Author Topic: Quality and Content Rating System - Simple Implementation (Read 8774 times)

Leo Blanchette · « **Reply #25 on:** July 01, 2013, 00:16 »

Before I got back to this thread I had already called it Rank in like 4 different places / files.

Still works the same - it takes those three levels and puts them in order.

When I'm done the mass-editor, this will be much easier to use. For now you might just want to take a hand-full of your best pics and give them a 1st level rank. You'll smile when you do a search

Kerioak~Christine · « **Reply #26 on:** July 01, 2013, 00:53 »

I would support a rating system both types and if it can be bulk edited so much the better. Most sites involving photography have a filter of some kind or at least a warning

I do not support Leo removing his name. With prlang's help I removed wordpress . The only change I might like to see is mention of symbiostock going to symbiostock.com and Leo going to clipartillustration.com

sc · « **Reply #27 on:** July 01, 2013, 00:54 »

Quote from: Leo on July 01, 2013, 00:16

Before I got back to this thread I had already called it Rank in like 4 different places / files.

Still works the same - it takes those three levels and puts them in order.

When I'm done the mass-editor, this will be much easier to use. For now you might just want to take a hand-full of your best pics and give them a 1st level rank. You'll smile when you do a search

Where does one do this?

Leo Blanchette · « **Reply #28 on:** July 01, 2013, 01:07 »

Right now (as of this release coming tonight or tomorrow) you can set it in author options or in the image editing area.

Experimenting:

All images start with a 2 rating level.

I gave one a 1 rank, and sure enough it was first in its relevant search.

I gave another one a 3 rank, and it was last.

So it works!

Ron · « **Reply #29 on:** July 01, 2013, 04:20 »

I definitely agree with the search needing to able to read compound keyword phrases

cathyslife · « **Reply #30 on:** July 01, 2013, 05:28 »

Quote from: klsbear on July 01, 2013, 00:09

Quote from: Leo on June 30, 2013, 23:47
With a night of coding almost complete - here's what we got:

A quality system that orders your images by priority 1, 2, 3. Maybe its a good idea not to call it quality. Call it priority?

"Priority" rating is exactly what came to mind for me instead of "quality" rating. I'd vote for using that term.

The content rating would rely on everyone actually using the ratings when uploading so I can see that being a challenge to actually make it work.

Agree. The people shooting nude women and beyond dont see their work as offensive, so i dont think they will want to be bothered. I dont care what others shoot and if they make money off of it, good for them. The only way i can be sure those images dont come up in a search on my site is to check the box you have already included. Unfortunately, that excludes all their images that might not be offensive. But that will have to be the way it is if they dont want to use the content rating.

cascoly · « **Reply #31 on:** July 01, 2013, 20:23 »

Quote from: cclapper on July 01, 2013, 05:28

Quote from: klsbear on July 01, 2013, 00:09
Quote from: Leo on June 30, 2013, 23:47
With a night of coding almost complete - here's what we got:

A quality system that orders your images by priority 1, 2, 3. Maybe its a good idea not to call it quality. Call it priority?

"Priority" rating is exactly what came to mind for me instead of "quality" rating. I'd vote for using that term.

The content rating would rely on everyone actually using the ratings when uploading so I can see that being a challenge to actually make it work.

Agree. The people shooting nude women and beyond dont see their work as offensive, so i dont think they will want to be bothered. I dont care what others shoot and if they make money off of it, good for them. The only way i can be sure those images dont come up in a search on my site is to check the box you have already included. Unfortunately, that excludes all their images that might not be offensive. But that will have to be the way it is if they dont want to use the content rating.

realistically - why would nudes ever show up in a search for green, animal, travel or any of the other keywords people are promoting?

grsphoto · « **Reply #32 on:** July 02, 2013, 08:00 »

The initial setting of the safe search function and the wording has imposed censorship and USA morality on all sites!!

I know that some places in the states it is illegal for women to show their breast ( but it is ok for men) but that is not the case for a lot of the world. So this standard is what we now have for Symbiostock? A lot of European fashion picks will be rated as Red by this network?

