Landscape

Well... I noticed in the last time that the rates were strange. I have

been on photo.net for long time and IMO the rates got worse. It seems

that the rates are totally random. I don't konw if thare are users too

professional or too unprofessional! In any case I made a test... I

submitted a photo by Ansel Adams!

Now.. I don't explain who was Ansel Adams...

The picture got an average : 4.40...! We can say.. a shot hardly

interesting!

You make a valid point.  Well known photogs or at least those that have a great port always seem to get better comments and ratings even for images that are not all that good.  Not sure why, but that's just the way it is.  Maybe this forum can help change that.  Sometimes the less talented like me actually make a great image.  Best regards...Brent

Oh, ye of such blind faith. I have to smile. It has always been that way. It will always be that way when you try to put a numerical rating to what should be or is thought to be an art. The ratings you received depends upon who looks at your photograph more than how good or how bad you photograph actually is. A very large percentage are rating on either one of two things: First, is it a genre they enjoy and do they like the photograph--basically, do they like the subject matter--very subjective. Why do you think that scantly clad women get such high ratings? Second, does the photograph follow the conventional wisdom rules they have been taught to think is important? Thirdly, very few, very few even really good photographers, have any idea what does make a good photograph, or how to talk about a photograph. We are all out here and most of us are stumbling in the dark. It is best not to put a lot of faith in having annonmous strangers assign numberical values to your photographs. There is much more to it than that, but that is the jest of the matter which is why in ten years I have rated only one photograph on PNet.

Let’s take a few examples. Fabrizio, your first folder is heavy on concert photos. I’m 72 and loud noise, even if it is called “music,” irritates the livin’ daylights out of me. Do you think I’m going to rate concert pictures very high? Probably not. Brent, what’s with the Dave Hill imitations—heavy use
of high-pass sharpening? Haven't we got past that yet? You young fellows may get off to that sort of stuff—but, hey, us old folks like to see camera pictures. LOL (that’s satire, sometimes it’s best to mention that)

Yes, fortunately, there are people on PNet that can get past their personal prejudices, that have some knowledge of photography and can give you a fairly descent critique of your photograph—but they are not in the majority. The best most can do it to say that either they like the photograph—most having no idea why other than they have seen similar photographs that were considered good; or that the photograph does or does not follow the rule of thirds or some other arbitrary formula they have been taught.

Now, this here photograph of Ansel’s, if Ansel put it out there, it is good. He just didn’t do bad stuff. Now I have never seen this one before and it don’t look much like the two I have but, hey, it’s Ansel’s, it’s 10/10 all the way whether I know why or not. (yeah, more satire)

Actually Fabrizio, it’s a very interesting photograph. But I would really like to know what you find interesting about it—let’s call it an “artist statement.” I enjoy discussing photographs but I seldom critique/discuss unless the photographer is willing to share some clue as to the intent of the photograph beyond a frustration with the rating system. LOL Some photographers would take this photograph simply because they wanted to document something about the scene. Others would take this photograph seeing the elements as a metaphor for something possibly more personal than house gables and hills.

I hate the photos of children... but I rate good them if the photos are well done.

I know that you said about the rates and people... there are the limits in the method! It's normal.

Actually I noticed only that in the last time the rates got worse.

I accepted rates high or low in the past but now there isn't logic! Are people changed? Maybe.

I suspect also that with the "popular" photography, with advertising and magazines... the people look more at the technical quality of picture rather than the meaning.. the message.. the idea.

Mah... in any case...isn't a tragedy... I made only a provocation| ;-)

Thanks to all!