So i had some free time and was rating freshwater fish pictures (not tank pictures, to clarify). After all, rating pictures is how the site was born. So I've taken some time to explain how I personally rate those pictures, not to set a benchmark, or to educate, but rather to explain my own point of view in terms of a good (or bad) rating. This is purely my opinion, and in no way meant to offend (or compliment) anyone in particular. I already know it will receive some praise and definitely some criticism... which is great as this is a forum. More than anything I hope this is a good read and gets people thinking more about how they assess their own rating scale.
0 - no fish pictured, or if it is i can't find it.
1 - either a very very blurry picture of fish or a super super tiny picture of fish... either way i can't make out what kind of fish it is.
2 - a jumble of color where its difficult to make out the fish from the background, either due to too many colors or foggy water or foggy tank glass, but some effort was made and i can see what kind of fish it is.
3 - a semi-decent shot of the fish, but the setting behind the fish is so distracting or ugly that i forget about the fish pretty quickly.
4 - a decent shot of the fish and a decent shot of the background (normally this would be a 5, but since there is a leap in skill to taking a really good shot, i put the average at a 4).
5 - an above average shot of a fish, where it shows effort was put, and some luck in getting the shot... nothing distracting to the eye, and the composition is there.
6 - i'm beginning to really like the shot. Bold beautiful colors, sharp focus, and some personality captured.
7 - this shot is starting to turn into an admirable shot, something you'd want your own fish captured in. I almost feel like I know something about the tank owner from the shot.
8 - this shot misses nothing in terms of composition or style... vibrant color, crisp focus, breathtaking setting, and lots of personality of the fish. I also save this category for hard to capture fish, since it takes much more skill to pull this off than with regular fish.
9 - the mother of all shots. The shot is not only pure skill, but a considerable amount of luck or patience went into this shot. It makes me proud to be a fish owner and proud to be a photographer. The shot has just about everything... i underline "just about"
10 - if after reading 1-9 you still don't know what belongs here, please go back and read, as not many people get a 10. Its perfect... its stunning... its a ten.
Now go do a water change and take some pics!! Take care all, Spongebob.
spongebob, i think you just encuraged alot of people to start rating. thanks dude. i usualy go through and try to rate, but i havent had any insight on what to rate tanks. the boundrys you just laid out are very reasonable. i think im gonna start rating now. thanks
agreed........i think its important that there a reasonable standard, not that your setting it or even trying to set it...but when you take a test in school or something we are all held to the same standard..but more so that everyone is kind of rateing in the same ballfield.....I like the standards you have set for yourself and will rate basically in the same fashion ....of course you get a 10 man ....lol..good post..snowboss
P.S. for those of you who may be concerned about expierience levels and compeating with others of a much higher caliber {basically everyone other than me...lol} don't worry about it....it is very easy to see a tank that has been cared for and is a priority in ones life.....reguadless of whether it has 5000 dollars in it or 50.............
excellent thread SB!!! i rate pictures pretty much the same way, even though i know some of my shots are not the best and having darn reflection on the glass is a big part of that, as i am using an old very old outdated kodak digi from back 00, even still i take my time and try to make every shot count, the one thing my gpa always said ( he was a professional wildlife photographer) he always said take way more shots than you need to, because out of 100 shots you may only get that 1 that makes people go OMG and their heart skips a beat because it's that good!!!! this is something i want to put out there to everyone, take some time take as many photos as possible, lmfao i have over 3500 photos of my fish tanks and other tanks on my laptop.. out of them probably 500 are worthy of some recognition. that's a huge ratio. however if done right you too can make hearts skip a beat.
Nice post spongebob. I don't usually rate fish pictures maybe once in a while but I do usually rate tank pictures whenever i come on the site. Freshwater and Saltwater.
I never usually rate on the quality of a picture as some people do not have expensive cameras to take good quality pictures. And I only give someone a zero if there tank shows no signs of effort.
