natureshots

In one way or another, my wife and I have had our IDs stolen three times in the last six to eight months, and we're cautious people. With that said, I don't like this "RealName" suggestion and understand the issues some of the members have raised. Why can't paying members have a choice? You've brought up RealName a few times already and I really don't understand your obsession with it when members have raised concerns. Amazon let their shoppers use screen names by the way.

Thank you for all your responses. It seems that there is a general agreement that certain actions of the photographer/videographer are inappropriate, unless of course, there is a mutual agreement among the bride/groom/minister that they are ok. Requesting the invisibility factor is similar to customers requesting zero defects per million in the semiconductor business that I'm in; it's impossible but it doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive for it.

 

I've not ventured into social event photography and I appreciate many of the excellent suggestions here, such as making sure there's an agreement among the parties and staging.

 

Sarah, many wedding photographers have zoom lenses with constant max apertures that make me drool. With these lenses, light shouldn't be an issue but maybe shakiness or depth.

 

Tim, LOL! That just cracks me up!

During the exchanging of the rings, should a photographer be next to the pastor or have his lens even closer doing his/her thing?

 

I've already mentioned that he had a camera with a tele lens attached. Forget the videographer and assume he's not there. What are your taboos about wedding photography?

I was asked to be a videographer at a wedding this weekend so I was next to the

photographer too many times. Even I was uncomfortable with the photographer's

actions. At times he was too noisy fumbling with his equipment. During the

exchange of the rings, he was about two feet away getting close-ups. This

closeness was not necessary given that he has multiple cameras with wide and

tele lenses attached. When I viewed the video, he was all over the place.

Given the noise that he and the mirror made, I found his in your face style to

be too obnoxious. However, I don't do wedding photography and would like to

hear your thoughts. What do you consider taboos?

I like the new caption search method over the general search but wish that I can search for keywords in a folder title also; sometimes a caption has little connection with the photo.

 

Seven, I search for one of my photos that have not been submitted for ratings and has a unique caption and it came up as the first photo.

Steve, too bad that you're closing the door and I hope to see you back. Been nice bumping into you now and then.

 

It seems that there's an assumption that paying members behave perfectly. I believe that paying members should have more options than non-paying members; otherwise, why pay when one can get an equal free ride? There have been many reasons given in the past as to why this site still has an honor system. The poor high school students and people living in countries where the payment methods are not available are examples. Besides, non-paying members are subjected to ads, which help the site financially. As for critiques and comments, it seems like you're looking for the "Wow! Great pic 7/6." I don't play the rating game anymore and wish that the ratings I received in the past would disappear. Unless people are outright obnoxious, be my guest and rip my photos apart with your views. I don't agree with a few of pnet's procedures but I think your post is just wrong, to put it mildly.

OK, I got suckered and Tim B got another increment on his counter. Thousands of postings, eh? Man, the accounting scandal expands! There is too much truth to what Mona wrote. There's no need for this thread; it should belong in the other thread.

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

ooohhhhhh... a fight, and the thread's not deleted yet!

<p>

DSC, you seem to be missing much or all of Tim's points. Give yourself a little more time and you'll see how pn works, which it doesn't seem like you do. Those who are obsessed about ratings will complain about the low ratings. And usually the threads started by low rate complainers are like silly daytime talk shows, they provide some entertainment at times but are mostly pointless to take seriously.

<p>

Ratings and praises can be bought; all you have to do is kiss ass with your comments and rate high exclusively. You may have seen some of those people who cannot write anything negative about a photo. But you really have not been here long enough to know the history, which translates into uninformed and weak arguments.

<p>

<a

href=http://www.photo.net/photo/4705094>Peace...</a>

<div></div>

<div></div>

Image attachments that are equal to or smaller than the recommended size show up

as a photo <b>above</b> the critique or comment. This order seems

unconventional; why is it done this way? Larger attachments are included below

the critique or comment as a typical attachment; this order makes more sense.

