I have recently received a news-letter from another site that uses a rating system similiar to the one here to rate images and they have tried to explain  the purpose and the use of the rating system.

This here is a copy that has been edited more to content of this sight but it is suggested that a posting similar to this be sent out to all users so that images are being evaluated and rated properly and not based on favoritism, popularity or neptism.

the letter follows:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

** **

The rating system was put into the gallery to allow members to give feedback about artistic quality to the gallery artists in a quick manner when they may not want to leave a specific comment. It is a fairly simple system, but one that is often misunderstood, both by those who leave ratings and by artists who receive them. The ratings proceed from one through to five (Terrible, Bad, Average, Good, Excellent). Many people feel that they must leave a “five” on every image that they like, but this really makes ratings meaningless.

An average image should be rated as a “three” effort. And that means the majority of images on this site. This doesn’t imply that there is anything wrong with the image, and artists who get a “three” should not assume they are being insulted. If there are no technical mistakes and the lighting is adequate, then this would be an average effort. If an image has a lot of figure poke-through, poor texture use, lighting that unintentionally obscures portions of the image or bad posing, these are all mistakes that might cause a member to give a “two” rating (implying poor technical quality) or even a “one” if the mistakes are bad enough.

“Four” should be given for a superior effort. Perhaps the textures, lighting, composition and post-work effort is particularly impressive. Such images are above the norm, and this would be indicated with a “four-star” quality. “Five” would imply a near perfect image and should be a very rare rating selection. Again, this isn’t an insult to artists. No artist produces perfect images with every effort. Only particularly impressive pieces deserve this highest of accolades, and members should keep this in mind. **While it is nice to get comments that illustrate the reasons for ratings, it is not required or necessary. **

Additionally, while imagination should be considered when deciding on a rating, whether you like the subject matter should not. Giving a “one” rating to a male nude scene simply because you don’t like male characters is inappropriate. Similarly giving a “five" rating to images just because your friend posted or you like the subject matter is equally inappropriate. If you must express your opinion about the content, please leave a comment not a rating.

Viewers, please take these things into consideration when you rate an image. And artists, please don't jump down people's throats when they give you a rating that is less than a 5. If you put your work in our galleries, you are asking for other people to form opinions about it. Don't fault them for having an opinion that may be different than yours!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again I did not write this but I firmly agree with it's intentions and purpose.

 I Hope that this matter will be looked at and considered otherwsie you might as well do away with the rating system altogether!

 because right now it is being misused and is very broken!

Chris

I fully agree and I suspect a lot of others agree also...but I doubt any of it will change.

@cvrad - I understand what your saying but I also agree with AnnieD; you can't change human nature.

There is another negative side of the rating system where budding artist may become discouraged and dispondant at low scores and give up too early in their efforts. High scores, even if they're meaninless, is an encouragement.

I like coming the Rendo galleries because I see them as a brainstorming of artistic ideas. None are bad and all have potetial to be great. So under my criteria everyone who has made the effort (and put up with those really long render times. LOL) gets a 5.

I may however leave some suggestions in the comments area. But there I am more cautious because the words that we type never true express what we mean. We humans communicate with more than words. So communicating with just words alone is fraught with danger. What one may meant as just a jokingly friendly remark becomes something else without that face-to-face communication.

Anyhoot most of us know where our own art truely stand when we look at the work/effort of others (that is, if we have the courage to be honest with ourselves).

And if one truely feels the need to have one's work judged (and has the courage to allow it so), then there is always the competitions that Rendo hosts now and again.

You may note I used the word "courage", but the word "humility" is just as equal in this case. It depends on if your a person who see his beer glass as half full or half empty ;-)

it's just half a glass neither full nor empty

Good answer!

Quote - @cvrad - I understand what your saying but I also agree with AnnieD; you can't change human nature.

There is another negative side of the rating system where budding artist may become discouraged and dispondant at low scores and give up too early in their efforts. High scores, even if they're meaninless, is an encouragement.

I like coming the Rendo galleries because I see them as a brainstorming of artistic ideas. None are bad and all have potetial to be great. So under my criteria everyone who has made the effort (and put up with those really long render times. LOL) gets a 5.

I may however leave some suggestions in the comments area. But there I am more cautious because the words that we type never true express what we mean. We humans communicate with more than words. So communicating with just words alone is fraught with danger. What one may meant as just a jokingly friendly remark becomes something else without that face-to-face communication.

Anyhoot most of us know where our own art truely stand when we look at the work/effort of others (that is, if we have the courage to be honest with ourselves).

And if one truely feels the need to have one's work judged (and has the courage to allow it so), then there is always the competitions that Rendo hosts now and again.

You may note I used the word "courage", but the word "humility" is just as equal in this case. It depends on if your a person who see his beer glass as half full or half empty ;-)

LBAMagic

in response to this part

"There is another negative side of the rating system where budding artist may become discouraged and dispondant at low scores and give up too early in their efforts. High scores, even if they're meaninless, is an encouragement."

No they are simply meaningless if there is no weight given to the rating system if people truly expect to improve and see a maeked improvement of their art then they will take the rating as to what they are.

Not every movie is rated 5 stars on amazon but I still buy it if I ike it.

Also since the rating are averaged overall nobody knows the axact score someone has gave you unless you tell them.

isn't that the point of rating something it is rthe same as "Favoriteing every image" it a nice gesture but it loses it's intended meaning when you do it with EVERY SINGLE IMAGE YOU LOOK AT"

this is not a SOCIAL NETWORK for the sake of acceptance as to how many VIRTUAL "friends" can I get it is supposed to be a place where those interested in art can come and display there work and talk to others of a like mind and basic intrest.

But through social engineering and cultural programming we have been taught if you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything at all.

