ghiga

<p>Sorry, I tried to read all the speeches, but it's hard. <br />I did not understand if you found a solution to this problem. <br />I have about 300 pictures already posted on photo.net with the resolution of 800x600 pixels. <br />It would be difficult and time consuming for me to reload all the photos in high resolution to enable them available for sale. And I do not even want to do, because I do not like posting pictures in high resolution. <br />You can not make sure that if I get a request for a print, I get an email that tells me, and then I can go to upload the photo in high resolution request? <br />It would be perfect!<br>

Thank you! <br />Ciao! Raffaella</p>

<p>Beautiful initiative, but why can not you send the prizes in Europe or other countries?<br /> Maybe asking for a contribution of shipping ...<br>

<br>

Thanks, ciao!<br>

Raffaella</p>

<p>Now I try to upload a shot.<br>

Ciao</p><div></div>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1665456">Harry Joseph</a> , your natural bi-chromatic shot is really great!<br /> <br /> Ciao, Raffaella</p>

<p>My cat "Nero" (black) taken with my Canon EOS 50D and the new Canon 18-200 IS zoom, @60mm. - ISO 160 - f/5 - 1/13 sec.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks for your replies, Josh and John!<br /> John, I don't have friends in the USA to whom send the (eventually) prize.<br /> It is a little complicated for me...<br /> But... I believe you, John! (QUOTE JOHN: "Go to it, and then when you win, I'll help you figure out what to do with your booty") and I will try to participate! :-D</p>

<p>Ciao, Raffaella</p>

<p>Thanks for your replies.<br>

I agree about the legal differences between the various states, but I believed that for a simple lottery there were no problems...<br>

Patience, I will not participate! :-(</p>

<p>Ciao, Raffaella</p>

<p>Hallo, I'm italian, and I'm member of photo.net from 2003.<br>

In my workspace page it appears the possibility to participate to some contests to win nice prizes.<br>

MPIX and TAMRON contests.<br>

It appears this phrase:</p>

<h3>This content is available to all registered photo.net users.</h3>

<p>But in the terms and conditions page I read: "<strong>MPIX does not ship prizes outside the United States</strong>"</p>

<p>The last is the "Tamron contest". And the problem is the same.<br>

I go to read the terms informations and I read: "<strong>Tamron does not ship prizes outside the United States</strong>".</p>

<p>Photo.net has many members in Europe, Asia, and others countries, but if the prizes don't are shipped outside the USA, how can we participate?</p>

<p>Thanks for the help.<br>

Ciao, Raffaella</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Sorry, my english is not so good, but I believe to understand that You have $800 excess to spend...<br>

Well, I really need a Canon 18-200 3.5/5.6 IS... It costs less than 800, but I can give to You my address to send it! :-D</p>

<p>Ciao!<br>

Raffaella</p>

<p>Sorry if I intervene in this argument. I tryed today to go to the page of imagePRO site.<br>

I noted a contraddiction. In my workspace page I found the advise: "Congratulations! As a current subscriber to photo.net you can now setup and manage your own ImagePRO site at Photography.com"<br>

But, if I click on the link: "<a href="http://photography.com/login" target="_blank"> Manage your ImagePRO site</a> " I go in the page and I read: "You must have a Premium account at Photo.net to register." It is real or it is only an incorrect phrase?<br>

I'm not gone on, becose today I don't have time, but surely I will try in another moment!</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Raffaella Lunelli (Ghiga 2)</p>

<p>P.S. Thanks to Josh and to all the components of the staff, that are working for us!</p>

I find very nice this new graphic of photo.net. It is more clear and easy to navigate.

I'm noted only a more slowness to open the pages. I hope this is only a transient problem.

Thanks for the work You are making!

Ciao

Raffaella (Ghiga 2)

<div></div>

I'm living in Italy.

 

I tryed to buy the ENGLISH version of Photoshop.

The U.S.A. price on-line is $. 649

 

The italian on-line price for the english version is ?. 826,80 that is $. 1.106,84

Without reasons!

 

And the same rapport exist for the others Adobe's products.

 

And I cannot order the program from the U.S.A. store becose it send me automatically to te italian store.

 

And if I buy the program directly in U.S.A., I cannot make the upgrades, and the license is not considered "valid" in Italy.

I will never buy Adobe's products!

 

I signed on the petition, but I believe it will not have solution.

Hallo, I'm not contrary to the existence of ADS in the photonet's pages.

But the problem is: they are too disturbing in this form! I hate the moving images in the page.

That "GNM" at the top of the page in continuous movement is really unbearable.

Every page I go to open it is there! My eyes are not happy of this.

The "EVENTUAL" presence of an ADS have to be DISCREET and NOT DISTURBING.

My reaction is to close the page immediately and to not stop on the photos.

If You can't change the kind of the ADS, and can't remove it, please, PUT IT TO THE END OF THE PAGE!

Note that if I'm disturbed by the ADS, NEVER I WILL GO TO SEE HIS SITE! And this is not good for the advertiser!

Thanks.

I wish to say some "thinking" about the changes of the site. I'm using Firefox.

I am a little doubtful:

 

1. The three added bands (links and right) on the page, are stealing space to the photos.

 

2. The text is too small and with difficulty readable.

 

3. In the "Photos" page of the users, the comments are not good distinct one from another: the space between the lines are "stranges".

The name of the auctor of the comment is more close to the end of the previous comment than to his comment.

 

4. The band with the name of the folder is displaced to the right, and is jutting out of the page (maybe this is correct for the graphic, but I don't know it).

 

5. If I go to see a photo, the gray band and the photo are displaced to the right too, and they are jutting out of the main band of the page.

