kahkityoong

<p>Thanks for the heads up. I'll check it out.</p>

<p>It's Nee-kon. Surprisingly it's pronounced correctly in Australia where people usually ape American pronunciation. </p>

I have no complaints about low ratings in this thread. My issue is with people who have set up multiple accounts to

manipulate ratings. Josh has already sorted out this problem for me.

Miroslav, with all due respect you have no idea what is going on. This was not a complaint about low ratings. I suggest you go back and READ what the thread was all about as you have absolutely NO CLUE. The thread was about an individual using three accounts to undermine my ratings while building a bank of 7/7s for himself. This has all been confirmed and the bogus accounts deleted by admininstration. And you have completely misinterpreted the responses of the other Pnet members. Once again I suggest you actually read the thread carefully. And then again if you still don't get it.

TRP = top rated photos

I think these bogus accounts would be eliminated if it were compulsory for all raters to have a gallery or confirmed by a

valid credit card.

Okay it appears that I do not have an accurate grasp of the ratings system. In fact I have little interest in how it works. My

only intention was to highlight these 3 accounts, proven to be fake, were set up to give high ratings to one photographer

and low ratings to 'competitors'. The fact that my observations that led to the discovery of bogus accounts should be

appreciated rather than seen as a whinge about ratings. If this person had been giving lots of 3/3s, their activities would

have come to notice much earlier. It was my curiosity that led to him being busted. I just wanted to see the work of a

photographer who rated what I would class a competition standard photo at 5/5. I expected to find either a brilliant portfolio

or more likely some jealous hack. Instead I found a bogus account and when I clicked on the other two discovered quite

the can of worms.

You're missing the whole point of this Lex and David. I don't give a stuff about the scores, this has nothing to do with my

concern. What I do not like is people personally targeting my work in a clandestine fashion so that they can get their photos

higher on the TRP. And my suspicions were vindicator. All 3 accounts have been deleted. Personally I am happy to do

away with the ratings. I am always my harshest critic, I don't need someone to score my work 7/7 to confirm that a shot is

good.

The conspiracy is correct, the bogus accounts have been deleted. I did go through abuse@photo.net first but got no response.

"Did they put comments at least?" Yes, they did but under their real name while at the same time manipulating my ratings

with their bogus accounts.

Actually I couldn't care less if someone is building up a bank of 7-7. What concerns me is the manipulation of MY ratings. I

know that people will say but they're 5's, that's above average but this is obviously an organized attempt to bring down a

photo that would be rating 6.5's. To me this behaviour is low and I do not appreciate it.

I believe my ratings are being very sneakily manipulated by someone. I had a reason photo called :The Island Arch http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00PxoE&photo_id=7455332&photo_sel_index=0

which received very high ratings overall - most of them were 7/7s. When I looked through the ratings I noticed a few 5/5 and 5/6 which

normally are not considered low. Under normal circumstances I would have ignored them. However, these few really stuck out like a sore

thumb compared to the ratings I had received. When I clicked on three of these 'low ratings' I found some very interesting accounts

 

(EDIT: Names removed by Josh)

 

How can it be a coincidence that the 3 lowest

raters on my photos are owned by accounts with no photos and the exact same rating patterns. I believe by giving out ratings that are not

too low, people are less likely to scrutinize them. Has anyone else noticed these irregularities?

The 5D has no problems with 45 minute exposure. From memory the longest one I did was 90 minutes. I don't see why you

would use ISO 50 for startrails. No better noise control that ISO 100 and you'll end up more underexposed and get more

noise.

A true professional lets his results do the talking, not the tools he uses.

"IMHO a pro photographer should only use pro gear and that only means a 1-series

body."

 

I've seen a lot of ridiculous comments over the years but this one takes the cake.

My first copy of the 24-105mm was okay but not brilliant. My second is incredibly sharp

and can match or better most primes in its range.

Good for wildlife. Ordinary for landscape. The 1DsMkIII or 5D are better choices for

landscape. If the above poster used the 1DsMkIII I suspect he would revise the comment

about 35mm cameras for landscape.

Great shot. It's an absolute disgrace not to be paid for this. I'll make sure I NEVER fork out a

cent towards this magazine.

3 stop hard & 2 stop soft are the best combination although if you can add the 2 stop hard it would be very useful too. The 3 hard & 2 soft are the most commonly stacked when I need to use 2 at once as well. I use Singh-Ray, carry all from 1 to 4 stops, hard & soft, reverse grads 2-3 stops. I wouldn't recommend buying a 3 reverse until you already have 2 and 3 stops in soft and hard gradients.

I was considering going to Venice for Carnevale in 2008. I may try to line up an assignment for the trip

and was considering doing a workshop to take the hassle out of bookings and organizing models. Does

anyone have any tips or experiences they would like to share about Carnevale?

1st half 2008 but can't narrow it down further for you.

"I would like a 5D a lot, but I think it is a highly overpriced camera. Not a bad camera; just a

bad value. For that amount of money, I'd rather get a used 1D Mk. II N."

 

Spoken like one who has never used a 5D.

You can turn off the IS when it is on the tripod and risk forgetting to turn it back on when you

take it off the tripod.

I have no interest in graphs or technical explanations as outlined above. However I have

made more low-light exposures than I care to count. My experience with my Canon 5D is

that to minimize noise a low ISO (100 ideally) coupled with a rightward exposure. Low-light

exposures at high ISO are a recipe for noisy pictures. If you're going to use ISO 400 and

higher you better make doubly sure that expose to the right. Without clipping your highlights

of course.

Depends how important sensor cleaning, live view, 14-bit and a few more magapixels matter

to you. The 5DII will almost certainly be released 1st half of 08.