Why I am out - after about a week

[roger_gauthier1]

Hello fellow photographers,

 

This has been discussed many times, yes, I know. And I am not sure at all that I am at the right place to

say this after reading the examples given above. As I am quitting however, I feel entitled to say why.

 

I became a registered ($) member of photo.net because I thought that I could get feedback on certain

pictures, discuss them and explain the vision behind those pictures.

 

I am not interested at all in ratings. Not in ratings based on only two highly disputable factors. Well, I

am getting a lot of ratings - and few critiques. Is this a popularity contest or what?

 

Here are a few ideas. I do not dare call them suggestions, simply ideas that, after proper discussion and

modification, could perhaps help you, respected remaining members of photo.net. Here they are, "en

vrac" as we say in French.

 

1. Get rid of anonymous rating. Better stil, eliminate ratings unless a member justifies his opinion with

a structured critique.

 

2. If this is not acceptable, then create a new category, with absolutely no ratings - only comments

and/or critiques.

 

3. If not, at least get rid of ratings from non paying members of photo.net, or from non registered

members (I don't know if they can).

 

4. Any member who does what I call "chain-rating" should get out. Think about this: how can a member

RATE MORE THAN 5000 PICTUES IN ONLY NINETEEN DAYS, I ask you? Unbelievable. Supposing that two

minutes are enough to evaluate correctly a picture, this means more than nine hours a day, only in

rating other photographers' pictures... Nine hours a day. Every day, including saturdays and sundays.

photo.net should be able to stop those rating machines.

 

5. Now, this is much more delicate. Photography is rapidly evolving in many directions, including

abstract art, complex compositions, compositions going against the Photo Book of Rules, pictures so

complex that they need time to be analyzed, sometimes as much as 30 minutes or more. There is no

place for such photography in photo.net.

 

6. Nowadays, art photography may often be called "research photography". A photographer tries

something different, sometimes very very different, and perhaps foolishly expects that people will take

time to search beyond the easy way. I got comments on a few of those - not often. What I got was

ratings (anonymous) ranging widely from 3-3 to 7-7.

 

Photography has much in common with painting. Painters, over the time, have tried things that were

totally, but totally different. Photographers are now mixing photography with painting techniques,

electronic tools, and graphic tablets. Photo sites should get ready to create a space for such strange

and bizarre minds.

 

7. This is a technical point, but it is important. Very important. Looking at so small versions of pictures

is the equivalent of judging any painting reduced to a 4x6 in. format. Many pictures do not show their

true potential unless they are looked at full-screen.

 

There is a way for photo.net to allow this: the larger versions of pictures should automatically open in a

new window, thus allowing a full-screen version with a single click.

 

This is my "testament". I sincerely hope I was not offensive, it was surely not my intention and I would

be awfully sorry if anybody feels insulted, because I realize that there is a big number of very good

photographers here. I am simply not able to get in contact with them or to get critiques by them on a

regular basis.

 

Sayonara,

 

RogerG

 

P.S.: Sorry if there are typos in my post, I wrote it rather quickly I fear. :-)

[joshroot]

There are problems with the ratings system that need to be addressed. And they will be addressed when we are able to do it.

 

However, regarding looking for useful feedback, have you tried making specific requests to a photographer who's work you admire?

 

I don't participate in the ratings/critique system. Partially because, as a site admin, I don't really think think that it's appropriate. But mostly because I don't really care about that part of the site when it comes to my personal photography. I have mentors and peers who's opinion I seek out if I feel I need it. i could care less what random viewers have to say.

 

However, if I were approached by someone who, for example, wanted to learn to shoot skateboard/BMX style photography (something I have had a lot of professional success at) and asked me to look through their portfolio and critique it, I probably would do so. I doubt that I would do so on the site itself, but I would send them email and give them my honest opinion.

 

It all comes down to what people are looking for from photo.net. If they are looking for public kudos and high ratings, then join in with the mate-raters and pat each other on the back. If it is to get valuable critique about specific things, then approach those who are active on the site (not just in the ratings arena) and who are also masters of the style or subject that you are working on.

