Question to Darryl Morrell

Hi Darryl,

If you probably read this forum, could I ask you a question on your valuation of http://www.airplane-pictures.net/image197239.html shot.

You have pointed as '2' which means photo is bad. Could I just ask what was your motivation for such mark?

Many thanks in advance.

Regards,

Fyodor

Hi Fyodor,

This was probably a mistake. I have heard of several examples where less than 5 stars were awarded by mistake. Wrong Click, Lag, Bug, I don't know...

In my oppinion there should not be 1, 2, 3 and 4 stars, only 5. We only have 10 ratings per day to give, so why give less than 5? If I am going to rate a photo, I will always rate 5 stars. But that is just me.

Interesting e Creative Photo, by the way.

Cheers!

Renato

Sometimes one just has to accept that not all photographers do not share the same taste in pictures. Personally I would not rate it either but I do accept that it has a place on AP.

I have reclassified it as an Airport Overview People shot... the A380 clearly is not the subject int he picture. It also lacks any text to say why the crew are behaving like this.

This post has been edited by Wallace Shackleton on 3rd April 2012 - 20:05

It is very clear that people have diffrenet taste. And during the life people can change their taste either. Pictures I was happy to make 25 years ago looks rather boring for me nowdays.

But as you say - my reaction would be not to rate picture which is not interesting for me at all. If I do not like something it doesn't mean it is bad. I just do not judge things I not interesting in. But '2' rate clearly means - photo is bad in view of Darryl. Indeed Darryl has an indefeasible right to vote as he think. However my question was only to clarify Darryl's logic. Nothing else.

It is a great benefit of AP in compare with the rest of aviaphoto sites that many different tastes have a place on AP. Being here you should not daily proof your right to have other taste from 'dominating point of view'. Thats why I'm here and many of my colleagues as well. :)

Regards,

Fyodor

This post has been edited by Fyodor Borisov on 6th April 2012 - 23:28

If the photo was at normal angle i would have given it 4-5 stars, problem is i`m not a big fan of obscure angles that people crop their photos at, maybe being a photo screener makes me too critical. I like the general overview of the photo with the crew laughing coming to a freezing airport etc etc, its just purely the angle. :-)

Darryl, many thanks for your answer. Situation now is much clear :)

However let me argue opposite of your position a bit.

There is no 'normal angle' in photography. 'Tumbled angle' is one of classic photography devices. You may use it for different reasons: to show the dynamic of the moment; if you like to use the diagonal as the longest line to describe the motive of the shot in full; to strengthen the effect of slope, etc.

Indeed, you can use this effect 'mistakenly' or out of sense. No reason to play with angle in classic side-shots, for the most of photos with clear horizon (there are exceptions indeed). In this cases remark that photo is done wrong could be proper. But with Sasha's shot it is very right usage of tumbled angle, I guess.

Btw I agree that comment would be good - it was the first arrival of LH A380 to Russia.

I have some shots in my collection there the angle is not 'normal':

http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/184457//

http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/182762/rf-32768-beriev-design-bureau-beriev-be-200/

and this I've started my collection from:

http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/178989/private-remos-aircraft-gx/

With 'normal' angle they would be just 'lenten'.

Regards,

Fyodor

Fyodor, have you really opened a thread directly asking someone why they gave your image a low rating? :/

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 7th April 2012 - 21:10

Its not my image, Paul. Please look through the discussion carefuly.

Regards,

Fyodor

The same actually applies. Why question someone's rating openly like this? Why should someone be publicly put on the spot and expected to justify their reasons? This simply isn't fair, Fyodor. If you want to get someone's opinion then contact them privately, don't do it publicly in front of the entire community.

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 7th April 2012 - 23:28

Why not, Paul. I'm interested too.

Because it puts people in a situation where they feel they have to publicly justify their reasons for using a facility that's open for all to use, and that's not fair.

I'm very disappointed the site management allow threads like this to continue. Extremely disappointed in fact.

