Being able to only post comments under Gallery - Critique Photos

[asimh]

Ok, i thought there was a thread on this somewhere, but at this time

of night i can't seem to find it to continue. Anyhow, being a

beginner, when i am critiquing/rating pics, often times i run across

one which i dont know how to numerically score, but would like to ONLY

leave a comment. currently (unless i am being an idiot and doing

something wrong), if i only write a comment and dont click on the

numeric scores, my comment doesn't get submitted.

 

i know brian had stated in a post elsehwere, "I keep saying it, but

people are either not listening or don't understand: the ratings are

for the site and the comments are for the photographers."

 

if you could have it take only a comment or a comment/2 ratings/ or

ratings alone from the critiquing page, that would be great.

[root]

Read the tutorial and you'll see how little emphasis is placed on comments. They are permitted, but not encouraged. The inability to comment without a rate from the list speaks volumes.

[peggy_jones]

if you want to leave only a comment to a photo using the Gallery - Critique Photos module, but without leaving a rating (with the radio buttons), then all you need do is type in your comment in the box atop the photo and then click the "skip to next photo" bar at the right of the comment box. if you wish to verify that this was done, then simply click on the commented photo (now shown at left under "What others thought...") and view the comments to see if yours is there, too.

[root]

You're right; it works.

 

Not exactly intuitive, though.

[asimh]

Hey, that does work. Who'd have "thunk" that way would have done anything other than literally skip and forget the current pic. Thanks for the help!

 

Carl - do I sense a bit of sarcasm in your typing?

 

the way i see it, i am better off leaving 10 comments than 50 ratings. at least to help people with their craft (and for them to help me with mine).

 

- asim

[peggy_jones]

that's a good attitude to have, asim. and I usually discover that when navigating the internet or a website that you learn the nuances of better using it by experimentation. that may not be intuitive, but it's rewarding.

[peggy_jones]

...or by asking others who might know, or by reading about it in this forum (which is more likely how I "figured" it out).

[root]

The bigger question for me is "what kind of interaction does the site encourage by its' interface?" Peggy, you've figured out a workaround, but I'm still of the opinion that there would be a noticable increase in comments from this list if the tutorial and interface was reworked. As it stands, you have to conclude that its' purpose is primarily to generate rates in large volume to sort the huge number of uploads rather than encourage the comments which are, after all, the main reason images were uploaded in the first place. Yes, there are other interfaces where you can do one just as easily as the other, but this is the introduction most first time visitors have to image interaction, and the interface influences the kind of input members will offer from this point forward.

[peggy_jones]

I'm still of the opinion that there would be a noticable increase in comments from this list if the tutorial and interface was reworked. As it stands, you have to conclude that its' purpose is primarily to generate rates in large volume to sort the huge number of uploads rather than encourage the comments which are, after all, the main reason images were uploaded in the first place. Yes, there are other interfaces where you can do one just as easily as the other, but this is the introduction most first time visitors have to image interaction, and the interface influences the kind of input members will offer from this point forward.

 

disagree on the tutorial thing, but agree about PN and rates. first, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

 

second, the answer may well be that PN could easily integrate a request for comments-only into its request-for-critique setup. again, suppose PN were to permit a user to upload a photo not-for-rating. mind that this particular photo upload can never be rated. if the user wants ratings she can simply upload another copy (preferably in a different folder) then or later for ratings. now, when the user requests this photo for critique, it gets queued in a group of photos similarly uploaded not for ratings. similarly, when users wish to critique photos, but only to provide comments, helpful critiques, or whatever, they would click on a special option link provided for this purpose within the gallery critique menu. and thus the two groups, critiquers not wanting to rate photos, and uploaders not wanting their work rated, are then married!

 

finally, you might ask, well if PN is primarily interested in sorting photos via ratings for the galleries, why should PN do all this? simple. those who want their photos rated will get them rated - by folks who think it worthwhile to rate photos - and add to and embellish the galleries. and those who do not want their photos rated will do PN a favor and sort their own work out of the gallery pool!

[peggy_jones]

oops! I meant to edit that, and clicked wrong. the first paragraph above is Carl's statement which I meant only for my reference in composing the previous post, but not really to quote. again, sorry about that!