tony_p4

I notice that there's more and more reference here to making this a full paying site. That's perfectly fair and as for various reasons I cannot be a fee paying member, I bid you good-bye and thank all those here who have helped me advance my photography! :-) Tony

HP5+ is a wonderful film that can be used and abused in all sorts of ways and still produce fantastic results. I'd go with the details Pedro has posted but make sure you use the Perceptol as recommended.

Before you try anything get yourself on a business course!! Photography is the same as any other job in that if you don't have business knowledge and experience you have very little chance of success. I'm sure it's not the answer you where looking for, but business is business and life is life! Some people will succeed no matter what but the rest of us have to start from the beginning.

Neil,

 

"What we can do about this, I have no idea! Do people even think that something should be done about it??"

 

I have no inspirational idea's as to what can be done about it either. Looking at the number of comments on forums and pictures there does seem to be a lot of people unhappy with the situation.

 

As for people thinking should something be done about it, I guess it's like flies and wasps around the picnic table. Most people hate it but we accept it as it's almost impossible to do anything about it without giving up going on a picnic or posting on the web :-(

LOL a new category for people to complain about, with a committee which will probably also be argued about when it's hard enough finding 2 people to agree.

 

Sorry I don't mean to sound skeptical but this sounds like new labour here in the UK. Oooops this committee, organisation, scout group don't work ... so lets set up another one to distract everyone from the others :-)

 

Presentations using other peoples work is going to cause all sorts of reactions with artistic temperaments and screams of copyright abuse.

Carl, The problem with anything that includes subjective appraisal is that I don't think any system can really cater for it. I know their are guidelines that should induce some objectivity, but take any subject which requires grading other than where there is only one answer (such as mathematics) and it will always be viewed differently. So as systems go there isn't anything wrong with it, just the people who abuse it.

 

Neil, Possibly in some way you have "hit the nail on the head". For originality just about everything has already been photographed. Aesthetics well I guess thats in the eye of the beholder. We all set our own mid point for both and grade according to that. If a subject has been shot 50,000 times do you rate the next one as a 5 average or 1 very bad?

Bartek, knowing your portfolio I find it amazing that anyone could give you low scores for genuine reasons. But there's some sick people here as on all sites that like to hide behind the screen and snipe for no reason other than they are sad and need to get a life.

Try would you believe "Black and White Photography Magazine" published by GMC Publications. Email me if you need extra details and I'll check the front cover for contact details.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the system, it's humans that are the problem.

 

For myself if I see a picture I like I give it what I think is a deserved rating either with or without a comment. If I see a picture I don't like but I think it had potential or I usually like the photographers work, then I rate it and leave a comment. If I don't like the picture and have no interest in the photographers work I move on to the next picture. Hence I have a high average rating score for rating others. Nope I'm not trying to be a saint just a human. BTW according to the system a 4 isn't a low score just average.

 

I actually experience something this week which did wind me up a little. I rated a picture quite well and left a comment. The picture was deleted and re-submitted as someone else had given that person a 3/3. Hence wasting my time and effort, I'm sure the photographer had his / her own reasons but it's a new one on me.

Hi Jeff, Many thanks for posting the comparison and I stand corrected there's a hell of a difference. Thinking back I guess the difference for me is that under very dark lighting conditions such as those I use B&W Ilford Delta 3200. With colour I shoot the Fuji Superia 1600 in lighting conditions only as low a dawn just before the light fails.<div></div>

Jeff, As you say very good quality especially at the speed it was shot. I will agree to differ on which is best (although I think it's getting very close) but that's because like everything it depends on post production and it's use. I am very fortunate in that I process all my own B&W so have complete control and have a very good pro lab locally who offer an exceptional service (at a price). Of course digital gets into the chain at some point for my colour work and when I can justify a Nikon D2H investment I will go digital for colour.

Steve, I'll probably open a bag of worms here but picture quality at higher speeds is the only reason I still shoot film when using colour. I do recommend the Fuji Superia 1600 if you use your F100 though.

