niranjn

"Proof"? Of course there isn't any, John.

Philip's strong statement that this site will be more focused on learning from

now on, is encouraging. To that end, I would suggest that the site do whatever

it can to encourage critiques. There have been many suggestions (reviving

critique circles, curators/experts, paid critics) in the recent past -- I

won't rehash them. I want this thread to have a narrow focus and consider one

of the biggest problems in getting adequate number of (quality) critiques ---

the sheer number of uploads and critique requests, and the relatively smaller

number of critics.

 

It may be a good idea to *drastically* throttle down the number of images that

are being submitted for ratings and critique. It could become one per day per

subscribed member, for instance. The stringent limit will also force folks to

consider their photos carefully and edit/cull *before* submission. The quality

of the critique request gallery will be improved, and there will be more

critiques. It will certainly be more educational.

 

This will certainly turn off some of our users. In the past, when financial

performance was the main benchmark, I wouldn't have suggested this, but now,

perhaps it's feasible?

 

Thoughts?

Inspire them by showing them excellent photographs.

Ben, the line that I quoted and responded to, came from you! No?

Ben> I can imagine some people getting very unpleasant about a crit they do not agree with.

 

If there is (and I think there is) a critical mass of thin-skinned folks, it will dampen the enthusiasm of even the casual critiquer, let alone the "experts".

David M> The point I am making is that people would rather see bad nudes rather than bad children. This is called natural selection.

 

Most people would rather see bad nudes than bad images from any-other-genre. That's the way it is.

 

We are conflating different issues in this thread, each of which may or may not be a problem; may be worth addressing or not: (1) there are nudes that can't be filtered out during viewing (2) there are *vulgur* nudes (3) there are *too many* nudes (4) there are *bad* nudes. While the first three could be legitimate issues to talk about, the last one is not, IMHO. The majority of images from any genre, suck. Fortunately, the subject makes viewing bad nudes less painful than a bad street shot or a bad abstract. YMMV.

Brian was nervous about implementing a lot of ideas because of their impact on "legacy" data and the risk of losing backwards compatibility. Now that Philip & co. are doing wholescale changes, this will be a good time to change the ratings system (and the ratings based display) drastically. Since Philip has said that the primary goal of the site is "learning", my hope is that the whole ratings thing will be buried; the ratings based pages will not be prominent; he will come up with a better way of folks finding more interesting images; he will encourage critiques and in-depth discussions on the image pages.

 

I wish we could re-start discussions on: (1) reviving "critique circles" or some such feature, (2) curators, and a curator-selected display on the front page, (3) Picture of the Day, etc.

Carl> Forum posts come up in searches more by subject than by author. I don't think there's even a remote chance that a prospective employer would find this thread.

 

They would, if someone uses the name in plain text. I could say, "Carl R00t (spelt correctly), ...", it will show up.

 

Even if it doesn't now, we should anticipate that search engines will get smarter and smarter. I understand that it may be to a professional photographer's benefit to use a real name; however, for those for whom photography is strictly a hobby, there is risk. Risk could be from many sources -- prospective employers, stalkers, etc. -- as others have pointed out eloquently. The source of the risk is that your real name is attached to your words, and those can now matched with other words that you may have said in other websites etc. While you are fine with your contributions to this site being public, you may not want data mining software to pick up other stuff, inferring all kinds of things along the way.

 

Sometimes when I web search my name and run into USENET postings from more than a decade ago, it makes me nervous. Not because of what I said, but because, someone who doesn't know me can come to arbitrary conclusions based on stereotypes (that members who post in those USENET groups have in common, say). I might just be paranoid, but stuff on the internet lives long, way too long.

 

Philip's comments about using real names have all been snarky and without the gravity needed for this topic. I am sure he understands the privacy concerns, but has (probably long ago) decided that these arguments are without much merit. So be it.

1. Retire "New Answers" (which often hasn't worked properly for me and for others). Label thread activity next to the thread title. You could show # of comments in thread plus timestamp of last comment.

 

2. Not a software enhancement, but a moderator suggestion. A lot of folks don't put a proper subject/title on the thread. The moderator should fix the title and inform the OP.

 

3. When displaying thumbnails, let the user configure how many he wants to see in a page. I'd rather just wait for a long page to load (doing other work in the meanwhile) and scroll down a large list of thumbnails. Others may prefer to click "next page" every so often.

 

4. Make it easy to quote the OP's or other prior responders' text, while you are drafting your response.

 

5. Make it easier to write stuff without having to directly use HTML. That is, have a GUI-based way of generating simple HTML (just a few things, like bold-faced font, italics, paragraph break, hyperlink, imgsrc etc.).

 

Thanks,

 

-Niranjan.

 

PS: OP = 'original poster'

Philip, this thread doesn't begin to describe the hundreds of issues and proposals that have been brought forth in many threads over the years. Best you read through them, they are all archived. I would recommend the "ratings normalization" solution that Brian almost implemented but backed down because of (IMHO, misguided) criticism. There are many such.

 

Your first point is fine. Clamping down on multiple bogus accounts by making it a little bit difficult to create accounts, is a fine measure. Giving new registrands read-only access to the gallery is probably another good idea. By participating in the site (posting photos, rating, commenting and forums), they can qualify for read-write access, etc.

