I for my part say yes! It is and it is completely without merit.
I personally started a while ago disabling ratings entirely.

Why this harsh judgement?

Well - easy ! Show my an image with say at least 5 ratings, that has an average of 1 stars, two stars. You will even be hard pressed to find one with an average of three.

So what does that fact tell me? That the ratings made are mostly 4 and 5 stars and lower values are rarely used. Now despite having tons of outstanding images in our Gallery - there are a lot of images - and I don't exclude mine either, that would deserve just one or two stars.

But it doesn't happen, because ratings are obviously given as courtesy and not really as what they were intended to.
Besides the range being too narrow (1-10 would be more like it), but what good are ratings, if they are not used for their purpose.

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on that - and suggestions on how to improve upon it.

Rarely do I rate an image...I think it is pretty much a useless feature on Renderosity. Sometimes if I am overwhelmed by an amazing image I may give it 5 stars, but I know that when I am doing so it doesn't really mean anything. That's why I always disable ratings on my images but leave them open for commenting. That is the feedback that really means something to me. My suggestion would be to just ignore the ratings. Most people who have been here a while do the same. I don't see that changing it to a 1-10 system would make any difference really. Those concerned with the number of stars on their image ...well, that is their choice. I know some poeple just leave it on out of habit too. It is an archiac holdover from a more surfacy time. I think the admin just thinks we need to have a rating system because so many other sites do it that way.

i never rate an image anymore for the same reason.  Maybe a voting scale with clearly defined criteria published somewhere... and yes a 1-10 scale would possibly make it better.
1-"snapshot" with no merit at all.
5 - decent but some problems with lighting/composition - room for improvement
10 - i would pay $30 (£15 =P) to have an A4 print of this on my wall.

And maybe a system where people who just vote 10s all the time are punished by their vote not counting as much.  I have been on the Worth1000.com site for a while now and they have a "karma" system which basically gives your vote more power based on how fairly you vote.  Not sure if the rosity elves would like to code that in tho. 

Yes, but how do you determine "voting fairly?" :m_confused2: I still say just ignore it. It is in my opinion a useless appendage, something we have hopefully evolved beyond needing. But in the end, it is basically harmless, unless people are discourgaged by the fact they get terrible ratings. Then I go back to my original statement, just disable the darn thing.

they have it as after the competition ends the average vote is taken and your deviation from that score is the important part of how fairly you voted.  To offset that, there are "jurors" who have a massive and unchanging karma and are those who are more experienced in what is good and what is bad (this is in terms of photoshopping things but could be transfered to photography).  For every time you vote within a cerain range your karma increases, if you vote outside the range from the average your karma goes down...
Obviously there isnt a time limit here for votes, but maybe if you put a time limit of 3 days to work out the karma then it might work - as after that time it is rare to get a comment on an image unless it is spectacularly good and people share the link to it...

I never pay attention to how mine are rated, I rate a 5 for images I apreciate a lot..These are also ones I comment on.

I agree with Kort on this one..a rating system is useless..
I don't allow ratings on my images, and I almost never rate images.

I'm sure there are some who enjoy it..and look for the ratings..

However, the current system is better than the old Hot 20 system..

Personally, I could care less about a rating system..BUT, to each his own..

You could bring this up in the Community Center Forum...You would get a response from other members of Renderosity, as opposed to just photographers..

I'd follow Kort's advice..just ignore it..

I don't necessarily agree on it being useless - though in it's current form it sure is.
If properly used - it could be a good gauge, on how you fair in your photographic skills and where you can improve...
And again - posted here with intent. The community area is a place where you place things, you never expect a return from.

I think that the problem stopped not with only the rating, it is all the system which is perverse! one daily sees systematic comments on behalf of certain people on all the photographs, same worst, only with an aim of attracting people on his own photographs and to have their votes for the favourites as well photographs as artists! these specialists will recognize themselves….
In addition the system of the favourites is perverse because it mixture all the kinds and of this fact there are very few photographs each week, it is one of the reasons for which I only vote very seldom and I do not ask for any rating on my photographs because that does not reflect absolutely the quality of work! I would like to more often see of the constructive comments and really critical, nobody owes offusquer of a critical comment because it is the only means of really progressing
thanks for your attention an excuse my bad english!

I don't have the training, I suppose, to rate an image on it's technical merit and don't rate images very often. But I think I'm probably in the majority. Probably many of the ratings are based on the emotions or such that a person "feels" when they view the image. IMHO that's where comments will tell you much about the ratings you recieve. I also don't think the ratings hold much merrit as to technical quality but may tell you more about the type of photo (or artwork) that people enjoy looking at. Generally I rate and image a 5 if I REALLY like the image for any number of reasons. If a photo (that IMO) would rate a 1 then I probably wouldn't rate it at all for a number af reasons... either they already know it's bad or I can't explain why I would rate it so low or I just didn't look at it.
Just some thoughts from a total amature.

IMHO, I think the rating system is more widely used as a barometer of member popularity here than judging any technical merit of an uploaded image.  I've seen images with 27 5-star ratings that are absolute crap.  It seems that the amount of 5-star ratings you get is in direct proportion to how many favorite artists are in your list.  I always leave mine off (unless I forget), I have no ego to feed.

Does anyone here actually pay attention to it? Really?

Well, to some people I suppose it's important.  Admittedly, I've added ratings to images, but only if I feel they are outstanding.  But I feel that for many, it's not so much for the image they've uploaded as it is for them.  And that's OK, whatever floats your boat.

But I think the best ratings come in honest written form, rather than from a drop down.

I agree with you there. I think new members give it more credence than it warrants, but those that have been here a while soon find out that comments are a better measure of the quality of an image, assuming the thumb is clicked on and image viewed. That does not hold true for all comments, but it still is a better form of feedback.

When I comment on an image I'll rate it - never gave it any thought until reading this thread... Like Firesnuffer I mostly comment and rate images that I have a reaction to - positive or negative. And because it's an image I WOULD comment on, it typically gets a 4 or 5.

Yeah, I guess the ratings are superflous, huh?

And yeah, I've seen tons of "HOLY ---- THIS IS THE SINGLE GREATEST IMAGE I'VE EVER SEEN IN MY ENTIRE LIFE - FIVE STARS!!!!!!!!" kinda comments when I thought the image (3D or 2D) was (shrugs) "okay..." So the comments aren't always helpful or constructive.

My thought on ratings is that most ratings are given for eye-appeal and subject interest rather than on technical merit. I have tested this theory by putting up a post that was eye-catching and colorful or contained subject matter that I felt was most appealing, but the photo quality was mediocre at best. I received very high ratings and lots of jolly comments. Then I posted a photo that I knew was of excellent technical quality but was not of a subject of great interest unless you had nothing to do but stare at the picture and look for hidden meanings (LOL). It got low ratings. 

My other burr is that you can get all the sweet, endearing, fluffy comments that amount to no more than "Great Photo" and ,amazingly, after all that verbal praise end up with only 3 stars. Are then the ratings a true reflection of what your "followers" feel regarding that post or are people just programmed to pat you on the head in the comment section rather than step on your toes and, then, anonymously use the ratings to reflect their true opinion?

As you can see, I think ratings are not an important gage but overall they can tell you if your photo is generally well received or a dud no matter what the technical quality which is a really a marketing tool rather than a true rating system for ability and skill.

This, folks, is my long-winded opinion. :-)