Jeff OOOOOOOOOPS good point sorry, but the second part of my reply still applies. Every considered a film instead of a digi instead? lol :-@

Although I sometimes use Fuji Superia 800, I find Fuji Superia 1600 just as good and the touch of extra speed helps to nail those shots easier. The smaller the aperture the better your AF will work as well, I often use F2.8 or F4 with lenses 105mm or less for reportage and they are published.

Brian,

 

Please don't "feel a little surly" in any way. You have made several very good points about the bandwidth and from my little corner of PN I must admit I hadn't considered that aspect. I do feel guilty quite often that I cannot be a subscribed member of PN for various reasons I posted on another thread a while ago, so eating up bandwidth at your expense is something I very much apologise for. I'll take on board what you have said and keep the socialising to where it really should be.

 

Kind regards Tony

I do find comments much more useful and have learned a great deal because of advice on such things as contrast, cropping and even defining focal points to a certain extent.

 

I read somewhere recently here that ratings are for the site, but comments are for the photographer. A sentiment that I do tend to agree with because I don't mind people liking or not liking my work, as long as I have an idea why. If it's valid then I can change the way I work, if not then at least I have considered other alternatives.

 

Comments here are more useful than those I get for work published which I wouldn't even bother posting here because in reality they are cr*p, but that's what the papers like. There the story is important and my pictures only support the text. Here this is work for me and my pleasure, so improving my technique and picture quality is more important. I can only do that with practice and comments.

 

BTW Brian many thanks from me as well for the way the site is run and your input.

 

Kind regards Tony

Ken, Yes I know and I'm glad you do as you are one of those who have helped me to develop whilst I've been here.

 

Kind regards Tony

Some interesting replies and thoughts here and just to put the record straight I am not ranting about comments.

 

The idea occurred to me because so many are ranting about comments not being left and as has been said it's a 2-way street. Possibly some of those who rate without leaving comments are doing so because they never expect them to be read in the first place.

 

I also see saying thanks as showing that you have read them and showing some gratitude that someone has taken the time and the trouble to leave them.

 

Kind regards Tony.

I admit I do the "thank you for your..." when I get a comment on any of my work, but that's because I am greatful and I want the person making the comment to know that I've read what when said.

 

Updating the tutorial may help but I wonder how many read it. It's a bit like how often do we read the manual or instructions before using a new piece of kit.

 

Tony

Yep I can confirm West Yorkshire does exist because I've been there.

 

Surely everyone has an interesting face, it's for the photographer to recognise what is really interesting with it and then capture it.

 

Sorry if this sounds a little cynical, it isn't meant to be and I find everyone interesting at least physically.

 

Kind regards Tony

I don't think this has been mentioned before but I'm probably wrong

so please forgive me.

 

Many of us rightly rant about people leaving low ratings without

comments.

 

One thing that has occurred to me though, has anyone considered how

many times you leave a comment whatever the rating you give and

there's nothing to show that the photographer has even bothered to

return to the critique request. ie. not even a "thank you everyone

for your comments but I disagree".

 

Just a thought.

 

Kind regards Tony

It's semantics in a way but when I've been asked to shoot casting agency style shots for a friend who runs an agency he usually wants them almost passport style (except they should look like who they are of lol). Where as with model headshots they can be more posed with the expressions we all love to see. Tony

I guess we have all given Troy a little taster of "what kind of trouble does this pose?" lol

 

Interestingly when I get pictures published as news stories, I not only get the fee from the paper but also nearly always royalties from people buying the pictures that have them in them. So although we like our privacy in many cases (but not all) a lot of people like their 15 minutes of fame even if they are only in the background :-) Tony

Conni,

 

Shame ;-) lol

 

Tony

Conni, are you aware that until recently and possibly still today that many companies including police forces have sold surveillance tapes to TV production companies. Some of these clips have appeared as funny or unusual things that people do and others as real footage to programmes. Look closely next time you watch a film and you may see yourself. Tony