stupski

<p>On this photo.... http://www.photo.net/photo/8508384 .....all the info was missing, including the title, copyright statement, and even previously submitted critiques from other viewers. I am certain of this because a friend wrote something especially nice about this shot....and it had very high marks. Please explain what happened.</p>

Mine went only two shoots before it got sent back. Luckily under warranty, but still have occasional problems with autofocus (which is why it went in).

As of today, I cannot move any photos at all with the re-order function.

Where do we find the "recent uploads" that used to be on the left?

My God, I just went to look at the top photos of the year and there was this hideous purple ad on the left! I thought one of the perks of being a member was that the site would be ad free with paid membership. It is so distracting, I couldn't even stay on the pages because it follows you from page to page.

Okay, I think I found it. After you upload, it says something like "Return to Gallery" and the shot comes up (with ads on top). I thought paying members were to be free of ads.

I've been to every link on the pull down menus and nothing takes me there. Again, for some, it may well be the only way their photos will get seen by browsers, unless you go into the rate photos section. Is this some sort of administrative device to force us to go there instead? I don't usually have enough time to sort through all the shots posted in a day or week, and I'm still disappointed at this change.

Where the devil is the front page where our photos would appear immediately

after posted? I really liked this feature since many shots will NEVER be seen,

except for that opportunity. It is one of the reasons I joined - I simply like

it. WHERE IS IT? ! ? ! ?

A lot of good photographers left because of the weird rating system and the 3's that would pop up almost before the photo showed up in the rate recent category. I have been told that the site uses some sort of logorithm to do that, which seems to have nothing to do with the quality of the photo, to try to keep certain photographers or whatever from being over-rated by their friends.

P.S. Got back on this morning to rate in general, and nearly every photo up, regardless of quality, had one 3. I'm fast becoming disillusioned with this site. I think I'm going to look elsewhere to post. It makes no sense to pay to be a member when all you can expect are insulting responses to good efforts based on logarithms and sour grapes.

Wigwam - of course I'm starved for affection! Aren't you? :o)

I usually go back to check the photo after it's put up for crit and noticed it already had ratings. D.B. - bingo. bingo. bingo. Surprised no one else seems to have figured this out. BTW, you're not the D.B. Cooper who jumped out of the airplane with all that cash, are you?

OK. How, tell me, is it possible within 30 seconds of posting to have zero

views but two ratings?

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

Nearly every single one of my photos has received a 3/3. This definitely is automated. At first I thought the site itself might be doing this to keep ratings further apart. I don't know how this can be done otherwise within so few SECONDS of a post of HUNDREDS of photos. Mine usually appear as the very first rating. Hmmmmnnn.

OK: new question: I just bought an Epson 2400. It prints great, but I had a devil of a time matching monitor colors with print colors. I've finally got it pretty close. To help, I bought a Spyder II ($70 version). That's where the real problem seems to be now. I've tried calibrating the monitor with my usual behind-the-monitor light, in total darkness, in a room with the blinds pulled, and no matter what I do, I think the colors are still too red on the monitor. When Spyder gets to the temperature adjustment, everything seems to turn pink. I have Adobe Gamma, but you can't use both systems at the same time. Problem is, I don't know what people are seeing on the other end (if it's too red), and at work I have an LCD, which is way too bright anyway. What should I do next?

I'm nearly in shock at seeing these numbers. First, it shows ones and twos. I have never given a one or two. In fact, didn't know they existed. This is all very confusing to me. I DO leave a LOT of comments on others' photos, and have even attempted to demonstrate a point by working on a shot and uploading it (then deleting their file from my hard drive). My point was this: I try to maintain high standards when rating or commenting on others photos. I'm not here to hurt or maim feelings. I like to be supportive whenever possible, and try to comment on photos in a positive way, unless I'm nitpicking, and say that I am. I don't care that much about ratings. My point in trying to send an email to administration was that the 3s were appearing IMMEDIATELY after I would post a shot, most often the very first rating received....which DOES bother me because it was consistent. Very sorry about all this hullabaloo. Will have to learn how to contact ONLY administrators in the future (messed THAT one up)!

...and re my own photos, when I originally looked, about every single photo except 3 or 4 had the 3/3 ratings within 1 minute of posting. I was trying to send this message to the Administrator to check, NOT to make this a public thread and would like it removed. My error, but have not sent a message there before.

My other method, to be fair, is typically to look at DETAILS to determine what others have given. I frequently will err on the high side, e.g., if a photo has 5+, I will go to six if I really like it. Due to the problem with all the threes, I seldom rate lower than 4. If I feel that it's a 3, I usually skip to the next photo and ignore the shot.

Brian - I have NOT, I REPEAT NOT, given over 60 3/3 ratings. It is quite rare for me. My method is to ignore those that I think are really bad. If you have that many 3/3 ratings from me, someone else is logging into my account, in which case I would like to change my password! (more than one exclamation point!)

I am one who has received a lot of instantaneous 3/3s on my photos.

I do understand that not everyone will like them and take no umbrage

at that. However, there have been a couple of shots that did

extremely well overall, but got 3/3 from one voter. This seems to

consistently happen, and I have felt confused by it. You mentioned

that you can check for bogus ratings, and I would appreciate it if

you would do that for me please. Thanks.

Question: I'm shooting large/raw with a 20D. Files look great big on the screen and in even small print. However, by the time they get reduced and posted on PN, way too much sharpness/detail is lost. Do any of you know what the best software compression/plugin for CS is that reduces large digital photos for the web? What seems to be the thing that others are using who produce great clarity of shots here on PN?

Re costs of PS, you can enter the PS market with PS3 for about $100, and then later upgrade to CS for much less than it costs to buy it new. Looking at your work, Glenn, you're much more sophisticated in your imagery than you let on, and someone like you would probably put PS to excellent use!