Sorry for the rant but censorship " for the sake of the children " has always bothered me.

travelwitness · « **Reply #33 on:** July 02, 2013, 08:09 »

If people really want a simple adult filter on their personal site why not just have an option to exclude certain keywords from the local site search, nude, sexy etc.

I wouldn't to see network wide censorship though, that would make the network pointless.

Kerioak~Christine · « **Reply #34 on:** July 02, 2013, 08:21 »

Quote from: travelwitness on July 02, 2013, 08:09

If people really want a simple adult filter on their personal site why not just have an option to exclude certain keywords from the local site search, nude, sexy etc.

I wouldn't to see network wide censorship though, that would make the network pointless.

That looks to be what Leo has done.

As I understand it there are three levels of filters and you can include words to exclude.

For instance
I have a few lingerie images that I have marked as yellow/amber

If you did not want any results with the word "bra" to appear on your site you would just add that to the excluded words for the Amber level

Without the filter you would have to block my whole site rather than a few selected images to stop the bra's appearing

Kerioak~Christine · « **Reply #35 on:** July 02, 2013, 08:33 »

I see Leo has removed his name from the theme - but has included a compromise

Leo Blanchette · « **Reply #36 on:** July 02, 2013, 13:57 »

Quote from: grsphoto on July 02, 2013, 08:00

The initial setting of the safe search function and the wording has imposed censorship and USA morality on all sites!!

I know that some places in the states it is illegal for women to show their breast ( but it is ok for men) but that is not the case for a lot of the world. So this standard is what we now have for Symbiostock? A lot of European fashion picks will be rated as Red by this network?

Sorry for the rant but censorship " for the sake of the children " has always bothered me.

Ok - the system is in as you know.

You will have to do an "update image info" in the admin area. If you don't, within 24 hours the system will automatically give your images a base 2 ranking, which will cause your 1's to go to the front if you want them to.

About the green, yellow, red system.

You mention culture. Some countries require cookie permission, some don't. We're all just trying to do things properly.

You may find this system befits you more than hurts you. AJT is joking about making a filter to search ONLY red if selected.

Meanwhile I sit here and say to everyone "It is what it is! Do whatever you want!" and I'm glad someone else takes care of central search.

The sandbox aspect of Symbiostock is just that. The tools are there. Use them or not - nobody will fault you. Its your sandbox.

Although its fun to go back and forth on matters of morality, this new system will:

A: The ranking system will help you put your best work at the front. Possibly even on symbistock.info.
B. The rating system is an honor system and probably will not get filtered by 90% of webmasters.
C. The keyword exclusion tool is also part of your sandbox to control your website. I know the network well enough to say that people so far will not be abusing it, and anyone who wants to network will probably not be filtering words "strategically" and if they do, who cares? Its your sandbox.

So really the basic point is this will not really change much and gives a little more control to everyone. Also this is the last thing to be implemented as a core part of the theme, besides the cookie no-sign-up cart which I am working on.

cathyslife · « **Reply #37 on:** July 02, 2013, 17:13 »

Quote from: cascoly on July 01, 2013, 20:23

Quote from: cclapper on July 01, 2013, 05:28
Quote from: klsbear on July 01, 2013, 00:09
Quote from: Leo on June 30, 2013, 23:47
With a night of coding almost complete - here's what we got:

A quality system that orders your images by priority 1, 2, 3. Maybe its a good idea not to call it quality. Call it priority?

"Priority" rating is exactly what came to mind for me instead of "quality" rating. I'd vote for using that term.

The content rating would rely on everyone actually using the ratings when uploading so I can see that being a challenge to actually make it work.

Agree. The people shooting nude women and beyond dont see their work as offensive, so i dont think they will want to be bothered. I dont care what others shoot and if they make money off of it, good for them. The only way i can be sure those images dont come up in a search on my site is to check the box you have already included. Unfortunately, that excludes all their images that might not be offensive. But that will have to be the way it is if they dont want to use the content rating.

realistically - why would nudes ever show up in a search for green, animal, travel or any of the other keywords people are promoting?

