n_p

<a href="http://kmpi.konicaminolta.us/eprise/main/kmpi/content/cam/cam_manual/cam_manual_Attachments/srt200_2.pdf"> Here's the link you need.</a>

This question has nothing to do with Photo.net feedback, but I guess you're only new at this. <br>Go <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005hAd"> here!</a>

Read <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007fIf"> this. </a>

Scott, read <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006pta"> this thread. </a>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007fIf"> This thread </a> puts this issue into the proper perspective. Don't get too excited about any of the PN numbers.

Goodnight, Vincent.

Tried accessing from the front page. This is what shows up on my monitor. Perhaps yours needs calibrating? ;-)

Just checked. VKT is still in the TRP.

Brian, I very much appreciate that you don't approve of members like me, who use nondescript handles. But exactly how many hours of quality sleep do you get on most nights?

"You're suggesting these outages are by design?"<p>No, I'm sure that is not the case, but when new photo.net hardware is commissioned, one has to expect some teething problems. Just going by the last couple of days, these problems seem to occur mainly <i>outside</i> normal business hours.<br> While Brian is on the job (and I'm not suggesting he works 9 to 5), PN seems to be zipping along just fine.

Good response Brian, but I can tell you that a "view" count is added every time your image shows up as a thumbnail, small, medium, or large image anywhere on photonet, when accessed by anyone. So don't get too excited by the numbers. This includes any ratings that you might receive. They're only numbers and have no bearing whatsoever on how "great" your image might be.<br>Look for meaningful comments only and <b>always</b> keep in mind that you are competing with more than 1300+ other uploads every day.

"...to help me figure out if it's me or the site..."<p>

That really easy, all you have to do is check other sites on the Net while you're online and you'll soon find out that it is this site only.

"The outages certainly have caused me to reflect on the amount of time I was spending on the site."<p>

LOL! Brian. Like I've suggested earlier in other threads, you could always go out and take some photos.

I'm sure that I <a href="http://www.photo.net/shared/whos-online"> saw </a> Brian Mottershead logged into photo.net around 3:00am on Tuesdaymorning. Most likely related to getting the servers up and running again. All I see is people complaining, but nobody ever takes the trouble of thanking the site administration for missing out on valuable sleep and keeping this site going 24 hours each day. Server error? Go and take some photos instead.

A lot of vindictive <i>"people"</i>, of course. Fingers not keeping up with thought process.

<i>"Bottomline is again, one man's meat may be another man's poison."</i><br>

Whilst I agree with that observation because it supports my sentiments voiced above, over time, I think that you will change your mind about that, Henry.<br><i>

"my point is, there is no intentional under or over rating, and i think i speak not only for myself."</i><br>

I beg to differ. There are a lot of vindictive in this place. This is unfortunate, but a fact of life at photonet. You've been here since January, just give it some time and you'll find out what I mean.

Pardon the pun, but my assumption is that most of us post images in this place to get some sort of exposure. Good images will hopefully attract either enough ratings or comments - or both - to rise to the top pages of the gallery. Either way, I don't care about the deviations in the numbers. Everybody looks at images with different eyes. When you come across half a dozen or more 6/6, 6/7 or 7/7 in a row I often have to question the impartiality of the rater.<br>Like Greg, I enjoy looking at most images and mostly appreciate the interaction with other photographers. Remember to enjoy your valuable time spent here. Otherwise I suggest that you actually wasted that time.

Please don't lump me in with the ad hominem crowd, but I too find it fascinating how much value many attribute to the stupid numbers game that takes place on this site. If you're a statistician, maybe this is an interesting excercise indeed, but really, the quality photographic discourse on this site has been dead for a long time now.<br>My portfolio is full of photo.net metaphors. My problem entirely, of course.

The sooner you impose daily upload limits, the better.

<h3>It Is What It Is</h3><p>

(written by Stephen Bruton and John Fleming)<br>

(performed by the Highwaymen)<br>

(inspired by �[� Z's comment above)<p>

I've been obnoxious<br>

I've been unconscious<br>

I've been all kinds of things that are hard to spell<br>

I've been unruly<br>

Speakin' truly<br>

I've been so cool I couldn't hardly even stand myself<br>

I've been a monster<br>

Without a sponsor<br>

I've been Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde<br>

I've been a goner<br>

I've been a loner<br>

And when my mixture was right<br>

Hell, I'm a nice bunch of guys<br>

<b>(Chorus)</b><br>

I am what I am 'cause I ain't what I used to be<br>

'Cause it is what it is but it ain't what it used to be<br><p>

But seriously... I've only changed my identity twice and have no intention of changing it again, ever!<br>Photo.net is indeed the best photographic resource on the Web and will continue to be so. As far as I'm concerned this issue is just a lot of white noise.<br> Better tune in on posting some thoughtful critiques and learning about photography in other areas of PN.

<b><i>The one thing we all know is that the only comments we wil get from "the management" is "why we ain't changing".</i></b><p>

Louis, you obviously haven't read <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007Ro0"> this thread. </a>Photo.net administration is working to <i>improve</i> this site whenever possible.<br>

Russ, I don't think that you should be allowed to upload multiple images. That is, not unless you are a photo.net subscriber/patron.<br>Brian, I would like to thank you for finding the time to consider implementing this proposed change. I think that Bob Atkins summed it up nicely last year in <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005eJF"> this thread.</a>

Have to agree with the above and am still in favor of limiting uploads to the Gallery for all members to one image per day; more for patrons. <br>Sorry for being off topic, Keith.

No moaning from me...<br> I find it always amusing how people will only look at the number of images you've rated and choose to completely ignore your tremendous forum contributions.

Here's a <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0072oD"> link </a> for you.