[mvisionphotography]

Roger, You have only been with us for one week. Please give it more time. Get out and meet more people as one week is not enough to build relationships with people. You have some interesting pictures and honestly I was VERY impressed with the picture of you boats (something wrong).

 

The man that looks like he is singing and the girl in the chair caught my eye immediately but I don't have time right now to spend looking any further.

 

One week (the first week) is always a get your feet wet week.

 

I too am a person of art and agree I wish there were more places to put some of my things but don't forget there is also fine art where sometimes things fit.

 

You have a great style and some wonderful pictures. Go out and look at peoples PROFILE'S and PORTFOLIO'S and get to know them by commenting on their pictures (not rate) but get to know them. Make friends and they will come and comment and you will make friends (not rate friends).

 

This is how PN works and what I have found to be the best thing about PN.

 

I have more friends that I talk and learn with "OFF" pn as I do on pn now. I think you need to not worry about those BOTS (or quick 3/3 raters) JOSH is on that (YEAH JOSH).

 

Welcom Roger, nice to have you here! ~ :) ~ micki

[kareng]

Yeah. What Micki said.

 

It takes some time for the critiques to start rolling in, but I've found the place pretty helpful. I even like to think that my work is better now than it was when I joined in August, especially the post processing stuff. If you can tune out the 3/3 freaks, there's lots of useful stuff and great people here.

 

-k

[johncrosley]

I joined 3.5 or so years ago, and didn't even know how to request a critique. I posted as my first photo my best photo ever, including to the present day (and one of my lesser photos is 'Photo of the Week' this week, but it still is not up to that high standard).

 

It took me a month to get 10,000 views under a system that counted all views of all thumbnails, a system that has been eliminated now.

 

Since I did not know the 'ropes' and especially how to request a critique, my portfolio I thought would languish, but i still rated (then they were not anonymous), and people came and took a look. Sometimes these days some raters are anonymous and others are not.

 

There were substantial problems with payback, mate rating, etc., that drove the Administration to distraction -- literally -- with non-anonymous ratings, so they are gone, probably for good, though anyone who does not rate your photo when it appears in the queue is shown on your ratings page (just click your ratings).

 

As to comments, I may lead Photo.net in the number of intelligent comments made on my photos. People like to come to my portfolio to discuss the photo and a variety of tangents -- from poetry to philosophy. I have made many virtual friends (including the indominatable Micki F. above) through comments on my portfolio and those comments number in the thousands.

 

I have taken care to reply to (almost) every comment, and have benefitted from wonderful analysis of my photos from fellow Photo.netters.

 

It took me maybe six months to get recognized on this place, and if i had been looking for 'instant recognition' I would have never experienced the wonderful pleasure that being a member of this site can provide.

 

Sure there are Luddites and troglodytes and even a few Cretans (sorry anybody who lives in Crete now). But this is a public site with no requirements for becoming a member -- and it's only $25 a subscription if one decides they like it.

 

I've benefitted maybe a thousand times over or much more than that from my membership fees (some of which have been paid by others -- thank you guys).

 

I try to give back, but there are millions of photos on this service, and to become known takes a while.

 

There is a phrase: 'the cream rises to the top'.

 

It is not always true, but often substantially so.

 

If you are too immature (young in your thinking) and think you will conquer the world of photographic art in a few weeks, this is not the place for you -- it takes time to get recognized, but some of this site's best photographers literally are great photographers, and you then will miss some friendship and critiques that you literally cannot pay to get.

 

It is in the nature of all great art and of all great artists that those who innovate often are castigated. Some of the great painters were ridiculed. Can you think of one painter who cut off his ear and one of his final pleas (before he killed himself) was that his brother could at least sell one of his paintings.

 

Great composers on presenting works we now all agree are 'great' were riduculed and booed at their performances.

 

Popular culture is sometimes challenged by new things, but 'the cream often rises to the top'.

