderator ]

 

I do also have to disagree with something you said above Brian. Each photographer should hand out far fewer 6s and 7s. That is IF you rate all of the average images from the average photgraphers on this site...some 25,000 as you say. I will occasionally go through these images, clearly just snapshots to be sure. However, you also know what happens next. I will get the same in return. So after a few rounds in that area, you remember, and stick to the top rated pages. There is a good reason why these photographers are on those pages. There work IS very good! I believe very good means a 6. And some of these are even excellent...I think that brings with it a 7. Just a thought.