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 7th April 2012 - 23:33

Paul, sorry but I complitely misunderstand why to ask someone openly is not fair. Realy surprised to see your point. If you make public judjement other people always can ask you 'why'. You always have a right not to answer indeed. Darryl have answered - many thanks for that - we can have a discussion on different views on the situation. Other guys can join with their options. We could have an interesting talk - why not? Thats how forums live. Overwise they are going to be boring and are dying. At least we are not members of 'United Russia' party and have a right to discuss matters openly - don't we?

It's all about how it's done, Fyodor. In principle I agree with your point and it could be interesting discussing opinions on why we give images certain ratings but I can't agree with how you're going about it. If you're interested in Darryl's opinions specifically then why do you feel the need to ask him publicly?

I have to agree with Fyodor, very clearly. The key factor is that this is a public site with public rules and public options to vote, so, why don't you should have the option to ask for a public response regarding the usual situations during the use of the site?

I think is a part of the game, you're free to vote, to ask, to answer, or not...

Cheers.

I very strongly disagree, I can't accept that directing such a question at someone publicly is a good idea. If the person the question is directed at doesn't respond for whatever reason then there's naturally going to be a judgement made on that person by some others. I don't see this in any way as being even remotely fair.

A basic level of respect should exist here.

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 8th April 2012 - 00:25

If the person in question is upset because of this post, he can drop a message to the team and requesting to delete the post, where's the problem? And Fyodor's way to ask Darryl was very polite and respectful I think!

This post has been edited by Emanuel Linert on 8th April 2012 - 00:38

Emanuel, I disagree but I don't think there's any way we're going to see eye to eye. It's probably best to agree to disagree on this one!

The respect and eduction has been exquisitely used in this thread by everybody. Is a matter out of discussion, but I perfectly can understand that somebody could consider a lack of respect the fact to give, publicly, just a two stars rating, specially when mostly voted with five stars rating, don't you think so?

No, Victor. I don't. If that's viewed as disrespectful then why have the facility to make those ratings? You've totally invalidated your own point of view. The ratings system doesn't require an explanation of why you give an image a certain rating, openly asking a question directly to someone does. As I've already explained, the reason I see this as unfair is the fact that the person the question is being directed at isn't necessarily going to respond (for whatever reason), which could lead to a general feeling of that person either hiding away from giving their reasons or being generally ignorant when in fact it may simply be a case of them not checking the site for a while.

As I say my problem isn't with the question being asked, it's with *how* it's being asked.

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 8th April 2012 - 01:13

I can agree with your opinion about the rating system, mostly, but please, do not confuse the freedom to express in a public environment with the respect, I majorly think that you are talking about your personal options or considerations.

This post has been edited by Victor De Lucas on 8th April 2012 - 01:21

Victor, I understand you disagree largely with my point please don't assume I'm confused - quite the opposite, I see it as a remarkably simple and clear-cut situation. There's absolutely no confusion on my part.

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 8th April 2012 - 01:22

I totally agree with Paul, a person should not have to respond publicly in a forum. I chose not to completely answer the question on here out of respect to the photographer and as I feel I don't have to answer it anyway if I didn't want to. I am though disappointed after asking 3-4 times by emails to get this thread removed in the first place, it is still here.

Darryl

Let me say that every action causes a reaction, and is only your opinion when you say that the ratings system doesn't require an explanation of why you give an image a certain rating. Others can have the interest or curiosity to know why, and since this an open site, with an open forum the rules about it are clear, there are no restrictions to do that, so please, do not confuse the freedom to express in a public environment with the respect, as I said before, exquisitely demonstrated by everyone involved in this discussion. I majorly think that you are talking about your personal options or considerations.

I'll say this once more and it will be my final time - quit saying I'm confused. I'm intelligent enough to know the difference between the different aspects of this discussion.

As for the ratings system not requiring an explanation, the simple fact there's no facility when using it to explain your reasons for giving a certain rating proves unequivocally that it doesn't *require* an explanation. How can a system with no facility to give an explanation possibly require one?

Just out of interest, did you see Darryl's reply before you posted yours? You're somewhat mistaken if you're assuming I'm alone in my thoughts.

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 8th April 2012 - 01:38

Of course I did, and I think exactly in the same way, but not sure if Darryl reads my first post in the thread where I said:

"I think is a part of the game, you're free to vote, to ask, to answer, or not..."

