Rating photographs

[northbeach]

Rating a photograph is a very subjective business, I realize that, but I'm really interested in where people are coming from when they make their choice. Will technical perfection win out over subject most of the time?

For instance, I have two photographs in the POTW this week. The one I think I would rate the least has the highest rating. The one I like the best is quite a bit lower. They are very different photographs but the higher rated one is, to me, a fairly ordinary subject photographed in an interestng but not outstanding way. I like the light and shapes in the picture and it's a good picture but... The other one is an unusual and interesting angle on a boat, very good depth to it and nice lines on the vessel. It's technically flawed, the b.g. is over exposed. However, to me, it's much more visually interesting and a better subject.

Do you think we place too much emphasis on technical purity in here?

[GENESXXX]

My two cents:
I judge / comment / vote based on what "looks good" to me. I am a very basic beginer to the digital world and only limited knowledge of film. So for me, what ever "catches" my eye and stands out from the rest usually gets my vote / comment.



Gene

[davemin]

I totally understand what you're asking. I once belonged to a web site where pics were rated and anything macro or studio still was marked down and anything nature/panoramic scored high. This made me mad because I don't have the money to travel to those National Geographic spots...or live near such places. You might think living in FL has its advantages for photography, however, the scenery does get old here. I wish there were mountains...I'm rambling...I have never figured out what people are going to like and dislike. The photos I prefer are abstracts and nobody on any site I've visited likes those What I prefer to do when posting a pic here, btw the best site on the net, is to only listen for the critiques and not the criticisms. BIG difference. I also want certain photogs to vote on my pics...you know, the people here who are fantastic. But in the end, I have learned to appreciate the fact that anyone would take the time to type anything about my photos, let alone vote. It connects us some how in this cyber world.

[ratcheer]

Well, of course it is subjective. If it wasn't, there could just be some sort of photo rating program that would spit out the answer. But, even that would have to be based on the subjective criteria of whoever wrote the program.

To me, a "5" is a decent, but average photo. Almost anyone could take it. It would have to have pretty good focus, subject, colors, and sharpness, but none of them would have to be excellent. A "4" would have some significant flaws, and so on down to a "1", which would be as awful as a "10" is excellent.

A "10" is a nearly perfect photo that it would not surprise you to see in a glossy, high-end magazine. Every element would be striking. The subject would have to be very interesting. The composition would have to be excellent. And the technical merits would also have to be spot on.

A "6" would be somewhat better than average, while a "9" would be only slightly flawed. And so on for "7"s and "8"s. A "7" would be quite a bit better than average, while an "8" is a pretty darn good picture that no one should be ashamed of.

IMHO, Tim

[George Tam]

Part of reason is that certain genres are simply more popular than others. They have more emotional appeals and are easier to understand for the average person.

Generally speaking, color photography is more popular than black & white. Literal is more popular than abstract. Nature/landscape is more popular than cityscape. A female subject is more popular than a male subject. Children are more popular than pets. Nudes are more popular than clothed. Portraits are more popular than documentary/street candids. It has always been this way, and I don't expect things to be different in the future.

As much as I enjoy the beauty of a sunset or a flower, I've seen some many images of them that I kind of lost some interest in them (unless they are presented in unique ways, of course). However, they are what people enjoy shooting and seeing the most, so that's great. That's the way it should be. On the same hand, if a person's passion is in black & white, abstracts, or road kills, then it would be a shame to see that person stop shooting or change his/her style just to fit in. There ARE people out there somewhere who understand, admire, or encourage your work. Keep shooting!

I think it is helpful to not get too caught up with the ratings. I used to belong to a photo site where it was more like a popular contest than it is about helping each other become better photographers. In my opinion, if a person rates an image, he/she should always take the time to leave a comment. Other than just saying, "good job", "I like it", "it's bad", etc., it would be helpful to the photographer to know the reasons behind your judgement. I do understand it can be disappointing when people view your photos without leaving any ratings or comments at all.
I try to leave at least a comment, even if I choose not to rate a photo because it has too many flaws. I hope that others will do the same.

[setiprime]

I agree with George's comments - read it through, it has some good basic philosophy in there.

Jon F.

[northbeach]

I understand what you're saying, George. And I agree. I think you expressed articulately what my feelings are on the subject.

You all have something valid to say and I appreciate the input.

[George Tam]

It seems to be the norm that people don't usually leave comments for one reason or another. I was looking at someone's gallery the other day on another photo website. By the quality of the photographer's body of work, it was clear that he/she is very accomplished. Each of the images received at least 250 views. One particular image received over 1,000 hits. I was stunned to find that people had left only 10 comments. That is a 1% ratio!

What's everyone's take on it?

[northbeach]

I'm not sure, George. I suspect it's just laziness but I wish more people did post thoughtful and helpful comments - if they don't want to rate it would be nice if folks didn't leave the photographer just out there in limbo, particularly if the work is good. Good work is deserving of comment and less experiences photographers welcome constructive input. I know I do.

That said, I think I'll take a look at some photographs and make some comments.

George,
I don't see much difference here when it comes to comments or ratings. I have a shot on POTW this week. Now granted motorsports pictures don't draw a lot of attention but when there are 144 views there should be more than 3 comments (not counting my two replies). These comments were from the only people to rate the photo as well.
I have to admit I was surprised that all three gave it a 9, but I guess they all realized the blurred area is motion blur and it adds to the action of the shot.
Anyway the other site had over 4200 views, 15 ratings and not one comment good or bad.