Keyword stuffing. I'm sure the keywords for a sexy woman aren't just going to include sexy and woman. Here's a list of keywords that were added for the attached image:

young, woman, wellness, vogue, vitality, vertical, thoughts, tenderness, temptation, tall, stylish, studio, slender, skin, she, sexy, sensuality, seduction, pretty, perfection, passion, nifty, lingerie, lady, isolated, human, healthy, grace, gorgeous, glamour, girl, gentle, fresh, figure, female, elegance, dream, dietary, desire, caucasian, bodies, blond, beauty, beautiful, attractive, affection

thoughts, studio, nifty, lingerie, girl, fresh, elegance, dream, dietary, caucasian, bodies, blond, affection? Sorry, I don't see those. Especially lingerie and dietary. So I'm searching for food and enter the word dietary and BOOM, I get that image. No, sorry. That's just annoying.

That was the first image I came to. There must be millions of others.

grsphoto · « **Reply #38 on:** July 02, 2013, 20:44 »

Leo, you have done great work and I applaud what you have done loudly and long many times and in many places. You have worked hard and I really appreciate what you have done, and I don't want to come across as a sever critic.

Quote from: Leo on July 02, 2013, 13:57

B. The rating system is an honor system and probably will not get filtered by 90% of webmasters.

Except that your have set it so that it is full on censorship when the theme is installed!

With all the other things a new user has to learn this is another, and how many are going to change a setting from green to red?

I understand what, and why you are doing this, but the wording on the labels, the instructions besides the buttons seem very deliberate.

I have, in the past, tried several times to have conversations about how best to deal with this so that something like this would not be imposed.

Instead of a colour designation how about calling it "safe search level" with open being the standard default, and the two more restrictive levels.

I would also like to see a rewording of the acceptable images for each classification... maybe open, sexy nudity, and erotic being the three levels.

Leo Blanchette · « **Reply #39 on:** July 02, 2013, 20:51 »

I can see where your coming from.

If things are working correctly, it should allow UNRATED by default. Meaning unrated stuff gets through.

Do you want me to make every input UNRATED by default? Edit: Meaning that instead of GREEN you have UNRATED, GREEN, YELLOW, ETC

I just started it at green - there was no deeper intention. Also regarding wording, feel free to suggest changes. There's nothing deliberate going on. Much like the default prices the theme installs with, they are meant to be changed. Not suggestions.

EDIT:

This is what I used to get a well-pioneered rating basis: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/146399?hl=en

Avoiding Bias, I simply used an existing system.

Leo Blanchette · « **Reply #40 on:** July 02, 2013, 22:04 »

So I took a little detour from my work and hopefully have covered all of the files where rating is addressed.

So what we have is the dropdown of options:

-
GREEN
YELLOW
RED

The dash is wonderfully neutral and unbiased. Its a dash, and like most dashes are devoid of any opinion and seek to merely fill a space

So technically these correspond to 4 levels.

ALL defaults should not point to allowing UNRATED.

Its also worth mentioning that pretty much every system out there has a rating system for sensitive content.

The only thing worth asking now is please post your verbage changes and agree on them.

We just need a system that is forthright and well balanced. I think we're getting there. Tell me if we're not.

grsphoto · « **Reply #41 on:** July 02, 2013, 23:02 »

About the censorship ratings.

In my opinion, All defaults Should point to unrated.

Images should be unrated until the action to rate them has happened. The site should be wide open until the webmaster takes steps to tighten their content.

4 settings

unrated..... as the name states this should be the default
general.... 90% of the images in the world
S or N..... Sexy or nude images ( including Art) There are a lot of sexy images which don't have "offensive" body parts and a lot of nude images which have no sexual content
Adult...... Images of adults, by adults for adults

If other people don't comment or have an opinion then I will stop

Leo Blanchette · « **Reply #42 on:** July 02, 2013, 23:08 »

Don't worry, your opinion is valued - and yes, everyone concerned please join in and suggest verbage agreeable to the masses.

By an amazing cooincidence you were our first webmaster with content like yours, so really your blazing a trail here for others with content like yours. Thanks for your help in getting the issue worked out properly.