 

Only late in life did I understand Picasso's genius, and thus also the genius of Giacometti and others. It's a good thing I didn't have a week's deadline, and that Picasso did not either, for his works were sometimes misunderstood till his death by some -- although he is almost a French national hero among the French I know, at the present time.

 

Can you count how many composers on presenting a new symphony or opera were booed by the opening night crowd. I know of innumerable stories.

 

When I joined Photo.net there really wasn't much friendliness to 'street' photography in the classic sense, even though some of its members were great street artists. Some left, but I have found great friendliness lately to my 'street' art, and some of it I believe is because I helped 'create' that friendliness, by helping those who critiqued my work and engaqing in colloquy with them so whoever came across my work could read the colloquy and gain an understanding of that work (and hopefully respect).

 

Most of your 'proposed chages' once were the rule or were considered by many and rejected as unwieldy.

 

Go if you must, but you'll never know the wonderful things that might have happend if you were to stay.

 

But if you always see the glass as 'half empty' them you'll always grate at lack of attention. If you're a 'glass half full' person, you'll probably have the time of your life, despite any petty annoyances, such as machine bots which spoil things for lots of us,but which the Administration works to clear out.

 

So, do as you will, but please consider this and the entreaty of Micki F. above. She is relatively new to this service, but has become one of this service's best-known and best-liked members because of the quality of her colloquy and criticism.

 

And she gained that by participation and showing her intelligence, as photography is a new 'art' to her, and when she joined she was just learning how to take photographs.

 

This is a big tent, and there're lots of places here for members of many abilities.

 

You have take time to find your spot, and determine if you will 'rise' like that 'cream'.

 

Best wishes,

 

John (Crosley)

[roger_gauthier1]

Thanks Josh, Micki, Karen and John for taking the time to comment my post. By Jove, is it

THAT easy to provoke such thoughtful comments as yours just now? Pros and cons, a

commented yea or nay, but something? And reading you, you will admit that you are not

saying that I am wrong in the points I presented, but that I should persevere and find ways

to work through the "system" so to speak.

 

You have given to me arguments explaining why I should stay, each in your own fashion.

And those arguments are strong enough to make me reconsider and see what I can do, I

mean, and this is my main point, see if photo.net is for me or not.

 

I also understand that for someone deeply involved in photo.net, especially for a long

time, there is a feeling of being part of things, a "sentiment d'appartenance" (I am from

Qu颥c with an e acute, does it show? :-) ), and that a post such as mine may seem at

least in part maybe not as being offensive, the word is too strong, but let's say

"challenging" for lack of a better word. As I wrote, I certainly did not mean to be offensive.

And yes, you make me reconsider, even if it my point of view that you are not telling me

that I am deeply wrong... at least not in all my arguments. What I perceive is that you are

telling me that my points are not arguments strong enough to quit, at least not so fast.

 

I do not want to start a tirade, a spell of ranting about the unfairness of photo.net. Nope. I

beg you however to reread points 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Read that in a neutral way and see if

photo.net can get better. All things can. And by Jove, those points are very important,

some easy to satisfy. The point is only to determine if photo.net wishes to go into this

direction, and this is not for me to say.

 

I must add these precisions as they are an essential part of my thinking.

 

- I do not repeat do not pretend to be a great artist that should get instant recognition.

Sorry if I gave that impression. I mentioned great artists of the past only to make a point,

not to compare me to them. My personal opinion about myself, as hard it may be to

believe, is that I am not an artist. I have been a reasonable, creative photographer for a

long time, but that doesn't make an artist out of me. From time to time, I create something

that IS exceptional and I instantly know it, often to my own amazement, usually in the

dead of winter nights with Gianmaria Testa's songs in my ears.

 

- I do not wish to gain "instant recognition", so sorry John, as you say in your post. I

distribute and sell (with some difficulty) pictures through private groups. This pays for my

gear and it's quite enough thank you. I have refused for decades to even show my

pictures, let alone have a website! I am not foolish enough to seek instant recognition. I

don't care about being known as a great artist or photographer which I am certainly not.

