The new comment note under RFC images

By now most of you have noticed the new default admin note that is now

included directly under the photographer's comment whenever a critique

is requested. I think it's a good idea, and hope that the next step

will be a similar note that appears with every image in the critique list.

 

A recent RFC image discussed in this forum showed that

many people don't read comments, and I suspect this note will be no

exception. My hope is that if this note appears in all views where a

rating is permitted, that both newbies and long time members will have

a better understanding of what kinds of interaction is being asked for

by the site, whether it's ratings or comments.

Funny you mention this Carl. I saw it on a person's request and thought wow how did they get that? where do I get one? and behold it appeared.

 

Thanks Brian- or whom ever is responsible for this new wing ding we have.

I second the motion. Thanks, Brian.

There is also a new note on photos for which a critique request has not been made.

Well done gang... Now to get the folks to learn to read...;-)

I think that is a great addition to the site. Thanks.

so why not include the note prominently in the critique forum module format for each requested photo too?

Personally I hate it, I like to have people make their own decisions what to rate and not

rate and I know I'll get sick of inadvertantly reading those disclaimers everytime I look at

an image. It's overkill and it should be posted at the top of the general gallery pages but

not on people's photos, yuck. Was there any sort of opportunity to comment on this idea

BEFORE you commited yourselves and all of us to it?

will the note always be under the picture, or does it "travel" so it is always readable as the last item in the column?

Cudos for both admin notes and I particularly like the note on the photos NOT submitted for critique (as you previously commented on Brian). Thanks so much for the addition. Superior work as usual at PN.

If I photo is not submitted for ratings/critiques then surely the ratings functionality should be disabled.

Carl, though I appreciate the effort, I have to agree with Max Haynes on this. It would be better placed as a general header.

 

What I would REALLY like to see is the photographer's Critique Request Comment included in the Rate Recent Photos page. I think having that would help the critic viewing the photograph. Oftentimes, the photographer includes a specific request or direction of criticism (I know I do) that the critic never sees. For example. my most recent critique request asks for opinion on cropping. This request is invisible in the Rate Recent Photos page unless the critic visits the photograph. And that does not happen that often. Regards.

Oops, sorry. Maybe I misunderstood this and jumped the gun. I do like the disclaimer on the photographs that have not been submitted for critique. It is a harkening back to the previous state where one could "hide" his photographs from the general public. I liked that feature and miss it. Putting a disclaimer on those photographs is appropriate. I hope all this makes sense. I'm pretty tired. Regards.

-Should be disabled? Why? I have some images that just quietly gurgle along, get some ratings, some remarks, some discourse..makes it fun. And I like to shop around once in a while to see what folks have in their folders. Often my ratings are determined by the folder contents, i.e. the posted image might be part of an overall concept that needs to be taken into consideration. Looking at the folders might help with a constructive critique. In some cases, a glance at the folders indicated a potential broken camera that was causing frustration.

Well, yes John. And this is why. Say, for example, I upload a photograph right now. I put in a lot of Tech Details, location information, and so on. But, after seeing it displayed on PhotoNet, I am not really happy with it and feel that tomorrow, when I am not so tired, I can simply re-up an edited version. When I am satisfied with the way it will look here in PhotoNet land I can release it for perusal. This is the way it use to be.

I was not shocked but I was awed. Finally .....

I just noticed the disclaimer note today. How interesting. I think it's a nice addition, but I doubt the hard core "nasty commenter and/or low rater" submitters will care or comply. Possibly a better way to weed out the crack pots would be to disable their rating or commenting ability if they don't have any photos of their own posted on the the PN site. However, I have been informed by other PN subscribers, some people have several identities and use the ones without images to rate low and make unflattering comments, so their real photos will not be retaliated against. So weeding them out might just be impossible. I have heard they also low rate to even out the scores, to help their "real identity photos" jump to the top of the board and help eliminate the competition. Most of these people are easily identifiable, and I believe most of us pay them no mind. My philosophy is to ignore them, I've found they usually tire of being ignored and most times move along. But Brian, it is a nice try, I'm taking a wait and see attitude. It would be nice if we were all decent, thoughtful, caring human beings, but then diversity is what makes the world go round. I've found the most hurtful comments come from those who are legitimate photographers, who just have a plain old mean nature, whether it be from jealousy, ego or just plain old insecurity, I don't know. I love constructive critique, it's the ones that are "dismissive" in nature that I think cause the problems. I believe most of us are here to look, learn and enjoy this wonderful site. I enjoy & admire the top rated photographers as much as the rest. For example, one top rated photographer made a brief comment on one of my photos, "snap shot" not deserving of posting in other words, followed by a low rating. Actually, I felt it was a pretty well planned and thought out photo, considering I took it, I new what went in to it it's making. Of course I was disappointed, but then I followed several of his threads on other comments he made and found he was not just trite with me, but also left other undeserving photographers equally as trite comments. Obviously he was not interested in helping anyone, just making his observations known. I think his over inflated ego had gotten the better of him. While unkind, unsolicited, inconsiderate comments are eye opening, the majority of the comments PN users leave are wonderfully helpful. So keep up the excellent work Brian, you do a wonderful job! I for one appreciate the site and enjoy it immensely.

John,

 

The reason why I think it should be disabled is because the disclaimer states:

<p>

<i>The photographer has not submitted this photograph for critique and/or rating</i>

<p>

Seems like common courtesy to me. Walter's point is a good one as well.

Well I don't really know what to make of it when I first saw it I thought that the photographer was having some kind of laugh. I mean come on....

 

Moderator's Note

 

 

The photographer has not submitted this photograph for critique and/or rating. It is here for exhibition purposes. Accordingly, please consider this comments thread to be akin to a guestbook; that is, a place for any encouraging or positive comments that you care to offer.

 

 

Is it not just a little over the top. I personaly don't request a critique on every upload, I hope that people will check out the other photos in my folders if they find any of the ones I have requested a critique on interesting, and it is my belief that many others may do the same. I always believed that every thing uploaded here was for critique. I personaly would like to see the option of turing off that text, as I would like people to critique my images honestly without feeling that they can only say good things.

We're moving (much more slowly than we had hoped) towards a set-up where there will be two distinct parts of the Gallery. One part will be for "critique", the same as now, where photos are subject to rating and critique. The other part will be for "exhibition". The exhibition section will also be usable for just "sharing" or "hosting".

 

Photos in the "Critique" section will be ratable, and photos in the other section won't be ratable. The comments on photos in the "Exhibition" section will be guestbooks, and photographers will be able to moderate comments on their own photos in that section (meaning delete them). But they won't be able to do that with photos in the "Critique/Competition" section.

 

The ability to upload to photos to the "Critique" section will be based on participation and reception. As now, you won't have to be a subscriber to have photos in the Critique section, although subscribrs will continue to have some advantages. The more you participate (comments and ratings given) or the more favorably the photos are received (views/ratings received), the more photos you will be able upload to the Critique section. There will continue to be a one per-day limit on the number of photos that can be submitted for critique for non-subscribers, and a much higher limit for subscribers.

 

Unlike now, the quotas on how many photos you can upload will be hard quotas: you won't be able to exceed them. Subscribers will receive a specific amount of quota in the "Exhibition/Sharing/Hosting" section. Probably it will be in terms of file size, and most likely the amount will be 100MB of photos included in the $25 subscription, and the ability to purchase more.

 

In the "Critique" section, while you will be able to increase your quota by participating more, or waiting for your photos to accumulate more views, you also won't be able to exceed the quota. The quota will be expressed in terms of total number of photos.

 

When we institute all of this, photos that are over-quota will be pruned automatically by our software, after a short grace period.

 

The "Exhibition/Hosting/Sharing" section will essentially be available to subscribers only. Non-subscribers will be allowed 1-2MB in this section, mainly as a place to keep a few photos before they are submitted for critique. That way, they can upload a group of photos and then submit them, one per day, into the other section. But it won't be possible to have vast portfolios of photos on the site that haven't been submitted for critique, unless you are a subscriber.

Brian,

 

I appreciate that PN is not a democracy but I wonder whether you are being over-generous to non-subscribers - and by implication under-generous to the subscribers who support this site?

 

A submission limit of 1 per day to non-subscribers is generous and I doubt whether very many people are able to produce 1 pic a day that is worthy of submission. I know I can't.

 

And there seems to be little to encourage people to subscribe, other perhaps than by introducing restrictive participation limits. I don't claim this to be a scientific analysis of ratios, but looking at my own latest critique request, there are 24 ratings, only 2 of which are from subscribers.

Is it right that the NON critique space will be restricted more than the critique area?

Would this not mean that the critique area will end up with more images than desired.

Posters will use the critique area as the default.

 

Garry I agree who can put up more than 1 a day. I would prefer an even more

restricted area for critique in the belief that WE all will be forced to be more selective

and quality will improve and just possibly critiquing/comments per post would

increase.

 

I would choose 6 comments on 1 image in preference to 2 each on 3 images

especially if that image was the most important to me.

 

I realise the figures are not too real not I gave them to try and explain the idea.

Louis

Brian,

 

What will be the initial number of photos on which a subscriber can request a critique. As a subscriber, I understand that I will be able to upload approx 1000 photos (each photo @ 100K) into the Exhibition Hall. Could I then, for example, request a critique of all 1000 photos?

 

Regards,

 

stuart.

<i><blockquote> The more you participate (comments and ratings given) or the more

favorably the photos are received (views/ratings received), the more photos you will be able

upload to the Critique section. </blockquote> </i><p>

 

Won't that just give a display advantage to mate-raters and cartoonish-yet-popular photos?

<i>But it won't be possible to have vast portfolios of photos on the site that haven't been submitted for critique, unless you are a subscriber.</I><br><br>

 

Excellent move! If you want to show your pics to the world for free, then you have to stand the heat.<br>

If you're just looking for a cozy place to pamper your ego, pay for it.<br><br>

Maybe there should be a special icon for those who have ONLY pics in the cozy corner, a softball for example, or two small balls ...