As of this point, I'm re-uploading 4.4.9 with all of the defaults set to unrated and the webmaster will have to specifically alter things to their wishes which is completely fair.

klsbear · « **Reply #43 on:** July 02, 2013, 23:40 »

Quote from: grsphoto on July 02, 2013, 23:02

About the censorship ratings.

In my opinion, All defaults Should point to unrated.

Images should be unrated until the action to rate them has happened. The site should be wide open until the webmaster takes steps to tighten their content.

4 settings

unrated..... as the name states this should be the default
general.... 90% of the images in the world
S or N..... Sexy or nude images ( including Art) There are a lot of sexy images which don't have "offensive" body parts and a lot of nude images which have no sexual content
Adult...... Images of adults, by adults for adults

If other people don't comment or have an opinion then I will stop

I'd suggest:

Unrated
General
Artistic Nudity
Adult Content

S or N for sexy or nude images is a bit vague and leaves you looking for a meaning.

Kerioak~Christine · « **Reply #44 on:** July 03, 2013, 01:20 »

I thought the current wording was very definitive

Words such as sexy and artistic nude are very much in the eye of the beholder, some may agree and others find them crude. I would imagine most people will leave it open but do wonder if there should be a "safe for work" option for customers to filter out red level

I know I have used the keyword bare, and may have used nude in describing a winter tree without leaves, so there can be overlap both way with keywords

Pilens · « **Reply #45 on:** July 03, 2013, 01:31 »

Hmm,

I was once asked by a FAA group master not to send any (ugly) pics of dead/decaying animals to her group because she felt offended by them (although I thought the group's topic, something like "wilderness scenes" or "found on the forest floor", I can't remember, seemed a good match to me).

How would I rate those images if this is all about nudity and adult content?

Leo Blanchette · « **Reply #46 on:** July 03, 2013, 01:47 »

Quote from: Pilens on July 03, 2013, 01:31

Hmm,

I was one ask by a FAA group master not to send any (ugly) pics of dead/decaying animals to her group because she felt offended by them (although I thought the group's topic, something like "wilderness scences" or "found on the forest floor", I can't remember, seemed a good match to me).

How would I rate those images if this is all about nudity and adult content?

It depends. Are the dead animals wearing underwear?

Pilens · « **Reply #47 on:** July 03, 2013, 01:58 »

Quote from: Leo on July 03, 2013, 01:47

Quote from: Pilens on July 03, 2013, 01:31
Hmm,

I was one ask by a FAA group master not to send any (ugly) pics of dead/decaying animals to her group because she felt offended by them (although I thought the group's topic, something like "wilderness scences" or "found on the forest floor", I can't remember, seemed a good match to me).

How would I rate those images if this is all about nudity and adult content?
It depends. Are the dead animals wearing underwear?

No, beside mangled fur they are literally bloody naked

grsphoto · « **Reply #48 on:** July 03, 2013, 07:08 »

Quote from: Tinny on July 03, 2013, 01:20

I thought the current wording was very definitive

GREEN:    Viewable by all audiences.
YELLOW:    Content rated YELLOW may contain individuals who are minimally clothed (e.g., low cut tops, underwear or revealing bathing suits). Content rated YELLOW should not contain nudity, including exposed buttocks, genitalia, or areola.
RED:    Shows exposed areas including exposed buttocks, genitalia, or areola.

The problem is the wording is too definitive.

Most of my Artistic images on http://peopleimages.grsphoto.ca/ would fall into the RED
While the images that I have that would likely cause the most offense would, by these definition, be green ( lips and a popscycle and did it ever cause me a lot of grief... I was after colour and didn't see the sexual connotation until it was published)

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Quality and Content Rating System - Simple Implementation (Read 8774 times)

Leo Blanchette

Kerioak~Christine

sc

Leo Blanchette

Ron

cathyslife

cascoly

grsphoto

travelwitness

Kerioak~Christine

Kerioak~Christine

Leo Blanchette

cathyslife

grsphoto

Leo Blanchette

Leo Blanchette

grsphoto

Leo Blanchette

klsbear

Kerioak~Christine

Pilens

Leo Blanchette

Pilens

grsphoto

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors