Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Here is a random question for you guys: how do you feel about having people rate your models you have painted? Does it make you uncomfortable to think about the fact that random people are assigning a score to the models you have worked hard on? Or does it really matter to you?

I for one don't like to have my models rated, for the simple fact that I am uncomfortable with having my paintjobs boiled down to a numeric score. I've had model I am happy with get very low ratings here on Dakka. The following is a good example:

Mind, it isn't the best photograph, but I still don't feel it deserves a 4.5 paintjob rating. Actually, I have seen quite a few above-average models on the Dakka gallery get very low ratings, and I've seen some very poor paintjobs get ratings up in the 7s (the Pirhana I painted ages ago is a good example of this). The Dakka gallery does seem to be a little inconsistent when it comes to ratings-while the CMoN people are very picky, you can usually guess what score a paintjob will get just by looking at it, whereas ratings on Dakka seem more random-but all this is besides the point.

I'm really genuinely interested to hear you guys/girls weigh in on this matter, since I know there have to be some people who agree with my...and probably many who don't.

Cheers!

_Tim?

I feel ya, its the same with some threads for me. You will see a plog thread with 10 or more pages with not so good stuff, and my plog, I cant get three pages even with me being half of the comments. Then when I do get a comment the question its been answered like 2 lines above the post. It kills me. So yeah I really would hate to see the numbers people would give my models, are negatives possible?

Your orks look good btw.

Don't forget that with a low number of votes a couple of low or high results will skew your average. I think that 4.5 after five votes seems rather harsh though, the skin on them looks good, I'd certainly expect more than 5.

I think the disparity in voting comes from a lack of standards. My baseline standards:

5 = Tabletop standard, must be based. A "tabletop standard" means the model is a minimum of three colors, is completely painted, and has a completed base. A simple wash or drybrush can be part of this standard, but isn't necessary.

So, that's where I start at when voting on Dakka pics. BTW, failure to base a model drops it by a full point. IMO, it's not complete. Given my standards when it comes to voting, I'd put your models at a 6. Not only are they completed to the basic standard, but I can see that they've got at least one level of highlighting, and all of the details are painted neatly. Now, the pics are a bit dark, and I can't see all of the details, so maybe they would rate a bit higher with better pics.

I rarely give out 9s, and 10s have to be amazingly technical pieces or examples of an original technique applied to miniatures painting.

Sadly, inconsistency is the name of the game. One model in my gallery, the same model, but two different angles, has coolness ratings differing from 4... to 6.8, and painting 4.25 to 5.6. Same figure! Two different angles.

So yeah, don't rely on people. Personally I'd say, if you're at all sensitive about being judged regarding painting/coolness, don't allow voting. And speaking for myself, try not to let the amount of replies to one of your threads reflect people's interest/coolness of your build.

 the_Armyman wrote:
I think the disparity in voting comes from a lack of standards. My baseline standards:

5 = Tabletop standard, must be based. A "tabletop standard" means the model is a minimum of three colors, is completely painted, and has a completed base. A simple wash or drybrush can be part of this standard, but isn't necessary.

So, that's where I start at when voting on Dakka pics. BTW, failure to base a model drops it by a full point. IMO, it's not complete. Given my standards when it comes to voting, I'd put your models at a 6. Not only are they completed to the basic standard, but I can see that they've got at least one level of highlighting, and all of the details are painted neatly. Now, the pics are a bit dark, and I can't see all of the details, so maybe they would rate a bit higher with better pics.

I rarely give out 9s, and 10s have to be amazingly technical pieces or examples of an original technique applied to miniatures painting.

Unbased miniatures are perfectly complete, I would hate to see people give my minis 3s because I don't like basing them (but my painting skills aren't really that good though ). Also, giving very good things like those orcs 6s is stupid. I don't understand the point of rating harshly... 6 is generally OK, while anything less than 5 is generally considered bad. "Good" would be from 7-10, so if models are painted neatly, highlighted correctly, and painted to a certain standard, it makes absolutely 0 sense to give it an "ok." These orcs are actually quite good, I would say an 8. So unless you are the best painter in the world, these are definitely not 6s.....
Also 5 is most definitely NOT a three color minimum tabletop standard. If they are literally just painted three colors with zero shading or washes, then it is worse than tabletop standard. "3 color minimum" rarely means that you smack on 3 colors and are done. It usually means that you basecoat the model, possibly highlight a bit, and add a wash here or there. Honestly anything less than a five is pretty much crap, no offense though, as I am not a very good painter
I agree with the other posters, though, a lot of people on the gallery rate things badly for no real reason.

