bob_pictaker

I'm writing this on a Saturday night. At the moment there are 62 registered users online, or about half the number as on a busy week day, and the site is PAINFULLY SLOW. I have a high speed connection and it took over 3 minutes to load this thread! If this site can work so slowly at what appears to be a time of low volume could there possibly be some addition problem?

I'm getting a lot of server errors when I hit the next and previous also. And it also happened trying to post an attachment to a thread on someone's image. It posted my comment but not the attachment.

 

If it helps I'm using Mozilla on a Mac because I had to stop using IE when the top rated pages began to load scrambled.

I like Brian's suggestion of the double blind system, and the restrictions and benefits that go along with it. Responsible raters are given more input and mate raters less.

 

Having to rate 100 different photographers is a fine idea but maybe we should even consider increasing that number. To date I've only rated 260 images, but those rates are spread out over 196 different photographers. I don't have the statistics available to me that Brian has, but 100 may be too easy a goal to reach. And since some of the "mate raters" have been able to rate thousands of images within a few months after joining (don't you people have jobs?) I'm sure they've already sent feelers out to at least 100 photographers looking to see who'd respond.

 

Just a thought.

Just to make myself clear. The problem with the scrambled top rated pages was only with IE 5. The server error message is with all browsers,

Carl I was using IE 5 also. Netscape in the studio and Mozilla at home both work fine.

 

Brian this problem is occurring when I post a comment on someone's photo. After I hit confirm I get a server error message. The comment posts but I can't get to the page to add an attachment.

Nope, it's still not letting me post an image with a comment. I'm using Mozilla because Internet Explorer was loading the top rated pages scrambled.

Hi Bob. Maybe we don't always need the most accomplished photographers? And maybe the photo doesn't always need to be spectacular? It's possible that these lessons could go both ways. If a photographer were to post an image with a good explanation of the technical and creative decision they've made, we may find people willing to suggest a better way. Or several!

 

There could a link on the home page asking for volunteers to submit images they would like to discuss. The elves could review them and pick the images they feel may offer the most interest. More work for the elves! :-) And maybe the images are switched every 2 weeks.

 

Of course I have no way of knowing what the response would be to this. Quite possibly the same response this question received. :-)

 

Thanks to everyone who did respond.

Photo.net is a wonderful place to share our images and to learn from

one another. The collective talent and knowledge represented here is

quite remarkable. We are given a Photograph of the Week, and now the

welcome addition of a Featured Presentation. Would Photo.net be

willing, and would its members be willing to add to these offerings

something along the lines of a Lesson of the Week?

 

As opposed to the POW this isn't something that could just be sprung

on a Photographer. They must be willing to take the time to explain

the technical and creative decisions that went into a chosen image.

And they must also be willing to respond to questions along the way. I

think this would offer a great opportunity for everyone to learn. Even

the featured Photographer may be offered an alternative approach than

the one chosen. It might also allow people who've chosen different

roads in photography to have a better understanding of each other. The

challenges presented by a top notch Photoshop composite, or a large

format B&W landscape for example.

 

Clearly this would be something that would need to be arranged with

the chosen photographer in advance allowing them to get their thoughts

together. And I think we should allow the photographer to choose the

image to be talked about. We all have images that were easier to

create, and images that were very difficult to create. The difficult

ones would probably be more interesting to discuss.

 

Thoughts?

Scott - Along the same line, this was part of my post to a previous thread.

 

I couldn't resist visiting one members area and discovered that out of this persons top 300 ratings 112 went to just 4 photographers. Of these 112 ratings 102 were 7/7's and the other 10 were merely 7/6's. These 4 photographers must be really good!

 

Almost comical, isn't it?

Scott - I did take a peek and you're right, it is ridiculous! I go for a period of time able to ignore this kind of thing, as suggested by many people in these threads, but then it hits that nerve. The image that comes closest to perfection over all images on this site was posted 4 days ago. The third greatest image ever posted went up 10 days earlier. Both by the same photographer.

