Saturday, April 22, 2006

Photo Ratings: Ranking

A quick reference on photos posted and ranked since inception of the ranking system.

Note:

If a post had 2 photos, only the higher ranked shot has been included.
If a photo was ranked twice, the original rank was taken.
The mean average was used, if a photo had 1 rank only then this was used.

Comments? I think this throws up interesting results...

Shadowman – Average score – 7.45
comments
photo

The Old Man And The Sea – Average Score – 7.35
comments
photo

Cambridge Punt – Average Score – 7.25
comments
No link to photo. Ivan - please provide if possible (imbedded in original post I think)

Minnis Bay, Kent – Average Score – 7
comments
photo

Stunted Pine Trees – Cyprus – Average Score – 6.15
comments
photo

Looking From A New Angle (Photo 4) – Average Score – 6
comment
photo

"Crocuses - arrival of spring in Nova Scotia” (Photo 1) – Average Score – 5.8
comments
photo

Dinosaur – Average Score – 5.8
comments
photo

5 comments:

Critical Light said...

What do you think the interesting results are? You can't get away with summarising the data, then saying that there are interesting results, and not saying what those are!! Not very scientific!

From my perspective, it's interesting that generally the photos are in the 6-8 range, which is a good overall standard. If, in a few months, we were all in the 7-8 range, then that would be a good measure of progress.

Critical Light said...

I think it also shows that Grant doesn't post as much as Damian and I. I make it Ivan (3), Damian (4) and Grant (1). Also, to complete Damians nerdy stato-fest, Average scores by photographer:

Ivan (n=3) 7.23
Dams (n=4) 6.27
Grant (n=1) 6

All are thus really quite close, which is good, and likely quite accurate. I submitted 13 pictures to the same stock agency as Damian, and got mostly 7's and a couple of 8's, which would make their scoring very similar to ours, so we are at least being critically consistent with an external scale that is likely overly-critical on a quality basis.

Ivan said...

Damo - apologies; I thought it was you who was the stato nerd. But it was Grant!!! You used to be cool, man...!!

Critical Light said...

Hello there,

Yes, I had the same thinking as Ivan. I didn't quite understand what was meant to be interesting. It is good to summarise the data like this so that we can measure progress. I have been keeping records of each post and so soon I can join Grant and get very geeky and produce a graph! Of course, being a scientist, I need a larger sample size so, we need more entries....please!

D

bishopsindubai said...

Ha... yes I was that geek - not D.

I guess I thought it was interesting that Shadowman scored so highly. No disrespect to the shot, and I know I scored lower, however I don't think this is the best shot we have rated. My own opinion I guess, that's all.

I will post some more very soon - I was hoping to post new shots, but have been busy... I am going to revisit one or two. I might also post a couple of portraits soon.

And D - if you fancy going all graphy on us - feel free... some breakdown across the categories perhaps... :)