A corner

Ite missa est.

I am really tired in cause of you supposition. As a memeder, i rate in the way i whant, and the photos that i whant. I do not ned to be in the top pageges. I do not sale my pictures. Some other persons that have problems in cause of my exsistence sales photos. I repeat, i am a phisicist. This is my job.

There is no basis for claims of mate-rating--especially when the raters are anonymous.

 

It would be nice if commenters would confine their comments to the merits or defects of the photos, rather than to make unfounded accusations.

 

Muy buena foto, Maria. Lo siento por no hablar italiano. Me gustan sus fotos en alg?n idioma.

 

(I sure wish that the capacity to write diacritical marks were still with us. An occasional remark in another language besides English is not going to subvert the moral order. Is this an international site or not?)

Not unfounded. Easily found scenario: A party that rates Maria's pictures very high puts up a poor image. Maria immediately rates it 7/7. (When only one or 2 ratings are given at the beginning of a posting it is still traceable). A large number of her images have a massive number of ratings, waaaaay above the norm for the quality level of the image. A cross check shows problems. However, I am not a moderator, simply a paying participant. I find Brian's comment above factual. Sycophantic praise for a posted image that needs work is not productive for anybody. The image above has some merit. the Shenanigans going on to rate it high do not have merit.

i'am not so bad like you. I do not love to rate low a photo that i do not like. I simply skip to the other. I rate 7:7 the photo that i like very much, 6:6 the foto that i like and 5:5 good photos, nice photos. I am aducated ad i do not whant to offend someone that loves his owen works. You, and other people, in opposit, have like a precept, a way of life, to offend others. Look in my page during the growing up of rates and control if i do what you say. Only disgusting bad suppositions. Look at the pages of the really good photograpers on this site and you can look that, generally, thay have the same kind of rating.

John, I fully agree that there is a site-wide tendency to rate too highly, and I am a guilty party, even if I don't give as many sevens as some do. I disagree in seeing this as conspiratorial in most cases. I think that your remarks and Brian's are well-taken about uncritical fans, but I don't know how to solve that problem, and it seems to afflict all photos, not just those of people like Maria, who is very popular. (It's just more obvious in such cases, since the numbers are already high.) The situation for me is analogous to brand loyalty. I hate the Kodak forums on dpreview.com, for example, since most participants get too defensive in the face of justified criticisms of their cameras.

 

The fact is that most of us don't know how to give or take criticism very well, and I don't see any structural changes that are going to change that fact.

 

One excellent critic who was almost driven from the site by popular backlash was Marc Gouguenheim. Whatever else one may say of Marc, he always said exactly what was on his mind. We could truly use a few more like that.

 

Criticisms do not have to be harsh or personal, however, and I think that that is what bothers Maria. It bothers me at times as well. Somewhere between the put-down and adulation--that is where I wish that all criticisms would come down, but I don't see human nature changing anytime soon.

Since you took the time complain about constructive critism on this photo, where the heck are your comments on the photo?

Maria,

 

This is a beautiful capture! The composition is really crisp and the color, well...outstanding! The light peaking through the arch is what relly made it for me. Congrats, Ronnie

OK G.Z. I think the image has some merit, It needs a tiny bit of straightening. There are sections of this image/exposure shown separately in Maria's folder. There is enough content in the image for several other images as well. I'm not into cropping or anything like that and happen to like the slight intrusion of the wall on the R/H side. However, one area in front of the arched passageway is a bit underexposed, which often happens in scenes like this with bright light. Because of the way the buildings are joined together, I'm sure that exposure would always be a problem, i.e. shadows or very bright light. If Maria had the opportunity, reshooting it at different times, perhaps with a different lens could have some interesting results. It would be worth a roll of good film, with a slower speed and finer grain and perhaps putting the camera on a tripod.

6/6s on snapshots followed by defense against critique are what drove Marc away. If you can't imagine any alternative scenarios to reduce this sort of abuse, then you haven't read as many of my feedback posts as I thought.

Thank You John, constructive critique.

Carl, I worry and read about lots of things that matter. Ratings on photo.net do not matter to me. Have you posted on this topic?

LMAO, Ridiculously overrated average image! I won't increase its ratings by giving it the 4+4 it deserves.