After looking at the effort they put in then I rate them on their aquascape and fish.
lol I have just finished posting a similar question in the planted tank forum I hardly ever go to other sections of this site as my main focus is on planted tanks for now. I tend to rate like serial32 I try to rate the tank and not the picture but the quality of the picture does have an effect on my rating though not intentional also in the planted tank section if a tank looks like it is newly planted and I think it would look good when mature I will give it a little higher score but not the same as a mature tank. I also like the points spongebob made his points are more detailed than my question but it is good to know what other people are looking for
Honestly I think your rating system is pretty harsh lol. I know that I try hard to get a good shot of my tank but I can never get it just right. Usually If I get a fish in focus everything else sucks, and when I get a crisp picture all my fish are blurs. My rating system goes the same way is if I were to rate a girl that I get a glance at walking down the street. If the setup is average its a 6 if theres no effort its in the 3 ish range and if they look like the tank looks cared for and some thought into it, it will get about an 8. I hope that made sense.
Deuce, i see your point... let me just add some thoughts. The rating system i came up with really only pertained to freshwater fish, not tanks. i totally understand that a well crafted and creative slightly blurry tank is worth a bit more than a crisp but boring and stale uncared for tank. Rating tanks is a different beast. Rating fish doesn't rely on the tank setup as much... and its really more about capturing fish personality and beauty, and less of displaying the beautiful setup of the tank you've worked so hard on, thats why i've been more harsh... and ofcourse this is just my take on it. I find it personally 4-5 times harder to take good pics of my fish than of my tank. My tank requires one setting on my camera... auto.. and i usually get a nice crisp shot of my tank and its inhabitants... it takes practice and patience, but what doesn't. Taking pics of fish requires a good deal of patience, but the reward (and the criticism) are greater, because your fish are living and display personalities, while tanks are stagnant and more aesthetic.
Anyway, i think you see the point im making... i love that you find it harsh, i wish more people would criticise it (though i love the praise), so that more users will concentrate on rating fish pictures, not just tanks.
You know what I think it's funny not reading one word in your first post can change what I thought you were talking about. I was basically skimming and when my eyes saw fish my brain was thinking tanks. I basically agree with your rating system but I tend to rate higher just because people get really personal about their fish and no one wants to see one of their babies bet a low rating ya know lol? I do agree with your point that people just shouldn't rate tanks and try to rate fish every once and awhile. I know when I uploaded my picure of my betta violet goby and gourami it took forever to get a good amount of votes. I hope you didn't think my previous post was a personal attack on you just a difference of opinion mixed with a tiny attempt at humor haha
I didn't take it personal one bit, i actually wrote the thread in hopes of getting criticism and praise, just so people discuss it... and i agree with you on the tank ratings... maybe I will write up a tank rating thread soon, hehe.
I use pretty much the same system, but one other factor I throw in is the difficulty/rarity of the subject. Some fish are FAST and don't stay still -- anyone who can get a decent shot of a rainbowfish or danio or something like that gets a +1 from me. Other fish that don't move around a lot, like bettas, I don't give a bonus to. I also give a bonus to macro shots that are well done, especially if they are fry shots.
As for rarity -- I'd rather see a pretty good shot of an endlers or rare killi than a "wow" shot of a cichlid. I get tired of cichlids.
I like this thread, and the original post, Boss. (That's Mr. Boss here) :)
I tend to rate tanks and I don't get much time so my system is kind of quick and dirty:
0 - Cruel or dirty conditions or simply a stupid/joke photo.
3-4 - if the tank is presented as "complete" but is visually and/or functionally unappealing and grossly incomplete. Meaning major stuff...like one plant for a tank full of Gouramis. Although, that borders on cruelty.
5 - they made an honest effort to photograph, edit, and upload and that all takes time and patience all by itself. Besides, we are all proud of our tanks and we all anticipate our ratings so why be harsh when there's honest effort? Sometimes these are children's pictures we're rating, too.
6-7 - If the person's passion and care for their fish is apparent. It just comes through whether or not a person is mechanical and ego-driven or they want to provide the best for their fish while creating a beautiful thing.
8+ - And I do give these. And it's based on whether or not I'd personally like to swim in that tank!