Again personal tastes or opinions about how to do something versus the freedom to do something, although you don't like what you read it.

Have a nice evening.

Freedom is one thing, basic respect is another.

You have a nice evening, too.

Both matters worthy of a very deep analysis and reflection...

Cheers.

This post has been edited by Victor De Lucas on 8th April 2012 - 02:04

Sorry to join in on this so late. Did I miss much? Any hair pulling yet? :p

@ Richard

- not much ...and no hairs involved, but two interesting points of view - respect and freedom.

In my personal opinion - there are five stars from 1 to 5 to use it to make own (!) point and questioning somebody why he (or she) like it or nor is totally wrong - it's matter of taste and when it comes to subjective matters of taste, people have wildly different opinions. Then with all your respect I have freedom to make my point and mark this picture with ... stars. Done deal - my taste.

The questioned seemed to be a legitimate one, perhaps the question not have been aired in public but the answer is enlightening. Some people just do not like anything out of the seemingly ordinary, while others will work at the edges to be more creative and we as photographers HAVE to respect their opinions,

AP prides itself on being different and each and every one of us must respect this. If you want to see conservative photography then I can think of a few places where you can get that.

Personally and very personally at that, I have always said that the AP rating system is flawed, you either like or dislike the photo. Far too many people hit the five without really looking at the image first, it is just the immediate first impression that gets them and sometimes that five is not even worth a three.

There is no dislike button on AP, so even a seemingly injuriously single star rating is an indication of how much you LIKE a photo and by giving even a single star you are actually helping a photographer in your own small way, so if you do not like an image then do not rate it.

The answers has been made and the subject has started to digress so it is probably time to cease this conversation.

While I agree Fyodor should be allowed to ask such a question, given the rules of this site, I feel I have to also agree with Darryl in his judgement, irrespective if said image follows classic photography rules or not. It's not a 5 star image by any means, but those who have decided to vote it as such are by all means in their own right to do so. What score would you have liked him to have passed, Fyodor?

S

Spencer, I've already made my judjement - its 5. :) I like it. Angle is very true for this shot. But if I would be severe critic - I'd say part of capt's legs is missed and picture coud be better. However as I know it was a reportage photography - it was rather complicated to fix all details in dynamic moment with many competitors on right and left. Complicated does not mean impossible indeed. But the shot is saleable.

Every shot is sellable, providing someone is willing to pay. Just as everyone is different in how they rate photos. If you admit it's not a perfect photo, due to the Captain's legs being out of frame, then why give it a 5? (I actually don't need a response, but your explanation is contradictive).

Ok, I'll specify. This phot has good commercial potential for wide range of media, as avition as general. It has more chances to find these someones. General media btw pay more.

I gave 5 even with cutted legs because of circumstancies it was made, because with the true decision with leveling and it also based in fact that I generaly very loyal to photogs' works. ;)

So if you gave it a 5 partly through loyalty you're in effect admitting you artificially inflated the rating you'd otherwise give it, thus showing exactly why ratings systems are so flawed in the first place.

I gave it first because: "of circumstancies it was made, because with the true decision with leveling".

I was going to leave this thread but Fyodor, you've certainly got my attention now! How can you give a higher rating just because of your loyalty to the photographer?!! That's crazy.That's the basis on why the Russian stuff on A.nert is being picked apart at the moment, especially as mundane images make it into the PCA section more often than worthy shots!

You also say it's a 5 star shot because of the circumstances it was taken. Please explain the difficulty in taking that image? Apart from getting access it's a very easy photo to shoot!

Very weak arguments from an accomplished photographer as yorself...

S

That's not what you just said, Fyodor...

"just because of your loyalty to the photographer"

1. Not JUST because.

2. I mean - loyalty to ALL photographers, not to someone. I prefer not to give any mark if I can't give 5 regardless if they Russians, Americans, Jews, Georgians, black they or white.

Have I clarified your apprehensions? Or we have to start very promising topic on good Englishmen and bad Russians?

