Bamboo Leaves

Bamboo leaves in window light. Handheld to cause movement.

it s a pitty that you ve got camera shake, I used to have the same problem but now sort it out with IS lenses.

Mehmet,Thank you very much for the comment. This image is an experiment. I have complained several times on the Forum that Photo.net has a built in system for burying images that reach 10 "ratings" so that they no longer get seen by the general viewership. It's only images of photographers who have formed "social" relationships here who achieve a higher number of ratings which then keeps the image in the "Top Photos" display section, providing more exposure and more ratings and comments.

For those of us whose images rapidly generate ratings, but not "attention" from "friends," our images never get more than about 10-15 ratings and get very few comments. I would like to get more attention. I don't care what ratings I get, I just like feedback.

As an experiment to "test" whether it is the quality of my images that is the problem, I posted this image. It's really not a photograph that I planned, composed or have any feelings about. It's an accidental shot that happened as I was setting up! I wasn't looking through the lens or even paying any attention to the camera. It's out of focus, there is awful camera movement for the slow shutter and long lens, the exposure was way off and I had to "rescue" it in Photoshop, making it grainy and posterized. It certainly does have an abstract quality, but that is pure dumb luck. This image could have been made by a chimpanzee, playing with the camera. (Now I'll get complaints that I am disparaging chimpanzees)

It got just as many ratings in the same period of time as any of my "real shots." It's interesting that the ratings are much more uniform for this image than my others. I frequently get 1s and 2s with no explanation at all as to what has made the image "Bad." Frankly, other than an offensive shot of someone being tortured, a picture of bodily function, poorly exposed, grainy, OOF, I really don't understand how an image can be "Bad." That this shot got decent ratings says volumes about any rating process.

That tells me that one of two things is probably true.

1. All my images are no better than an accidental shutter trip.

2. The PN display system severely penalizes anyone who has not established a network of friends to respond to his/her images outside the "Critique" section.

I choose to believe #2. I'll take this down soon. I just may repost it with this full explanation. I doubt anybody reads the photographer's comments anyway when rating an image in the Critique section. We'll see.

VL

I am not agreat amateur of 'flower' macro but this one has quite an audacious crop and a 'liquid' texture that make me think to an aquarelle in a japanese-chinese style... I imagine a 'kanji' signature in red in the lower right corner.

Yes, Bamboo leaves do suggest such forms, or perhaps such forms are derived from the shape of bamboo leaves. But did you read above?

VL

And now you have 11 I would rather not have rated this picture, since I try to only rate pictures that I like and can rate highly (cuz of all the fragile egos around her), but since you were drawing attention to yourself (in the feedback forum), I thought I'd take a look. I like several of your other pictures, but this one just doestn't do it for me. I see some out of focus leaves, without any central focus or point to draw the eye to.

Arnie,

Thank you very much for the reply. But why are you critiquing this image as though it has any validity? It is an accidental exposure!!!!! That's my whole point!!!!

Did you read the explanation above?

VL

What is the subject? There is not one leaf which is correctly in focus (imho) and this make difficul to me identify the subject. You titled this shot "Bamboo Leaves" but at least you must use a more accurate DOF otherwise this looks just some unsharpen green with anything interesting. I would also add that the ISO 200 here has produced some grain that u could easely remove via PS. Hope this helps.

OK, so I'll apologize, I read the first two paragraphs (which I think have much validity), and then my mind just wandered off...so, I have the attention span of a 5 yr old LOL. But, I do agree that absent, a network of friends or followers, because of the way the system is set up, you will rarely get more than more than 10-15 ratings...me, I'd rather have comments than ratings, but that is whole different issue.

Venicia - do not remove this photo - its clearly shows how this system works :). Best regards, Mark

Arnie and Mark,

Thanks for the replies.

Michele,

Thanks. Please read my long explanation near the top of the Comments area.

VL

Venicia, yes I've read your comments... but I think that what you want is what many people, especially amateurs (I've also read that you are a pro..) want too here... so welcome on board!... at least you found an additional way of getting attention using the feedback forum...

:o))

dont expect too much, give a bit and you might make some good encounters ...

Venicia. When I started showing my work here (couple years ago) I was hoping not only get a real critique but also help in evaluation of my work. Neither happened. Place is dominated by people who believe they work is absolutely the best and many of them exchange 7s between them. After a while I think they really believe they are the best on top pages. I do not think you want a critique from them as they will either lie to get 7 from you or I think they do not know much about photography so what kind of help you can get?