A photo in my "Yosemite Winter" folder recently uploaded received more than 14500 views while the highest view of any of the others uploaded on the same day is about 1000, too wide of a gap. The "Views" on this photo is even much higher than many of the other photos uploaded a long time ago to the same folder. Yet, I don't think there's anything special about this photo. The photo with the run away views has not been submitted for critiques. "Views" count seems strange.

Aw, ain't that nice. Just leave it. One of these days when I feel a bit lonely, I can gift myself a little easier.

Linda, when you submit for critiques, of course, you want people to view your photo and provide critiques. As mentioned, sometimes people upload a fix of your photo, sometimes a link, sometimes a similar photo of their own, etc. All of these are fair game unless someone steps out of line, like using profanity.

 

I viewed your photo and the attachment in question and I found nothing wrong with the uploaded image. From my point of view, the guy was only sharing with you a similar photo, of kids having fun on a beach theme. He wrote nothing negative. It's a "community" thing. If you have a hard time dealing with such critiques, you may have a hard time with this site. You cannot "disapprove" a critique on the photo. Your only option if you are unhappy is to delete your photo and upload again as I believe emailing abuse will not help.

I didn't know that the CO was receiving that much visibility. This question may be rhetorical but isn't it true that CO images do not show up on rate recent? That takes away the main visible vehicle from those photos. I don't doubt that if I submitted my images for ratings, some of those images may have received thousands of views and perhaps tens of thousands of views rather than hundreds. I may resubmit a photo with ratings for kicks but what I don't understand is what kind of "special visibility" you are talking about? Even if it may be true that the critiques are "better" on CO, those who like CO are not having the cake and eat it too; yet you make it sound like we have ice cream on top of that cake also.

 

You didn't want CO to be a forum but when it seems to work that way, you yanked the rug out from under our feet. How long has it been? Yet, still, there is no replacement rug. This seems like big brother crushing a group of dissidents.

 

While I may not agree with the rating system, I cannot remember the last time I dissed it. I do agree with you that the debate between the two camps is silly at times but to me, this is perhaps your only valid point for removing the rug. But you run the site.....

Han, your argument is incoherent, off topic at times and weak. From my point of view, you've written a sentence or two too much and are "removing all doubt."

Carl, there's the "Digital Alterations" category as Bob stated. These "art" images that you saw, what were they categorized as? Were they similar to seeing a dog in the "Nude" category? People do sleazy "manipulations" to receive more visibility. I just scanned through the Rate Recent and the categories are not included with the images; which means that you won't be able to avoid a category in Rate Recent, unless you rate by category. If people abuse the category system, then adding another category doesn't solve much, since "Digital Alterations" already exist. And I hope that the site is about "photo" and not "art".

Will, I agree with many of your points. I've seen "landscape" images where the light sources were 90 degrees out of phase with the light reflected on the rocks or water. Yet, there are many thoughtless critiques praising them great photos. Since the site allows such works, I put on my don't care attitude. The common thing about these images are the many thoughtless, superficial one or two liners, like those that you included above. Those who actually took the time to critique usually do point out that the image is an art work. If people are happy with such praises, so be it. For me, I would rather people tell me how they would do things differently.

You should find a <a href=http://www.canon.ca/english/index-dealerlocator.asp>Canon authorized service</a> instead of any other shop that is near your area. Find the "service facility" in the above link. Your best bets are with an authorized service center; I sent my lens in for repair at a center in California and I'm satisfied.

Jim, open a photo and you'll see "Options" at the lower left; click on "options" and choose "Edit Image Info". Then upload the new photo to replace the existing one.

 

Swapping photos for size reason is no big deal. However, I'd try to avoid swapping photos with drastically modified ones so that the critiques received don't make sense anymore.

Here's the <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/pc-recent-requests?topic_id=1481&critique_p=1>buried link</a> to the CO. This topic was discussed <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Fw7R&tag=>last week</a>. Perhaps only one person knows when it might be back but he might get ticked off again if we ask too many questions. I'm quite disappointed that the CO is given low priority also and unfortunately my Jedi mind forces are not working correctly.

" "?