 

My advice is to reduce the reward for high ratings and the punishment for low ratings. You can probably bunch them up into buckets -- like a grade, not GPA. Don't use a strict sorting order. Jumble them up. Make the ratings average invisible in the TRP pages. This should still give you a satisfactory display of well-above-average photos to show in the TRP. Use "fairness" policies and ensure that the same photographer or the same genre doesn't hog all the limelight. By reducing the reward, you can sleep easier; trying to prevent users from gaming the system is a losing strategy.

While this sounds like a good idea (I remember Photosig or some other site having a "most controversial" view of their gallery), I fear that looking at the most controversial pictures may not be particularly interesting. It would comprise of (1) shocking nudes, (2) protest images (3) photos by clique-ish photo.net members with many vocal friends and silent (but ratings wielding) non-friends, and (4) well-executed but highly manipulated images. Won't be a compelling click.

 

A better view would be a "most discussed" view of the gallery. Some factor that would capture both (1) the length of comments, so that photos with a lot of one-line comments but nothing much else are underweighted, and (2) the number of comments, so that John Crosley's pictures wouldn't hog the entire list because of factor#1 (:-). Of course, quantity doesn't imply quality...

I'll second the recommendation for Adorama. The prints on their premium luster paper are great.

For "most" photos, the broad bin in which I place it does not change after the first few seconds. You might think that this photo or that may require careful study to decide whether it is below average or significantly above average, but that's uncommon, especially for accessible (to the critic) genres.

The cost of the card is probably far less than the cost of a failure at a later date. It will work fine until you take that absolute must-have shot and then poof!

 

Just chuck the card.

The percentage is less relevant (not counting the extra time spent on wasted shots, since you are enjoying shooting anyway) than: (1) is your absolute number of keepers down? and (2) are your digital keepers worse in some way than the ones in your past analog history?

> Any reviews on that Casio Exilim 850?

 

There are reviews for the 750 out there on dpreview.com. If would be fair to assume that 850 would be similar.

 

Decide on the "compactness" criterion to have an effective shortlist -- or else you'd be overwhelmed by the number of choices that are available. I did a search (my criteria are probably different from yours) a while ago and have decided on the Fuji F30 -- unreleased, unreviewed, but hopefully a great low ISO performer. Go to dpreview.com, plug in your parameters and see what the search page brings up.

Whoa. That indeed was fast. Great job, thanks Brian.

> To get a perhaps more genuine idea of the pictures worth it would, on occasion, be worth by-passing the audience who have no interest, or even have an active dislike, of particular genres.

 

It really depends on what you are measuring. Your method would just filter out *negative* bias.

> if art has to be explained why its important, is it really art?

 

We are not talking about art, just about photography.

 

I like the idea. I remember in the Leica Forum, someone (Rene Braun?) once started a series of critiques from a Magnum Photo book. I think a link should be good enough. It will be a great learning experience. Of course, the masters and the genres should be varied to keep it interesting. What is the forum going to be called -- COW (classic of the week?)?

 

No comparison between this effort and the "trick" experiment that another poster did with an Eggleston a few days ago.

I agree with Jamie W. Wireless (in all walks of mobile electronics) is the future, and including WiFi in digicams is the first baby step. It will quickly morph into something more useful. 5-10 years from now, tethered connections (USB x.0 or whatever) from digicams will not be common at all.

 

At this point, it does seem a bit pointless, since I don't find plugging my camera in (or taking my slides in for processing for that matter) to be a cumbersome exercise, but it will change.

 

Wireless power would be cool.

I have no empirical evidence for it, but I assume that this is an efficient marketplace for comments and ratings. That is, higher densities of comments and ratings will have a strong correlation with a higher number of critique requests and uploads.

Sure, why not! Count me in.

Excellent response to Ben's challenge. Let's see if this is at all statistically significant...Brian can let us know in a few months if the average # of critiques per photo has shot up.

 

A consistent 5 per day is too much for me, but I promise to be more active (I had taken a break from this site for a while).

Thanks all for your advice. I will consider the Fuji that you recommended, Bengt and Rob. I will probably wait for a bit since I am in no hurry.

 

JC> Most cameras will satisfy you if you work out how to use them to their fullest ability and adjust to cover their failings.

 

JC, I agree. However, the more effort I have to put towards adjusting to a tool's failings, the more likely it is that I will leave it at home and take another tool (SLR) instead. The key considerations for the P&S here are that it be compact (pants-pocket'able) and have minimal shutter lag; prefocusing does help with the latter.

 

Once I end up getting a digicam, I will post a short note in this thread.

Hi,

 

After giving my Canon A70 to my nephew, I am back in the market for

a digital P&S. I would like some suggestions for a short-list, which

I will investigate in detail. These are my requirements, in

descending order of priority:

 

0. Minimal shutter lag. Primary purpose is to take street shots and

also pictures of a fast-moving toddler. I hated the shutter-lag of

the A70.

 

1. Compact. The A70 was a bit too bulky and heavy for my trouser

pocket.

 

2. Large LCD, preferably 2.5" or better.

 

3. 6MP or better.

 

4. Fast lens (f/2.8 or better at 50mm equiv) and/or a usable ISO 400.

 

5. Aperture priority, exposure compensation, built-in flash that I

can turn off.

 

Thanks!