I post my work here to get feedback good and bad and to hear heartfelt comments and hopefully get people to think outside their "Box"

 in respose to this part

"I may however leave some suggestions in the comments area. But there I am more cautious because the words that we type never true express what we mean. We humans communicate with more than words. So communicating with just words alone is fraught with danger. What one may meant as just a jokingly friendly remark becomes something else without that face-to-face communication."

I do agree that it is difficult to convey what one means when not having the opputunity to also hear the inflection of their voice and see facial responses to their words.  That just means that you need to think a bit before you leave a comment they may possibly interpeted as rude.

or write that person personally if you feel it may be taken the wrong way or misused against them.

I wil end this now as I wish to not be getting too argumentive about this.

BTW I do appreciate your comments I just hope to hear back from this site itself as to their feelings on the matter

Thank you all

Chris

this problem with the rating system has been pointed out many many times over the years... it's basically pointless since to many of the cliques that frequent the galleries, anything less than 5 is a personal attack... thats why you'll see gallery images of say just a sphere over water being given a 5 and gushing praise... when in reality it's the most basic image....

nothing will change tho.

Although I agree with many things posted in this thread.(Especially those  thoughts expressed by MangusGreel).

I think the following quote is the best solution.

"...you might as well do away with the rating system altogether!"

Tom

This would be why I decided a long time ago to disable ratings on all my renders.

Quote - So under my criteria everyone who has made the effort (and put up with those really long render times. LOL) gets a 5.

No, that's horrible, that hurts everyone involved...

The only thing that encourages is complacency and stagnation, where's the desire to get better if you're already getting all the stars you're gonna get? What's the point, you've already reached the top, right? Why even bother sitting thru the long render times, surely you can make the render quicker, and still get those same fives stars, no? I've seen it far too often, and I've been guilty of it myself more often than I'd like to admit, but ultimately false praise to protect someone's feelings only hurts them.

Of course, there's a flip side to giving everyone "who made the effort" 5 stars, sure you're encouraging the developing artist [to make MORE images at least, not necessarily BETTER images], but you're doing so at the cost of kicking all the artists that have put in the years of hard work developing their skill and possibly hundreds of hours of work in on a single image, squarely in the teeth. You completely devalue the hard work and effort they've put in when you rate their work the same as someone's first render.

While I absolutely agree its important to be encouraging of young/developing artists, do it with your words thru constructive criticism not arbitrary stars. You'll do them worlds more good that way.

 @LBAMagic - I've nothing against you personally and I don't intend my words/post as such, you just happened to be the catalyst, and this the place, for somethings that always bugged me, sorry. I do agree with you completely on the dangers of the written word across the internet [especially when english may not be a first or even second language for either side].**
**

With regards to the "rating system being broken" of course it is, that's a given, it always will be. Because of things already mentioned [cliques, and "encouragement" etc] but also because not everyone is of a skill level where they can even objectively rate something the same as everyone else. A work that may look like a masterpiece to someone that's only be doing CG for a year may well be nothing noteworthy to an artist who's being doing it for 10 years. I know anytime I page thru the collection of images in my "inspiration" folder, I'm always left in shock at [and often embarrassed that I even saved] some of the stuff I thought was great 5 or 6 years ago. I'd love to see a push to steer the ratings system back on track, but I fear like AnnieD said, some things will never change.

Even if we can eliminate the subjective elements [that'd be a huge, huge step in the right direction], there's still the varying reference point of one's own objectivity**.** If you can say that art can even be rated objectively, but that's a whole 'nother can of worms isn't it?**
**

@cvrad - true my broad approach to defining art does make a mockery of the whole rating system. But when I first started in the galleries I did give true ratings but after a really good artist that I felt friends with left after recieving less than 5 then I started to question the whole thing.

As MangusGreed pointed out this is not the first time the rating system has been questioned. I had participated in some of those earlier forums discussions too. Can't say anything ever changed.

I actually like the rating system at DeviantART where a word is associated with the rating. However I don't understand their ratings "mad / sad / fear"; must be some moderators joke that didn't come across clearly ;-)

@Warlock279 - I don't mine critisism as long as it's constructive. Confucius says "Treat one who has shown you your faults as if he has shown you a treasure". Anyhoot my day job is in sales and my customers have made me develop a very very thick skin. LOL.

Edit to my previous post "my day job is in sales and my customers have given me a lot to treasure......."

^.^

If the old system is broken how about a wider range of scale given then everyone would not feel every image is a "10" and like a stated before nobody knows what somebody else has given you unless you state so.

A rating system of more numbers would possibly give a more accurate distrubitution of averages and would would also "knock down" "undesreved higher scores" for those images that are actually only average.

or limit how many many images you can actually rate a day that would limit the "clicks" from "pushing there friends image up the art charts".

I don't know nothing is perfect but it is obvious that this system is not working and if it reamins I will disable it and enocuarage others to do the same since this turns inot a popularity site a not a site of self expression that might possibly get recoginized even without being on the "Art Charts"

Chris

PS I'm enjoying this thread and love debating this and thank those who have participated still have heard nothing form the site itself!?

I think the following quote is the best solution.

"...you might as well do away with the rating system altogether!"

I think so too.  I just completely ignore it, I consider it more like a toy/gadget for the members who enjoy popularity contest.  Are there really members who believe that those ratings actually say something about their art?*** **

I agree with Lucie.

It doesn't bother me at all that the system works the way it does.  I don't do my art based on a point system.   The idea that there are people who are more popular and better or worse than I am at art seems reasonable to me...lol

I appreciate all of the comments that I get..constructive or not...helpful words and tips on how to do something ...will encourage me to do better...more than points.

Having said that..I do understand how some people need the system and maybe some day they will get it fixed.