I think that this sort of personal attack in ridicolous, expecially in adults persones. You do not like this photo? Rate as you prefer or do not rate and comment on what, tecnically, you do not like and i'll appreciate costrucctives comments.

Maybe if you keep only your first class pictures in your portfolio (what was suggested by Brian above) the "critics" will be cooler, there will be less missunderstanding and less personal attacks

I'm jealous not because of how good your pictures do here, but about how many critics you had received. More on one single photo than on my entire portfolio

And except for the overexposed part your picture is fine, no need to straighten except if you want to print it BIG

Mondiani, I presume that she should follow your lead in that regard (i.e., keep only the first-class pictures), especially as in, say, your "Striptease" folder?

 

I personally do not think that the present mass hyteria on both sides of this issue has anything at all to do with Maria's photos, rather, her popularity. None of that is her fault, and the issue of ratings should properly be taken up in a context that is clearly not ad hominem.

 

I've just gone through all 300 photos which are visible as having been rated highly by Maria. Yes, she rates a lot of pictures, and she rates high, but I see no evidence that her ratings are given on any other basis besides what she likes.

 

Judgments of motive are probably best left to God.

I'm on my way to do my own selection later after receiving more feedback...

Maria, this photo continues to intrigue me. I can see a very young Vito Corleone wandering these old streets.

 

I was wondering how it might look printed and matted on a black background.

Then, again, maybe not, but it seems that there is something that can be done to bring out the best in this photo. It has a certain atmosphere which for me is heightened by the sense of the early but already hot afternoon.

 

I am reminded all over again as to how personal and subjective aesthetic appeal is.

Thanks, my friends, for your honest and sincer support. You know me and know that my way of do is only the spirit of honest competion and mutual help on do better avery day. And thanks to Modiani too. I think that, in some part, you're rigt. But the photos on my portfolio are a continuus of my development, my progress and of the evolution in my photography.

Maria Conversano, July 10, 2004; 05:29 A.M.

I think that this sort of personal attack in ridicolous, expecially in adults persones. You do not like this photo? Rate as you prefer or do not rate and comment on what, tecnically, you do not like and i'll appreciate costrucctives comments.

 

I presume that this attack is directed at me Maria.

 

I did not mention anything but my impression of the image, and made no personal comment regarding you. Many other commentors have pointed out areas that the image could be improved on< Brian, Tim, John, and Dhiren plus others with regards to a different frame. A good image does not need anything more than a thin defining line to separate it from the background.

 

As for the exposure well it is underexposed in the shadow areas and overexposed in the highlights so I downloaded it and tried to get a more equal balance.(Seen Above) I did not say that I did not like the image, what I said was that it is only an average image and I still stand by that statement.

 

Erin, you have to weigh the words before write. Using "redicolisly" is like to say that all the people that rated this photo are redicolus. Thay are not! And is redicolus that nobody cancell this sort of uneducated way of do. If it was not in your intend to offend about 90 persones, you have to make your apology in respect of tham.

Exactly what Brian said.

Back to the photo: I have just viewed this photo on a friend's computer. On that monitor, my version is WAY too dark and contrasty, Erin's is too light and flat, and Maria's original is about right in terms of brightness and contrast--not at all what I would have said about the same versions viewed on my monitor at home, even though I never liked my own image.

 

I become skeptical that we can ever have a true on-line gallery, with consistent or meaningful ratings, if we are not seeing the same things.

 

I wonder if some kind of calibration page on PN might be a possibility.

 

I reject Erin's dictum that a good photo only needs a thin defining line to separate it from its background. If that were the case, the color of matting could always optimally be white, and that, to my mind, is ridiculous.

Framing and matting of images is primarily and historically for mounted and framed prints Lannie.

 

In high quality photographic essay books a thin line to seperate the image from the usually WHITE background is all that is required to present the image to its best advantage.

 

More recently, on websites, frames are photoshop or graphic design software embellishments and can improve a mediocre image and detract from an excellent one. I apologise for being not specific enough but a strong book print image or electronic file will stand on its own without the crutch of a frame.

 

If you doubt this check out the work of some of the really top class photographers here,

 

 

Emil Schildt,

http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?include=all&user_id=526277

 

Floris Andrea,

http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?include=all&user_id=772774

 

Fred Voucenk

http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?include=all&user_id=552657 (Narrow borders)

 

 

are three that spring to mind.