| Author |
Message |
Egor
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 14:19
Reply
I have thought, that for struggle against set of uninteresting photos it is possible to count an additional rating: a mean score of all photos of the member. It will force, in any measure, members to delete not estimated or low estimated photos.
|
geert geenen
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 15:32
Reply
here we go again.
and no: some of my underestimated photo's are very interesting. and vice versa.
|
|
Egor
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 16:02
Reply
for God's sake!
nobody makes you to delete any photos! It will additional rating - if you wish - look on, if dont - not.
|
devish
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 17:25
Reply
Having the mean average would be interesting as a statistic though...It would be curious to see what a photographers mean average is, without it counting in any ranking..
I love any kind of number, so anyone that proposes a statistic is well accepted by me!
|
pansa
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 18:12
Reply
Let us wait for Woophy version 2.0.
|
Ruud~
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 18:45
Reply
and pray !
|
TBM
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 19:15
Reply
And be happy with Woophy 1.0 and all the nice people and skilled photographers you can meet there...
|
|
Egor
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 19:23
Reply
I would like to explain the position. When the visitors has a desire to see views, for example Rome or Moscow, they discover with many hundreds photos which in a significant part of it cannot give demanded. As in definition of value of photos there are some complexities, I have suggested to enter additional criterion. The above-stated rating will indirectly force users who are care about ratings etc, to delete the unvaluable photo, in any respect, to lift the one rating. And then they can tell about themselves: " my rating of quality - 4,9 ". :)
They will receive satisfaction, and users convenience and beautiful pictures our remarkable world.
(Let's reduce quantity of chaos though a little.)
|
lonesome runner
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 21:11
Reply
I'm waiting for two years now for any improvement on this point either in version 1.0 or 2.0. And I am no kidding. A couple of weeks are becoming a couple of month (or years?).
So keep on dreaming!
|
Geoffrey McElwaine
Member
|
# Posted: 11 Dec 07 21:25 - Edited by: Geoffrey McElwaine
Reply
Egor. I agree with pansa, Ruud and TBM ! I suspect, however, that no Woophy version will be able to solve the core dilemma your topic raises : how to deal with large numbers of uploaded pictures. Responses to art of any kind - including photography - are subjective. Because of this, using a phrase like " valueless photograph " raises a more fundamental question : Who has the right to decide that a photograph has no value ? Assuming the existence of basic levels of technical / creative competence, I feel uneasy making this kind of judgement on any picture.
When scrolling through Woophy pictures, I apply two simple tests to decide which to spend more time looking at : Do they -
a. Engage my mind ; and
b. Startle my eye.
In so doing I know that some pictures which " pass " my tests will not appeal to others. Each of us must make these kinds of decision. For this reason, I do not think that another " layer of bureacracy " is helpful. No-one is compelled to look at EVERY picture : each Woophy member can ( should ? ) select those to which he / she responds, using whatever selection method he / she chooses.
And with that I will shut up !
Regards
Geoff. ( Geoffrey McElwaine )
|
|
Egor
Member
|
# Posted: 12 Dec 07 10:42
Reply
Dear Geoffrey McElwaine, unfortunately my knowledge of English insufficiently.
I am afraid that could not understand your demur completely.
If you will look again on my posts you can see that I dont insist to delete any photos.
I was simply occurred with an idea, that if there will be such rating it will force, indirectly certainly, photographers to clean not estimated or is low-estimated photos. But if to you this criterion is indifferent, you are free to publish any photos (not breaking other rules, certainly).
(Мне просто пришла в голову мысль, что если будет такой рейтинг, то это заставит, косвенно разумеется, фотографов убирать неоцененные или низко-оцененные фотографии. Но если вам, грубо говоря, наплевать на этот критерий, то вы вольны публиковать любые фотографии (не нарушающие прочих правил, разумеется).)
That's all.
|
|
devish
Member
|
# Posted: 12 Dec 07 17:41
Reply
Egor, as I said I would like that statistic, because I like statistics in general, but just as a number, here I want to explain why what you say won't work:
Who cares about their portfolio and wants there to be only highly rated pictures in it eliminates the poorely rated ones. Who doesn't care doesn't eliminate them. This happenes now, whithout this newstatistic, and the situation won't change if we add it.
(not that I enocurage people to eliminate their pictures, I want to be clear, everyone should do as he pleases!)
David.
|
jonny greentree
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Dec 07 15:33
Reply
personally i think there should be something in the programme to stop people rating with out leaving a comment i know this is bit restrictive but it stops hard feeling when you have a photo being rated high with comments then someone just leaving a 1 or 2 and no comment.
on additional rating i think its more a case of constructive comment more than just nice shot or fab or great view. and to help this i feel instead that woophy should have some style of translator programme to help. as i know its hard to write a comment in another language. as for more ratings just think it will confuse and upset more than bring woophy to be more helpful and constructive tool to us photographers.
regards jonny
|
Online now: Guests - 2 Members - 3