g2imaging

When I rate an image, I generally rate it in comparison to other images on this site...most of which are far superior then your average persons vacation shots (Which if posted on this site would probably get a 1 or 2 from me). I do agree that comments are the key evaluator, not just a number. I have however noticed that the most photo.net participants average ratings are above 4 (including mine). I try to keep it close and evaluate all images based on an even playing field for the subject matter. Landscapes are pretty common unless one steps out and really pushes the creative envelope.

 

Like figure skating in the olympics, I still believe that high and low ratings should be dropped.

 

On a positive note, I enjoy and learn from looking at all of the images... the good, bad, and the ugly.

Not to belabor the point but there has to be a way to monitor or

control peoples ratings. I am not moaning because someone doesn't

like an image or two of mine. My concern is when an individual's

average for both Asthetics and Originality are substantially above,

or below "4". The word average means just that, for every image

that gets a 3, one should get a 5. Every 2, one should get a 6...

 

I am seeing such deviations on some of my images it is a joke. One

person rates an Image a 1 for originality, another a 6. See

http://www.photo.net/photo/2139424

 

I contend that the highest rating and the lowest rating (average)

should be thrown out when figuring out the images average. It would

also be nice if the combined score was displayed with the image's

score (my math is somewhat suspect).

 

Any comments?

 

Thanks all (and Brian).<div></div>

I noticed I can only post 4 images per week for critique. If I pay

to play will I get more of an allowance?

 

I know people can evaluate images when uploaded, but I am

specifically concerned with the 4 images issue.

 

Thanks All........ Greg

I hope they decide something quick. My D60 is sitting in Canon's corporate office waiting on an evaluation dispute I have had with the Irvine repair facility. That's a long story. I too need a new digital camera, love the 1d Mark II per specs and may just wait if nothing happens this week. I can always have my D-60 fixed for under $1000

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I don't mean that an F-1 is functionally obsolete, more "technically obsolete" with respect to "features". I own everything from an FTB, F1, 2 AE-1s, G2, D-60, Had D-30 and an EOS 3. It is not the camera that makes a good photograph, it is the photographer and their understanding of the different variables as well as artistic interpretation.

 

I play guitar and someone asked me what the could do to play like Eric Clapton. I told them they would need his hands, heart and soul, not just his Signature Model Statocaster. I good photographer can make a great image on a throw away camera. I have one on my wall that my brother took where the film didn't advance all the way. The best mistake I have ever seen. (He shoots professionally as well). Enough of my ramble.... Good glass!

Here has been my experience while shooting motion pictures for theatrical release. "Better Glass = Better Picture". Now... I doubt that you will be enlarging your images to 60 feet so... Focus on your objective. Larger prints will show lens imperfections and quality. If your shoot with the D30 than larger prints probably arn't a factor due to Megapixel limitations. With the 10D, the higher quality lens will show up, especially in larger prints.

 

Another thing to consider. An engineer friend of mine at Panavision (who won and Acadamy Award) reminded me that the 1.6 ratio is effecively using the center area of the lens to focus on the CMOS sensor. Thus (acording to my friend) better glass is even more important digitally as you are magnifying any lens imperfections. If the lens dispursed the image accross a larger area then any imperfections have less impact.

 

Pretty technical stuff... somewhat confusing to me too.

 

Personally, camera models change and evolve quickly, a good lens never goes out of style. Look at Hasseblad... a 30 year old lens is still good today.... A 30 year old F1 (which I own) is functionally obsolete and has been replaced (autofocus, metering, digital..) Don't get me wrong, the old camera still takes great pictures but I shoot with my EOS3 when I want film. (I keep the F1 for its historical value as well as some older Canon F series cameras and lenses).

 

I hope this helps

 

Good luck.

 

Greg

 

P.S. If anyone has a different understanding then please educate me as well.

Good advice on getting the refurbished body or buying a "junked one" to fix the camera. The catch for me is that I wouldn't be doing the physical repairs... an engineer from Panavision would (he has won Acadamy Awards for his development of motion picture cameras).

 

Also, the camera is working perfectly except the LCD/TFT. I may just give it a shot and buy the part..

 

Thanks all and additional comments are appreciated.

 

Greg

I bought a 28-70 2.8L lens and sent it to be repaired a month later. Caonon indicated that some chip or element was defective. I am not a very happy Canon Camper now... I've had D60 problems too. On the other hand, I have been using Canon cameras since the mid 70's and have never had problems. Luck of the draw...

 

If you don't like the lens... send it for warranty repair... that's as clean as you'll get it.

My D-60 took a moderate water hit some time in the last year (I

don't even remember it happening). It started to wig out in

November almost like it had a software problem. I sent it to Canon

and they tell me the camera is completely ruined... Not

economically feasable to repair.... $1032 if I want it....

 

I had them send my camera back and it worked perfectly without them

doing a thing. The only problem was the TFT/LCD display was

powering up white or scrolling the normal options. I can control

all functions blindly by using the manual or another D-60 as a guide.

 

Amazing... Canon wanted to know if they should even send my camera

back (I'm a CPS member as well with guaranteed 3 day turnaround...

it took over 12). I kept calling Irvine repair and they never

returned calls regarding why it was working and how I can repair the

TFT... that was in November.

 

I filed a complaint and escallated it to NY's customer service

center who asked to look at the camera. I did and they concurred

with Irvine... So what's the problem??? I asked them EXACTLY what

needed to be replaced IE the TFT and what it would cost. They told

me they could sell me the parts but not tell me if that would solve

the problem. What the heck.... If they could evaluate the camera

and tell me it needs over $1000 to fix than they should be able to

tell me exactly what needs to be replaced on a camera that works

fine except the display. Funny isn't it? I can fix the camera

myself if they tell me what parts NEED to be replaced but they don't.

 

Anybody have any suggestions or had similar experiences. I'd just

like to know what parts are busted and replace those... not the ones

that work.

 

Thanks for your feedback and letting me vent.

 

P.S. The CPS rep in Irvine is "Jess Bailey" should you ever need

nothing done.

 

Greg<div></div>

Call Irvine and ask for Jess Bailey. He is the Canon Professional Services rep there. I can't say they have always done a good job with me (I splashed a D-60 and they were dic__ ) but they are the place to go....

 

Good luck