True decision doesn't mean it has to be difficult. Photography in general rather simple thing. But it can be difficult just to understand that besides 0 degrees level you have another 359 options to make a shot.

"That's not what you just said, Fyodor..."

I made copypast from my own message.

And one more thing. Russian staff is not picked apart from Anet. Big part of Russian staff has simply moved here because people feel here more comfortable.

This post has been edited by Fyodor Borisov on 8th April 2012 - 18:12

Fyodor, you're either totally missing the point or you're intentionally bypassing it. It doesn't matter one iota whether your rating on this individual image was affected by "loyalty" or whether all your ratings are, either way it's fundamentally wrong to rate an image on anything other than your personal opinion on the merits the image either has or lacks. Loyalty simply shouldn't come into it.

As for good Englishmen and bad Russians, what on Earth is that supposed to mean?

Fyodor, why have you brought the country into this? It has absolutely nothing to do with the principles being discussed.

Was that me who brought the country?????

"And one more thing. Russian staff is not picked apart from Anet. Big part of Russian staff has simply moved here because people feel here more comfortable."

Yes. What does Russia have to do with any of this?

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 8th April 2012 - 18:22

Can you read Spencer's messages?

"That's the basis on why the Russian stuff on A.nert is being picked apart at the moment, especially as mundane images make it into the PCA section more often than worthy shots! "

It wa discovered over at A.net that Russian forums were promoting only Russian images, thus Russian images were making it into the PCA section on nothing but false ratings. By your own admission, (although you have now explained you meant it another way), loyalty to (let's say) Russian related images should get higher ratings. If that's bringing countries into it, then so be it. If an image can't stand on its own merits, as Paul says, then it shouldn't be rated as anything but what it's rightly due.

If you remember Iranian photographers got a hard time as well, for similar reasons. This hobby is global but the community is pretty small, and that shouldn't be forgotten. If we start implying, or falsely rewarding, an image's worth, then sooner or later it's going to be found out.

Back to the original question, who really cares if Darryl gave this image 2 stars?

S

"discovered over at A.net that Russian forums were promoting only Russian images"

Realy? Do you know facts? I'm moderator of one of the key avition photographer's forums in Russia. I know the stories when we criticised strictly such practicies if they appeared. Its clear - this is unfair competition for local photographers as well - we have few hundreds spotters here. But am I correct you know something about Anet policy to pick apart all the staff by nationality if there were some cases of false voting with Russian or Ukrainian photogs? Could you please tell me more about this practice?

Back to original question. That was me. And I've got an answer already.

Sorry if I disturbed or offended Darryl. In my understanding of things it should not be offensive. However people are different in different parts of the world. Paul was shocked on my question, I was shocked on his reaction on my question. Fine. I'll try to be more careful further. Hope you guys will have more understanding of others points as well.

Fyodor, I wasn't shocked by your question, I disagreed with how you put it across. They're two very different scenarios.

Ok. Point is - we do not understand each other on this way. Might be our basic values are different. It happens but it is not a reason to go further - it can come on very personal way and it would be wrong. My suggestion is to fix the points with mutual respect to each other and to the right to have own points of view and to stop discussion not about the subject of concrete photo or at least similar cases. Could we do that? :)

This post has been edited by Fyodor Borisov on 8th April 2012 - 19:14

Guys, I really like to say something. It's a forum, so everyone is free to ask and do whatever they want within the boundaries of the forum rules.

If someone rates a 5 star image do we ask why they rate it 5 stars? No.

If in this case someone rates it lower than 5, one is curious why it would get a seemingly lower then 5 stars rating and asks for it "out in the open" :

I would personally not choose for that cause of the probable judgments one could make if the question is not answered.

Asking such a question is completely up to the one asking that question, that is what a forum is about, but really expecting an answer is not. At least, not out in the open. There are a zillion ways to take a picture and if one would not agree with a certain rating, be smart enough to ask it in a private mail and maybe share it out in the open if both are okay with it. Now it is like a courtroom where you have to justify a certain personal view. Again, we don't ask people why they give a 5 star rating but want to hear about it when it's lower "or out of the usual 5 Sar rating people tend to give"...