 Johnno wrote:
Sadly, inconsistency is the name of the game. One model in my gallery, the same model, but two different angles, has coolness ratings differing from 4... to 6.8, and painting 4.25 to 5.6. Same figure! Two different angles.

This has been my (limited) experience, as well. I'm a better critic than I am a painter, so I have a pretty solid handle where I stand (even if it isn't where I'd necessarily like to be) and don't bother with ratings on my own images (especially since I haven't uploaded a single thing past the first dump or two of crude, early projects). I take some small solace in the knowledge that my votes have imparted at least an iota of consistency to the sea of highly skewed scores, though. I have, admittedly, had the urge to give undeserved ones or tens to try and balance out ridiculous ratings on low-vote images, but I have no desire to become a full-time voting vigilante. This has actually led to me voting less, since the numbers are so frequently bull, and restricting my critiques to written ones, in-thread. There simply aren't enough people voting regularly and on a consistent scale for my efforts to contribute to any real balancing.

Ratings have the ability to be good tools for painters, providing a quick, easy to gauge measure of a wide sample of anonymous feedback. Problem is, the sample is frequently small and stupid. If I could restrict the pool of potential voters to people who vote on a similar scale to me (a sort of "voter calibration" and subsequent grouping, thereby giving me unbiased feedback on a familiar scale), I'd immediately break out the camera and start filling my gallery. Hmm... There's something for Legoburner's next "suggest a feature" thread, methinks.

Oadie's on the mark here. The registered vote on CMON is usually pretty fair; the public (unregistered) vote is occasionally put off by unscrupulous folks up-rating their own work. But still, it s useful as a yardstick.

Well thats the interweb for you. Put something nice up and somebody is going to vote it a 1 for good measure.

I wouldn't worry about it they'll well above TT standard for anybody but a paint snob, and look very nice.

I don't worry about it too much, but you can't help but feel a little proud when you see your stuff with a highish score. One thing that's kind of annoying though is going through the high rated stuff out of curiosity only to find the odd obviously self voted image. The marine that has deep struck into a tin of house paint, but somehow sits up high on the ladder because the owner votes 10 on all their stuff. It's fairly obvious when it happens and only lowers my respect for them somewhat, I guess it can also be considered a little sad. If you want that 10 so badly you would lie about it on everything, work for it and actually feel the pride behind the score instead of cheapening yourself for nothing.

Also that picture in the first post sits about where I'd expect it to be. On my scale I split TT quality into three parts, 4 for lower end, 5 for standard and 6 for high TT. Looking at the average it's had a few 6s up there. From the picture in the post it'd be an obvious 5, however going to the page and seeing the highlights and such starts to lift it up. It gets a 6 from me.

 Shredsmore wrote:

 the_Armyman wrote:
I think the disparity in voting comes from a lack of standards. My baseline standards:

5 = Tabletop standard, must be based. A "tabletop standard" means the model is a minimum of three colors, is completely painted, and has a completed base. A simple wash or drybrush can be part of this standard, but isn't necessary.

So, that's where I start at when voting on Dakka pics. BTW, failure to base a model drops it by a full point. IMO, it's not complete. Given my standards when it comes to voting, I'd put your models at a 6. Not only are they completed to the basic standard, but I can see that they've got at least one level of highlighting, and all of the details are painted neatly. Now, the pics are a bit dark, and I can't see all of the details, so maybe they would rate a bit higher with better pics.

I rarely give out 9s, and 10s have to be amazingly technical pieces or examples of an original technique applied to miniatures painting.

Unbased miniatures are perfectly complete, I would hate to see people give my minis 3s because I don't like basing them (but my painting skills aren't really that good though ). Also, giving very good things like those orcs 6s is stupid. I don't understand the point of rating harshly... 6 is generally OK, while anything less than 5 is generally considered bad. "Good" would be from 7-10, so if models are painted neatly, highlighted correctly, and painted to a certain standard, it makes absolutely 0 sense to give it an "ok." These orcs are actually quite good, I would say an 8. So unless you are the best painter in the world, these are definitely not 6s.....
Also 5 is most definitely NOT a three color minimum tabletop standard. If they are literally just painted three colors with zero shading or washes, then it is worse than tabletop standard. "3 color minimum" rarely means that you smack on 3 colors and are done. It usually means that you basecoat the model, possibly highlight a bit, and add a wash here or there. Honestly anything less than a five is pretty much crap, no offense though, as I am not a very good painter
I agree with the other posters, though, a lot of people on the gallery rate things badly for no real reason.