 

It appears that this search function, All - Average Rating, isn't able to serve its purpose any longer. I like Scott's suggestion of breaking this down to periods of time. A year by year search of the best images. I would also like to see a page of "Elves Picks". These wouldn't be images that the Elves would need to rate or even necessarily love. In fact it may be better if they don't rate them. Just images that they see some merit to. It's probably pretty close to the curators that were once discussed. Not a perfect plan by any means, but it could get some exposure for otherwise ignored images.

This has been happening to my as well, on 2 different Mac's at 2 different locations. I posted a question about this on April 7th. The only response came from Bob Atkins advising me to upgrade to IE 6. Instead I switched over to Netscape and it's working fine.

 

Carl, are you using Internet Explorer? If so what version? I had been using Internet Explorer since joining PN back in August with no problem until recently.

I'm running IE 5 on both Macs and it's still happening. The menu

bar loads in front of the top row of images and none of the links

to the images work. At times I have to load the page 4 or 5 times

before it comes up properly. Very strange.

For the past several days the Top Rated pages have been

loading scrambled with all links disabled. I need to back up and

try to load the page again often having the same problem

repeatedly. This has occurred on 2 different Macs both using

internet explorer. Has anyone else experienced this problem?

Brian - The amount of enjoyment I've gotten from PN over the

past 7 months is worth much more than $25.00 so I felt it was

only right to pay up as a way to say thanks. I'll wear my icon with

pride. Thanks for taking care of this.

Excellent question. I sent a check into Photo.net back in January.

It was only cashed a couple of weeks ago and I still don't see an

icon next to my name. How many months does it typically take?

Brian - This is a great addition to the site. I've also discovered

some wonderful images and hopefully this will help cut down on

some of the 7/7's. Speaking of which, I couldn't resist visiting one

members area and discovered that out of this persons top 300

ratings 112 went to just 4 photographers. Of these 112 ratings

102 were 7/7's and the other 10 were merely 7/6's. These 4

photographers must be really good!

 

Thanks Brian, you've increased the enjoyment factor

tremendously. I see you guys finally cashed my check! Good,

give me that icon I'm sticking around :-)

I am in total agreement with making all ratings publicly viewable.

Abusive practices will never be eliminated entirely but this is one

step that may help. People tend to behave in public, so lets keep

everything out in the open. Transparency has its advantages.

 

Fake ID's are a tougher problem. Making everyone pay before

they can rate would greatly reduce the problem but traffic on the

site would drop off considerably. At that point would the good

folks at B&H, Ritz, Adorama and the rest still be willing to pay to

advertise here? I wonder, is it possible to limit the number of

accounts per IP address? I'm sure there are households who

have more than one person who is a member so it shouldn't be

limited to only one. Maybe two or three? It would certainly cut

down on the number of fake ID's, especially the people with 26 of

them. If it becomes more difficult to abuse the system, and more

visible if you try, it could only help in the end.

Bob - when I quoted you I understood your meaning. I wasn't

trying to misrepresent what you were saying I was merely

attempting to draw an analogy. Sorry if I wasn't as clear as I

should have been. I agree with your comment in regards to the

rating situation as it is now. I do try to ignore them. Lately I've

made an effort whenever time allows to comment on more

images than I rate. In fact I will comment on an image I feel is

over rated, and do so honestly, then deliberately not rate the

image so as not to promote it farther up the top rated page.

 

And you are right that people will always find a way to work

around the system. But why not make it harder for them? There

will always be people determined enough to find a way to

manipulate the ratings. But there will also be people who do not

have that kind of determination, who will in essence remove

themselves from the equation. So by making mate rating more

difficult we may begin to see less of it. Again, it will never be

perfect, but it could be better. Why not try?