 

6. I can't edit my comments. The olders and the news too.

 

7. Like the others, I think that the "Amazon" space is too big, and too disturbing posed into the comments.

 

These are only some notes about this change.

Thanks to the administrators for the work they are doing for us all.

Please, see the ratings to this photo: http://www.photo.net/photo/4342224

If You don't go, i say the resume: 3/3 3/4 4/4 7/7 ...

 

Wich meaning could I draw from that? In case like this the ratings are only an annoyance. Yes, I can ignore completely the ratings, but, then, why give the possibility to ratings? It is only a great loss of time.

I understand perfectly that a photo can like to one and not to another: but WITHOUT an explanation this is completely USELESS. This is the real problem.

 

I have another proposal:

 

Make THE COMMENTS OBLIGATORY: do You want to rate a photo? OK: You MUST LEAVE A COMMENT. Anonymous, too, but a comment. And it will be duty of the administrators to control that the anonymous comments are not offensive.

Thanks to all.

I'm sorry if I repeat some concepts, but my english is not so good and I couldn't read ALL the previous comments. I believe to have understood the sense.

 

I have a question for you all. I made a little control on my recent photos. From 31 March to 12 April I submitted to ratings AND comments 9 photos. ALL of them received in the first 1 or 2 minuts from 1 to 3 ratings, of value 3 or 4. And after, nothing or almost. The average of the all ratings to my 9 photos is O-4,19 and A-4,18.

 

But, my problem is not for these 3-4 ratings, the REAL PROBLEM for me is the number of COMMENTS 5 (FIVE) for 9 photos.

So, my problem is: are really my photos becomed suddendly so bad? So unworthy of a little comment? How can I know the level of my works if NOBODY (especially the 3-4 raters) gives to me a comment? An explanation?

 

Every time I give a rating, I give a comment too, and often, now, only a comment, becose the lost of value of the ratings.

 

In this case, maybe I must to leave the photography, and Photo.net for first.

 

I believe that the ONLY WAY to resolve the question of the 3/3 4/4 disturbing ratings is to make ALL THE RATINGS NOT ANONYMOUS!

 

Why not? So all will be more sensibilized and responsibilized on their actions.

Thanks for you kind attenction.

Sorry if I repeat this question, but maybe I posted it in an uncorrect

section. It is remained without answer from the administrators.

 

"When I go to see one of my folders, and active the option "DETAILS"

it appears under the photos the informations about them. But it could

be interesting and useful to have the indication of the DATE of the

LAST rating received. I have many shots, and I can't remember the

number of ratings of every of them. And if I don't have comments, but

only ratings, I don't know if I had new visitors to my photos. It is

possible to do? Thank You very much for the help. Ghiga 2"

 

If You go here, You can read some answers to it.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FsoZ

When I go to see one of my folders, and active the option "DETAILS" it

appears under the photos the informations about it. But it could be

interesting and useful to have the indication of the DATE of the LAST

rating received.

I have many shots, and I can't remember the number of rating of every

of them. And if I don't have comments, but only ratings, I don't know

if I had new visitors to my photos.

It is possible to do?

Thank You very much for the help.

Ghiga 2

Ahemmm.... :-) UNDERSTAND. (not anderstand), yeah. ciao!

Dear Brian, I like very much this new opportunity. I used it some times. I have only a question. It is (now or in the future) previewed the possibility to have a list of the personal e-card sent? A list from my portfolio and eventually another list of the card sent using other's photos?

 

Sorry for my poor english, I hope You anderstand my question. THANKS!

Ghiga 2

A little comment about the payment to photo.net. There are too many negative comments about it.

Without touching personal ideas or motivations.

I wanted to subscrive from a year, but the ONLY way to pay was the CREDIT CARD. I don't had it, and I DON'T COULD PAY.

I try to know if I could use the Bank Transfers or some other ways. NO. And so, only this year I taked a credit card and I could pay.

The administrators of this site could consider to give others possibility for the payment. Thanks.

Excuse me if I intervene in your discussion. Unfortunately I don't speak good english (and read too), but I belive to have understand the sense of the discussion.

My opinion about the 3/3 ANONYMOUS raters is that the problem is exactly there: in the word ANONYMOUS. If all the raters where clear, I belive that this problem where solved.

I belive that the honest 3/3 raters, in that case, will give an explanation of their votes. And if don't, I will can REQUEST an explanation.

The sense of PN have to be the improvement of the participatings, and this is possible only with the comments, suggestings and advices of the PN-people.

I don't consider too much the ratings, but if one of my shots receives no comments, I start to ask to me if it is really interesting or not.

I put here an example:

hhttp://www.photo.net/photodb/ratings-breakdown?photo_id=4025275

Why that two 3/3, if the others ratings are >= 5?

Maybe those raters hate the cats (or me... ;-)), but: why don't say it?

Thank You for your attention, CIAO!

Thank You, JC UKNZ, but I need a valuation about the two models if possible from an user of both. If I reed only the reviews, I am in confusion. Thanks for the suggestion about irfanview: I tried it and it is a really nice program. Ciao!

I have a big doubt! I need to buy a compact digicam, to have it always

with me: in my bag or in the pocket.

I have two candidates: Canon SD 500 (or 550) and Sony DSC P200.

They are both very good (dp-review, steve-digicams, imaging-resource).

But: in the photo-samples (especially in the portraits), the Sony

appears to be a little too soft, and to have less sharpness and more

elaborated pixels. But it has no cromatic aberration, and less

distorsion at the edges.

On the contrary, Canon has more distorsion, high C.A., but more

sharpened images.

Question: I like a little more the Sony, but it is possible to have

more sharpeness in the images with a parameter regolation or not?

Thanks to all for your help.

Ghiga 2