 

- Josh' last paragraph is maybe the most instructive of all and I had not thought about it.

This alone may be good reason enough to stay and try to get what I want - feedback and

discussion with no ratings whatsoever. I repeat myself, but I personally don't care about

ratings, and if I stay, I will always ask specifically not to rate my pictures as I am not

interested.

 

- John, several of my points should be considered with more than a passing thought.

Several are not unwieldy. Creating a space specifically for those who do not seek to be

"artist of the week", or the month, or the year, is not difficult. It may not interest photo.net

to do so, which I would respect, or it may not be the philosophy of the site, or the Admins

may have other more pressing problems to solve.

 

- I don't care about the glass being half-full or not - unless it's beer from a micro-

brewery. As bizarre as it may seem, it's not me that doesn't get attention, it's the pictures

for which I want a feedback, a true, honest-to-God, without-gloves feedback. If someone

tells me that I am great, I will probably blush behind my beard and my tan, and ask myself

what my picture thinks about that.

 

- Rise with the cream? Heaven forbid! I do not wish to become mainstream to THAT point.

I have posted none of my really controversial work, and do not see why I would do it in the

Critique section. This is one other reason why I suggest the creation of a forum where

people not interested in becoming known gurus or so-called pundits could discuss their

work. I mean, you know, not a personal "forum" or private groupe with photo.net, but an

open section of photo.net, a real one with a link to it and all that.

 

Thank you all for taking the time to answer at length. You've certainly got me thinking. I

also hope that some of my points you will reconsider. Some are major, not difficult to

implement, worthy of consideration.

 

Must go, there are hundreds of ducks quacking in the river that borders my property on

two sides. Time for the telephoto.

 

Regards,

 

Roger Gauthier

 

The Photographer Who Came From The Cold

[john_h.1]

For someone who they says don't care about ratings, you sure spend a lot of time in utter anguish over them. If you are telling the truth then just ignore them. Since you obviously do care, however, ignore the ones you have already identified as invalid. You know which ones they are because you have already wrote about them in detail.

 

There. Problem solved. The time saved on posts about ratings can now be spent on communicating with others about your mutual image making.

[roger_gauthier1]

John, you just don't get the point. It is possible that you know me better than myself - this

I do not know. You may believe and say obliquely that you do not believe me, it's neither

very constructive nor very polite, but you're entitled to your opinion.

 

Now, I will repeat myself, just in case I did not express myself correctly at first: I do not

care about ratings, John. I do not care about them, I do not want them, I do not want to be

photographer of the week, or the month, or the day, or whatever. There, it is said. Got my

point?

 

If you recall correctly, I am a newbie in photo.net. When I asked for critiques, I saw to my

amazement that ratings, that I knew nothing about having overlooked that "thing", started

coming in. By Jove, what a roller-coaster! Mamma mia.

 

John, I am a newbie in photo.net, granted. Not dry behind the ears, if you wish. But I am an

old enough hand in art photography to know how to post pictures that WILL get good

ratings if you do not take into account the freaks out there. Wait a few weeks, you will see

rolling in pictures that will get real bad ratings, they're so much against the mainstream.

 

John, other people realized my mistake and pointed out to me, quite politely, that there

was a way to get rid of ratings. There it was, right in me face! No ratings... So I have

started posting again, but this time free of photo.net ratings. As I wrote, my spirit is now

free and soars way above.

 

There you are, John! Problem solved all right. Because you were right, in a way: I cared

about ratings in the sense that they were apparently part of the system even if I did not

want them, and yes, they were a disturbing factor. You may well choose not to believe me.

You are however dead wrong. At 62, I am simply not interested by such follies.

 

I politely suggest that you see in the future if you find a single new picture from me where

you can put in a rating. C.Q.F.D., as we French say.

 

- RogerG, The Photographer Who Came From The Cold

[john_h.1]

So long ratings then. I gather you might stay awhile.

Feel free to comment on my pictures. More to come at the new year. I took the liberty of doing so with the Phantom picture. A good one to start with.