 

In fact one of my photos here (with lowest ratings) received gold medal in HASSELBLAD AUSTRIAN SUPER CIRCUIT 2004 this year. If I only use the *help* from here I would never sent it.

 

As you can see feedback here can be very misleading. Best regards, Mark

 

Someone with a sense of humor around here! I KNEW there had to be one.

You have no idea how much I cull through my images after each shoot looking for that Happy Accident called correct focus! I'd be dangerous if I could increase my average.

I think I have pretty much worked my way through this little snit. I feel ever so much better now.

I'm curious Lex, dear. Just what IS a "Perpendicularity Consultant?"

VL

of an abstract painting that was shown to a group of art critics. The critics were enraptured by the painting, going on and on about the artist's unique vision, his use of color, his minimalist approach, his willingness to throw out all the old conventions and create something bold and fresh. It turns out that the "artist" was a horse who'd had a paintbrush tied to his tail, and an easel strategically positioned near his rear.

 

Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean the painting was bad.

 

 

Venicia, the subject of your 'whine' (as you described it on the forum) is a valid one, but it is also one which has been addressed many times before, by many different people, without resolution. My opinion is that you are right: if you get yourself a clique, you will get more attention :-)

"It is an accidental exposure!!!!! That's my whole point!!!! Did you read the explanation above?"

 

Well, I did read the explanation above. So, what exactly is your point? Are you saying that this is automatically a bad photo because YOU know you took it by accident? Are you saying that the only merit behind any photo is given by the intention of the photographer? Good intentions = Good photos? You clearly have preconceived ideas about what deserves high ratings and/or positive critique. The system is certainly not perfect, far from it; but please explain what gives you the certainty that in a perfect system this photo should have received less critiques and/or lower ratings than the rest of your portfolio? What exactly makes you think that in a perfect system everybody should have recognised this photo as an accident? Finally, for what it matters, what makes you think that in a perfect system people should read your explanations before expressing their feelings towards an image that has been offered for rate/critique?

 

Amicably,

 

 

that was an accidental exposure too and I happen to like it... read the thread too ...

Stefano,

Well you HAVE missed my point (which is becoming less and less important). I have said nothing about HIGH ratings or POSITIVE comments. How did you misread that I did? I complained that the PN system frequently "buries" images after they get 10 ratings (of any kind) unless the photographer has engineered a way to get attention otherwise (some claim I have accomplished that end now).

YES, most emphatically I think everyone should read whatever comment the photographer has made. YES, most emphatically, I believe every photographer should comment about what he meant to accomplish or a description of his methods. It adds enormously to the appreciation of the image. The more abstract the image, the more such information usually helps.

Is this ALWAYS the case? No. Obviously not. If I view a wide angle shot of tidepools in the setting sun with foreground rocks receding into mirrors of wet sand, fantastically colored sky and sea, it is obvious the artist meant to show the viewer a wide angle shot of tidepools in the setting sun with foreground rocks receding into mirrors of wet sand, fantastically colored sky and sea. Many abstracts are perfectly acceptable as "stand alone" also. But the artist's words add understanding and enjoyment. It is often impossible to intelligently critique an image without asking, "What did you intend to say here?"

No, I do NOT subscribe to the philosophy that every work of art conveys its meaning simply by virtue of the fact that it exists. Every single one of Ansel Adams' images or Galen Rowell's images DO stand alone. However, their wonderful descriptions of their experiences while making their images has become as much a prt of the value of their work as the images themselves. Adams' description of the making of "Moonrise over Hernandez, New Mexico," his most purchased work, is required reading for anyone hoping to grasp the passion and intelligence of the man, and the meanings of that image.

I appreciate your comments. Thank you for taking the time. I got YOUR attention. Didn't I? I don't care whether someone likes my work or blasts it. I don't care whether someone agrees with me or disagrees. I just LOVE the opportunity to share viewpoints. Not to argue. To talk.

VL

I have to disagree that establishing a base of friends is the best way to get ones posts seen. I believe it is ones comments and becoming involved- which it appears you are doing very well at. The friends are a side benie.

It's inflow = outflow.

 

Knicki

 

addendum- I actually have been giving this thread a bit of thought. Have you taken a look at the picture this group? It might be worth looking into or joining.