This just clarifies the rating system. It should be a system where you rate anonymously which gives a better star rating than the usual 5 stars most of us seem to get.

Example: 13 people give a five star rating, but someone thinks" I don't like tihs or that part of the picture" would he give a 2 or 3 rating ? No he probably would not do that because he might be judged negatively by his rating which probably gets him impopular for whatever reason. It's a public site so such rating systems never give a good and honest point of view.. Only if you make it anonymous it will give a better view of the actual rating.

So, accept the way it is applied as it is now or do not rate at all.. Either way it doesn't represent the actual "taste" of the viewers in most cases... When actual names are submitted to a rating people just tend to rate 5 stars

This is my personal view, I'm not judging anyone on here, let that be clear :)

Interesting to see how this develops, oh and one last thing.. "The written word can be interpreted in many ways, (which is always a problem on forums, sms, FB or whatever) so always try to see it as a positive one first.."

I have to agree with Andras here, I sometimes don't like to rate pictures lower than 3-4 stars in case this happens, HOWEVER I will rate lower if there has been a rating of the same type by other members. I haven't been put into a situation where on of my photos have been rated lower than 5. What I am also trying to say is that there is no need to complain of a low rating because everybody has a different point of view and they have taken their time to look at your photo and rate it so you should be grateful for it, I will use myself as an example I have 35 pictures on the database an only 9 have been rated but I don't complain it does feel good but my photos are in quiet airports unlike Auckland or Christchurch. Sorry for joining this chat so late but this my opinion.

Cheers Guys Jarod

Just to bring some fairness into discussion... I am quite active on the Russian forum, where Fyodor is the moderator, and I have known him for a number of years; we have been corresponding extensively discussing many various issues and aspects of aviation photography.

I will state here that Fyodor has always been strongly against any voting based on the nationality of the photographer, and he has always made it very clear publicly on that forum, as well as calling on other photographers to stop doing that. He would be the last person I would accuse of practising this form of "loyalty".

As for the "five star" rating system - it has clearly showed its flaws on Airliners.net. I don't understand why it has been adopted here even in its non-anonymous form. The simple "like" button would be much more appropriate, IMHO.

I also don't see why the person who has rated the picture should not be asked publicly why they have done it. After all, the rating is very much public. If you have decided to publicly give a photo the low rating, you should be ready to publicly explain why.

Regards,

Andrei Bezmylov

No you shouldn't. Sorry. But in all fairness you're allowed to upload what you like, you allowed to vote how you like, you're allowed to ask why but by no means do you have to give reason. I've spoken to Fyodor behind the scenes and it appears I may have come across a little hostile, if I've understood him correctly. To which I responded that wasn't my intention at all, I'm just direct in my meaning. Btw Fyodor, I don't know if you got my reply last night, would be nice to hear from you re my mail, cheers.

Ah, for the record, it was the Ukranians that bumped the votes up on A.net I remember now, thanks to Fyodor's reminder! :-)

I'm sure it's not all of them. But as you said Andrei, it's not a fair system, merely an indication.

S

Yeh, I got your mail Spenser and have just read it. I'm on the way - just few minutes before boarding for my flight from LED, but I'll answer your letter in few hrs as I be at my appartments in Moscow. :)

My thoughts on voting system will come a bit later as well. :)

Voting is just like screening, one has to stand by decisions that you make and that means defending your corner in a public forum.

There was a discussion on the old forum on the rating system and its flaws but at the end of the day this is Martin's site and it is his to do as he sees fit.

You can certainly ask for a review of the rating system but do not expect anything to come from the discussion... and perhaps it should be best carried out on another thread.

Hi Guys.

Just now read all this thread:) And... what i can say as author of the picture for your discussion.

At first. I have no claims to Darryl. Everyone of us has their different opinions.

About technical side of photography. I'm not a fan of pseudo-creative (strange angles, colours, crops, etc) But this pic looks more better with that angle. (my opinion)

And why so much negativity? ;-)

A-P cool website with a lot of interesting and rare pictures. This is one of the main advantage.

Less words, more photos!)

Thanks for all.

Alexander M.