Romance

what do people think? I took this by putting the rose on a box so i could

control the light source.

Ian, i have just gone through your portfolio read your bio, saw your big fish......but what really left the impression is the ratings you give. i have never seen anyone give more 1s and 2s then anything else. you must either look at some really shit images, or have standards that are totally unrealistic. As to this image, to start with the word "ROMANCE" seems a bit silly as your stating the obvious. Usually the meaning of red rose, is either love, or romance. The rose itself could be a bit better focused, and those two white dots definitely need cloned out.

Good advice on those white dots thanks Roger.

 

With critiques I'm always positive and try to suggest things that may help but I do like to at least write something more than a simple well done.

 

On ratings I guess I'm hard but fair. I give a lot of 7's but I do give a lot of 1's as well. I will sit and rate photos for an hour and just do them one after the other, I dont pick and choose, I rate them as they come. I rate nudes as well and photos in a total category selection. If they lack composition, lack clarity and are not original then they get a 1 if they are good they get a 7 in both. It just turns out the average is lower I guess Roger.

 

If i think I can help I will put a suggestion in comments but i dont see the benefit of just telling everyone they are great whhen they are not - that's what flickr is for.

 

Thanks againf for the advice roger, I'm off to fix my dots.

hello Ian,

 

Perhaps what you call a lot and what i call a lot are two different things, but your, "lot of sevens" is actually a total of 27 for originality, and 23 for Aesthetics. Where as if we add up all your ones and twos they come to 234 for originality, and 241 for aesthetics. Now i would call those numbers, "a lot of negatives" at least in comparison to your sevens.

 

You and i rate images differently, i usually only open image if it appeals to me, so it has advantage right from the start. As to your last comment, "If i think I can help I will put a suggestion in comments but i dont see the benefit of just telling everyone they are great whhen they are not - that's what flickr is for"

I dont think its a matter of telling anyone they are great, but it is important that you respect ones work. A one here is considered to be very bad, and a two as bad, a three is below average. Most people scream at the 3/3ers they are legendary on this site.

 

Your own images rate a bit lower then 5.5 which is good to very good, you have never been rated either a 1 or a 2. I just dont understand with the ratings you get that you give generally such lousy ratings. The average rating given by you is 3.07 for aesthetics and 3.3 for originality, i must tell you that is what most of us here would call the bottom of the scale. I have never seen anyone within a point of you for low scores.

 

It is now very late here in little old New Zealand, and i am tired. I shall go to bed and hopefully wake up in the morning and come back and see where you have redeemed your, "wicket ways" and turned into the seven fairy.

 

hope you have removed the dots !

 

roger

Thanks for the guideance on the rating scale. As I said i dont pick and choose which photos I rate. I just let them come one at a time and rate every one for a periosd of time. Good, bad or ugly. I hope by being what I consider faif people will comment more on my work and i will learn.

 

While you were up working out my stats last night I took your feedback and when back and fixed the rose. I took all the blemishes off and fixed the white dots as well as removing the romance word. It's much better now and thanks for the advice.

 

I dont think I'll change my rating scale and I'll continue to give advice to the poorer photos rather than just compliment the great ones.

 

Thanks again for your help Roger, any suggestions are much appreciated.

you seem to be stuck on my ratings of others photos, or the compliments i give to them. that tells me you have never taken the time to read any of my critiques. as i said i only look at images that interest me and mostly it is all flowers. its also how i have earned my crust for the past 8 years, marketing flower images. my "well dones" are meant more as a acknowledgment from one photographer to another. you see there are many different levels of skills here on p/n. there are photographers here that have forgot more than you and i shall ever know. then there are the ones that have just bought a camera and joined p/n. i have worked as and been around a lot of photographers for more years then i like to remember. to me its all about the eye, you either have it or you don't. people with out the eye can still develop into good photographers. but always the special ones see things just that little bit differently, i guess that is what makes them special. so that is the range of photographers one can find here on p/n.

 

your 1s and 2 ratings are a insult to your fellow members. you say you really like to give advice, thats fine but for the advice you dish out what qualifications do you have?? all those 1s and 2s you give out make you look like a jerk, and no one is going to want to have anything to do with you. it should say something to you that you have no 1s and 2s yourself. people are here to learn or just show their works not be cut to bits by some one who seems to be living in his own little dream world. i really can't thing of anything else to say. take the time to smell the roses sometime.....roger