How to have a photo that's been significantly altered re-critiqued without reposting

Recently I posted a photo which received an originality rating in

the low - to mid 5s and an aesthetic rating in the low to mid 4s,

and the reason was very clear.

 

Despite having sent the photo to a photofinisher for Photoshopping

(my skills are rudimentary since I seldom use the program's full

features), I wanted to share it. Members tried to help, and I want

to continue to show their comments. Now, with some study, the

photo's been improved, and soon it will be redone and ready for

reposting.

 

The photo: 'Glasses, The Dream and the Reality', is in my single

photo folder.

 

I would like to find a way to have others view and continue the

rating and comment process when the final photo edit it posted (it

still needs some refinement as it stands presently -- some selection

marks still show).

 

That's because I highly value the comments, which reveal the path

that shows the community help I received in getting to the final

product --- Photo.netters can be an enormous help sometimes in

critiquing am image, I've found.

 

So, how do I continue the ratings process, short of reposting the

photo and either (1) having two of the same photo in my portfolio --

a thought I abhor, or (2) deleting the original photo and therefore

deleting all the comments that show how the original photo was

altered to get to the final result?

 

Any ideas?

 

John (Crosley)<div></div>

Dear John,

If I read you right, all you need to do is go to your existing image, click, "Options," and "Edit Image Info." Then you upload the new image by clicking, "Browse," and select the new file.

BTW, very humorous image! Just a tad over saturated for the older lady's skintone.

Wilson, the image already has been replaced by this interim 'placeholder' image while I work on the 'final' image that's to go in my folder and which I wish to have finally critiqued -- as part of the continuing critique process.

 

And I have saved the original post (in which the woman was very 'washed out' and posted that photo down under comments in comments undeer that photo with a promiment discussion of how the photo happened to be 'improved'.

 

So the only question is not how to 'replace' the photo, but how to continue the 'critique' process once I have put in my 'final edit' without having to completely repost the photo, and either ditch the prior post or have two of the same photo posted -- the old and the new. (I price myself on not repeating myself in my single photo folder.)

 

(Thanks for the compliment -- it's funny how my mind wandered as I waited by be 'waited' on). John

<em>Despite having sent the photo to a photofinisher for Photoshopping (my skills are rudimentary since I seldom use the program's full features)</em>

<p>

From the photo.net terms and conditions of use:

<p>

<em>...The content which you submit must be Your work <b>in its entirety</b>. You may not submit content which is an amalgam of the works of several persons, even if You are among those persons, even if You are the principal creator, or even if the other authors have given You permission to use their work as part of the collective work. By submitting material to the Site, You are representing that You are the sole author of the content <b> in its entirety</b>...</em>

Bob - I think that the spirit and letter of the site's terms of use does not preclude the photographer receieving assistance in the material processing of the image (slides come to mind), provided that the subject content of the image is entirely the photographer's.

 

John - I wouldn't get too worked up about the meaning of the ratings. What you might consider to do is replace the old version with the new, and post a comment about it with a copy of the old version accompanying that comment.

I cant believe what I think I have just read. Who cares? The picture is rubbish anyway. Here I am contributing to this forum for the photographically challenged. Dear oh dear.

Stick with what you posted. Don't upload an alternative unless it's part of a response. This is the official site policy, although it's not posted anywhere for easy reference.

 

We suggest improvements based on what the original looks like. When you delete the original, then future viewers won't understand our comments.

Carl,

 

There's more than one way to skin a cat. One way is to do an addendum to intial comments by the poster, noting the image changes made, and referring to the addition of the altered image at the outset of the comments, then adding the altered image as a link, or a smaller image (in-line) in a far later comment.

 

As to 'official site policy' that's great, and I want to adhere to 'official site policy' but I've noted that the after 10 months the site still has many mysteries to me, and 'unwritten or hidden site policies" are sure to be broken unwittingly.

 

Why not have a "written site policy," so we can know what we re expected to do and not to do? Keeping 'site policies' secret serves no useful purpose.

 

And a site navigation guide for newcomers would be most helpful -- Photo.net was a total mystery for me for many months, and parts still are, I find, for seasoned veterns. Many members still tell me they are 'afraid' to go in certain areas because they don't know what they mean or what they'll find -- and they have no guide or guidance. Why not tell everybody from the newcomers to the veteran members?

 

I've noted this from day one.

 

It's a fine site, except for this one missing area.

 

John

Bob Atkins, the photofinisher's skills turned out to be significantly less than the skills I was able to learn on my own, with the help of some community members, and I wanted to preserve the comments to give them credit for helping me learn them. Isn't that what the community spirit is about?

 

And sending an image out for Photoshopping is no different than sending a negative out for darkroom work in the pre-digital days. Henri Cartier-Bresson had his own personal 'printer'. Would he have been ineligible to post on Photo.net because of that?

 

I think not, and that although you made a good point, you did not think your implications through thoroughly.

 

Respectfully, John

Steve,

 

Photography has room for everybody (including some civility) and while your portfolio has some very interesting and original work, just because I don't understand and/or like all of it, I wouldn't dismiss it as rubbish, just 'in the nature of things' because I'm an open-minded guy, and I learn from others -- and don't imagine that I'm some overpowering photographic genius, and that anyone who produces an image I don't like/understand/agree with/commune with/ is somehow lesser, supercilious, or a purveyor of rubbish.

 

It's just 'in the nature of things'.

 

And without others' 'rubbish' posted, how would others know of your great superiority?

 

J.

john, lighten up, kick back, and do what you think is right for YOU. there is no hifalutin board of review or ethics here. youre not up for tenure or a doctorate degree, so there are no profound consequences for not doing stuff according to hoyle or adhering to scientific method or to the exact letter of PN policy buried in some brian m posting somewhere here. just BE YOURSELF and do what is right for you. feel free to be as creative in presenting, changing, and discussing your photos as you are in creating them. bottom line is you have to live with how you present your stuff 24/7 and the others but a few moments

Spaghetti Western

Thanks.

Ultimately, that's what I do anyway.

Sometimes I like to do thinks by the rules, just to avoid upsetting anybody, but ultimately -- if you glance at my portfolio -- you'll find out I pretty much handle things on my own.

 

Thanks for the helpful advice.

John

Ouch! All this negativity! (I don't mean from you John, by any means). My suggestion would be to post the new photo as a comment to the old photo. That is probably not quite what you are looking for, but it would do well to keep the conversation going in a linear fashion instead of being spit into distinct stages. I guess you could also replace the old photo with the new, then immediately post a comment with the old photo in it as a referance and to give new comers to the conversation an idea as to what is going on.

 

And Bob, com'n, you're a smart guy. You understand that he's not talking about sending it out for to have someone add a lion to the background - probably not even enough modification to mark it as modified, or just enough to put it over the line. Should I give credit to the fine folks at my local photo finisher on every nondigital color (I do digital & b&w myself) I post? Is my boyfriend considered a contributor if he suggests a particular angle while we're out shooting? I don't mean to be argumentative, but you're being silly.

No I'm not being silly. You have to draw a line. The line photo.net draws is that whatever you post is your work in it's entirity. That means you did everything.

 

If you don't like the line and think the rule is silly, break it. If you think that work can be submitted which isn't 100% the work of the photographer, make up a rule that allows some contribution from others - but not more than you think is reasonable - and post the wording here.

 

Photo.net makes the rules. Break them if you want, but in that case don't claim you're not breaking them.