I think the first line of my post sorta says it all. You say his models are an 8, I say they're a 6. We're obviously using very different standards. On a scale of 1-10, I would think 5 should be average (i.e., tabletop standard). These are slightly above average, hence a 6 in my estimation. Not trying to sway you to my way of thinking, just trying to illustrate the point of my post: grading is very subjective.

As to basing being necessary to having a complete model, this site would tend to agree with my opinion: unbased models should not be displayed in the Painting and Modeling Shocase sub-forum because they are considered unfinished. From the Painting and Modeling Showcase sticky:

"2) That means the base too. Some games/lines/types of dioramas might use unpainted/flocked bases, and if that's the case it will undoubtedly still look neat and clean and finished and we'll be able to tell by context. But for most wargaming models a completed model means a completed and nice base too."

 n0t_u wrote:
I don't worry about it too much, but you can't help but feel a little proud when you see your stuff with a highish score. One thing that's kind of annoying though is going through the high rated stuff out of curiosity only to find the odd obviously self voted image. The marine that has deep struck into a tin of house paint, but somehow sits up high on the ladder because the owner votes 10 on all their stuff. It's fairly obvious when it happens and only lowers my respect for them somewhat, I guess it can also be considered a little sad. If you want that 10 so badly you would lie about it on everything, work for it and actually feel the pride behind the score instead of cheapening yourself for nothing.

Or like one chap that voted his own model as a 10 and then disabled the voting meaning that it was pinned at the top of the gallery when you ranked them by ratings...

I've never voted for my own work, but it's frequently done by others, it evens out over time though. I've spent quite a lot of time doing my bit for the gallery voting as you might see to the far left, don't have as much time now. The thing I would appreciate is if people deactivated voting on images that don't need votes, things that are half built or not even models, or pictures of boxes at the beginning of a project. Stuff like that that I end up skipping over in the turbovoter.

A raw number is a general indicator, but take it with a huge grain of salt. Everyone has a different system for judging. We are talking about putting numbers to something completely objective.

My own system is
5-6 Quality tabletop. Obvious work and care went into the job
7-8 Advanced techniques, profesional level.
9-10 Golden demon level stuff.

My ranking philosophy in general on a 1-10 scale is "average work gets a 5, adjust from there". Some people work on the "start at 10, then take points off" or other systems. Which all will get different results. Plus things as simple as what the previous image they rated was might skew things. Your orcs might get a higher rating is someone was just slogging through pictures with bad paint jobs.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Or like one chap that voted his own model as a 10 and then disabled the voting meaning that it was pinned at the top of the gallery when you ranked them by ratings...

I'm of the opinion it should count as 0/10, 0/10 while voting is disabled.

Unfortunately it's not only subjective, but also probably quite arbitrary.

 n0t_u wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Or like one chap that voted his own model as a 10 and then disabled the voting meaning that it was pinned at the top of the gallery when you ranked them by ratings...

I'm of the opinion it should count as 0/10, 0/10 while voting is disabled.

I think it has since been fixed for this very reason.

twenty bucks that at least a quarter of the people rating don't even paint their models and play with a grey ghost army.

People are very picky on models, if its not golden daemon some won't even give it a five.

If I did post pictures of my models, I would ask for a score to get other peoples perspectives of my models, but other then that I couldn't giving a flying turd if they don't like it or not.

As long as you like the model, then stuff the rest!

It's actually more worthwhile to make a thread asking for feedback than going by the numbers alone. Can start up a painting blog, but few seem to venture there despite it having some stuff that is way better than the majority of the showcase threads that pop up usually.

I would rather have some idea what people think of my work than none. Good, bad, or ugly. I would prefer anyone who votes on my work to leave a comment as well, especially if it's a low score. If somebody thinks my stuff is poor but has a suggestion on making it better, then I'm not offended at all. The whole point is to better all of our skills, not just bash on the newbies and praise the veteran painters.