The mate raters that are so prevalent on the top pages are most

certainly aware of the many threads such as this one where

discussions have raged concerning their practices. They seem

unwilling to participate in these threads to offer a differing

opinion or to defend their actions. They continue on their 7/7 way

knowing full well that it goes against one of the stated purposes

of this site as I understand it. In so doing they are effectively

snubbing their noses at the site itself, the sites administrators,

and the community in general. The result of this is they have

taken over a segment of this site to suit their own purposes.

 

So, it looks like we should just "eliminate" friend-rating --

somehow. But, will we be driving people out of the system

entirely? - Brian Mottershead

 

I agree that we should limit the number of 7's anyone is allowed

to dole out. Is this going to anger some people? Sure, but mostly

the people who hand out too many 7's. Will some of them leave?

Of course. But is that really such a bad thing? As Marc pointed

out, even if every mate rater abandoned this site tomorrow we

are still only talking about a handful of people. Insignificant I

would think relative to the total number of Photographers who

post images. And how many people I wonder leave this site

because they have become discouraged? Because they have

posted images they feel in their heart are at least as good as

many of the images they see in the top rated section, but these

images sit in their portfolio with 0 ratings and 0 comments. Their

images may not be realistically viewed as "top images" but it is

this inequity that is the most discouraging I would think.

 

I'll bet that human nature is playing two roles in this issue. The

most notable role being the vanity on display on the top rated

pages. Less noticeable, but possibly more wide spread is the

tendency for people to ignore a problem, and hope it goes away.

It's the easy way out. I've certainly done it, and I imagine that

mate rating is a problem for a great many people that they are

just hoping will go away. It takes a great deal of effort to push for

change. To be the squeaky wheel.

 

"The only way to win this game is not to play" - Bob Atkins

 

That's very true! This site is after all meant to be a fun diversion

for most people. When the game is no longer fun the easiest

solution is to just stop playing. Unfortunately I would think this to

be detrimental to the general health of this site. And again goes

against the sites stated purpose - its reason for being. If this site

wants more people to play the game as intended, a level playing

field is a must.

 

No system will every be perfect, and to be honest I don't need

perfection. A few adjustments to this system could make enough

of a difference to alleviate this problem to a acceptable level for

most of us. You might lose some players from the game, but we

might just see a bunch of other people getting off the bench and

back into a much healthier and more enjoyable game.

As a member of the negligible percentage :-) who uses IE on a

Mac I'm sorry to say that I experience the same washed out look

Janko speaks of if I go straight from PS to Photonet, so I don't

think profiles are coming into play.

 

What I do is to view my images in QuickTime Picture Viewer

before posting because it is very close to what I will see over the

web. I will then make adjustments to the file and view again in

Picture Viewer until I get what I want.

First to Peter and Seven.

 

To say that the image you provided a link to is an example of why

ratings are inflated is rather disingenuous. If that image had

been flooded with 6's and 7's within hours of being uploaded,

and then became firmly planted on the first page of the top rated

section then you would have a point. As it is, it is just an image

that some people liked more than others. Quite common I think.

 

We all know the root of the problem is the "Hit Team" that has

their fingers poised over the 6 and 7 buttons just waiting for one

of their friends to post an image. Is there a solution? I really don't

know, because we are dealing with one of the more unfortunate

aspects of human nature - vanity. Do we do away with ratings?

While I, among many others would love to see the originality

rating retired, if we do away with ratings entirely how will we filter

out the truly good work?

 

One solution might be to limited the number of times anyone can

rate an individual photographer to once a month. I realize that

many people like to go through a photographers entire portfolio,

and they still can. Rate one, and leave comments on the others!

The mate raters can still smack one 7 on each of their friends

every month, with nothing more EXPECTED of them! The result

would be a lot fewer 7's floating around at any given time. And it

would force people who are in the mood to rate an image to find

another photographer who quite possibly would appreciate

some input. I doubt this is an original idea as it's probably been

proposed countless times in the past, but I think it would have a

beneficial impact.