Untitled

It must make them feel better... :)

I think its ENVY. If someone is trashing your photos, you can report abuse.

They use this web to express their anger, and you happened to be one of their victims, there are a whole bunch of them scrolling the galleries. And top/worth photographers seems they already have a group of buddies, and don't even take a peek at others' pics. But yes, what you say is amazingly true.

Cheers for the idea! 7/7

... I have an entire folder devoted to dealing with the 1/1 raters who leave no comments.... you'll find it here:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=334574

 

There IS a way to remedy this situation.... but we must be brave...

Thank you for this. I can respect an favourable rating or comment from a good photographer but it doesn't help getting one from the not-so-good.

I guess it's an inferiority complex or something

Thanks again for this!

just look at the folders of the people who rate this low

They are small like like their banal pictures...

that is so true!, that pisses me off too

Yes it's sad, and with no comment it's even more frustrating

... and never comment...

Very simple. They are not photographers, and do not understand photographers minds. Certainly, they do not understand photojournalism, nor have any sense of what a photograph means. If you want high ratings, just post photographs of tits, bums and ladys bits.

 

The problem is, I think, that, when I joined the community, you had to make a comment, before you could post a 1, 2 or 7 rating. Now they have stopped that. I have tasked them about this, and they said that the comments usually added no more than the rating. Also, having made a comment, you can delete it. I would like to see the requirement for a comment restored, because you have to do a lot more on your computer to make the rating. That way, we would know whether the rating had a serious rationale behind it. If it says crap, and the rating is 1/1, then you will know that you can ignore it.

 

Personally, I always try to make a constructive comment, before I rate an image.

 

Perhaps I should give this a 1/1 rating. Instead I will give it 7/7 in sympathy for your sentiments.

 

Here is my constructive comment. You could make a much stronger image by getting a mischievous lady, get her to stand with her legs apart, back to you, bending down, and write the message on her backside, and post a photograph of that.

 

Also, I thought that NPH was a high speed, low saturation negative film. So it should be C41.

I totally agree with my colleagues!!!

To be disliked by a creep is a compliment. I would wonder if Hitler wanted me to be his buddy.

I guess my pictures must be really crappy, cause I get crappy ratings from everyone.

 

PS- why waste your time processing film do do something like this... I could have did this with notepad (start/accessories/notepad;)

 

Becuase they "know" what a good photo is...

Just remember, it is normal for best dressed man of the year to be in the running for worst dressed, if you are provoking such extreme reaction (i.e. low scores), you must be doing something right, otherwise they wouldn't even notice your photo's. Anyway, I'm off to look at your gallery now, and comment on (my opinion) your best and worst.

Let see:

 

Lee Goodwin's pictures are actually pretty nice as far as I'm concerned.

 

Gudmundur Ludwigsson has nice pictures too.

 

Kevin Brogle only has 2 macros and they look prety good.

 

Sorry, but Ray House has a damn fine portfolio too.

 

So does John Oliver.

 

James Brodwolf's stuff looks good as well.

 

I can't comment on mine, but judging from the ratings... well, it appears that mine are crappy!

 

So with the obvious exception, at least in this case, I'm afraid your comment does not hold merit.

 

:)

I like the large font size, but it lacks emotion. Your initial letter needs to be capitalized, also.

Of course, the logical extension of this thought is "Anyone who rates my pics low must be a crappy photographer themselves, and so their low rating should be ignored." : )

I agree with Stephen H, your font work could be improved. Personally, I think using ?!? at the end would have more impact; the exclamation point would imply your anger/frustration, while still maintaining the question format. :>)

I question your techinical details on this shot. It doesn't look processed at all! In fact I suspect it was done on one of those new fangled high tech computer machines. While I agree with the sentiment I have to rate this low for aesthtics. I think more thought could have gone into font choice, not to mention formatting. I also take offense with the word "pics" being abbreviated, as any serious photographer would call them "Photographs" or "Works of Art" etc. While this is certainly an original message, I'm struggling with rating its originality, as I suspect it's not a photograph at all, but merely a hoax. Perhaps I should rate it highly to boost its visibility among fellow photo.net patrons to get its poignant message out there. On the other hand, it's not a photograph so how can I possibly rate it as such? Oh the dilema! Oh heck alright...I'll give it a 7/7!

 

All kidding aside, I REALLY do have the same feeling towards those rascals who rate extremely low then leave NO comment and to boot have less than average pictures of their own, or even worse yet NO pictures posted at all!

 

Nice grab 7/7

 

Cheers,

 

Todd

 

PS have you tried a bolder font or cropping a little tighter? :)

Well personally, I feel the Courier font gives a photojournalistic twist to the image, albeit a little outdated. It's a nice B&W, but I'm missing the subtle range in tonality normally present in such work, perhaps if you had used a drop shadow but then the effect would've been too soft I fear. Aesthetically speaking, I would perhaps have justified your text for perfect symmetry unless that wasn't your intent. All lower caps and using colloquialism for the word "photographs" might be considered sloppy but I'll dismiss it in view of the "story-telling" content of the image.

;-)

It's because the rating they gave to you is already the highest rating they ever had.

The ones who've given me the worst ratings are people who haven't uploaded any pic's at all! This really bugs me! I know it's a bit extreme, but I'd much rather we had a system where only people who are serious enough about this great art form to pay the measly $25 p.a. subscription could rate and comment on other people's work.

 

Thanks for bringing this issue to so many people's attention! Perhaps the adminstrators of the site will take some notice of the depth of feeling that's been expressed here!

 

Kind regards, Chris

Very original...