[dusty2004]

Never ever give up. Never,never, never. Too many people these days give up to easily. ONE WEEK AND YOU GIVE UP ! Now lets have a look at your pictures. Cheers.

[roger_gauthier1]

John, you're a real sport. I was rather harsh in my last comment, sorry about that. One

thing

is true: there are so many good photographers out there that it is amazing.

 

Roy, you've got a point too. But I had to see if I could function inside photo.net.

Paradoxically, and it was not what I tried to do, this thread has created a lot of contacts

and given me the basis of an informal group inside photo.net. Isn't that amazing as an

unwanted side effect?

 

Let's have a laugh, and a single beer before driving away, as we use to say.

 

- RogerG, The Photographer Who Came From The Cold

[GerrySiegel]

Dear Roger, you had some thoughtful comments and I tend to agree that the ratings are not the end all of self improvement. It is hard to give a thoughtful and useful comment and some offense is easily taken and then dialogue really halts... I comment rarely, but I always try to say something substantive, or say nothing. I never submit my own meagre photos for comment because I am my harshest critic and believe, after all these years, that I mainly shoot to please myself and document my life,which passes faster and faster as I get on.

And am old and stubborn enough not to care very much whether someone would crop different, or adjust levels, or use a filter, or do this or that in photoshop. I want to shoot and lazily LET YOU (figuratively) do my lab work,how is that? (hah, gotcha!) I want to be the Director,s o to speak and conjure the image. And once it is in the can,well take it or leave it. I learn by my self recognized missteps. 30 plus years of wastebasket negs.

I am a traditionalist I guess and a do it in the camera type person. I do like the return to black and white chiaroscura (?) thing in PN lately. The wheel turns full circle,n'est ce pas? It seems to nail down the elements of a photo and focuses the mind. We are so besieged by images that it is hard to be quote original, get attention,but as long as we all share the passion ( I cannot not have my camera in my thoughts at least) then we are left with no populist expression for all us hoi polloi. Stick around, I did,because PhotoNet will get to you after you been around a while. There are as you see some really classy folk on the member rolls. And a few jerks,but that is the Internet,sir...Aloha from Oahu, Gerry

[roger_gauthier1]

Thanks for your input on this. Having been a solitary photographer most of my life, even

my website is totally mine and depends on nobody else except my server. I think that I

expected more from photo.net than you guys who have been members for a much longer

period of time. I think that I can benefit from such a structure if I do not expect too much

of it in terms of feedback. Seeing a lot of pictures from different photographers is an

experience per se.

 

On the other hand, I've observed that many people (including myself) will comment good

pictures much more readily than ordinary or bad ones. This is only ordinary human

behaviour. It may also explain why ratings from member are often very high. It's normal, if

you rate more good pictures than bad ones.

 

As far as Pshop is concerned, I am in a way both a traditionalist and a Pshop maniac. When

I record Nature, like flowers, insects and the like, I try to be as true to the original as can

be. On the other hand, when I go overboard in Pshop, I say so, or it's obvious, but finally

what counts is the image, not the method.

 

Classy folks in photo.net? You bet.

 

- RogerG, The Photographer Who Came From The Cold

[dusty2004]

Gentelmen. the law of attraction is very simple. We get what we expect. If you expect little you will get little. As a man thinketh so he shall have. You are what you think you are. So change your thinking. I expect to have many good things come my way. Therefore I have. It works, I know for I experience it every day. Cheers.

[roger_gauthier1]

Nicely put, Roy. I would perhaps prefer a variation like "As a man thinketh so he shall be".

Thank you for your thoughts, I will think about it. What I learned in this thread, from

people like you and others, many others in fact!, was that there were several ways a

member could benefit by being a member, and perhaps have others benefit sometimes

from my own experience.

 

Once I understood that I could get rid of the ratings (no way Roy, there were infuriating

me. They should not perhaps, I will agree, but there it is, I can't stand them...), photo.net

became a totally new experience.

 

Thank you for your thoughts once again, Roy. Reading you will always be a pleasure.

 

- RogerG