jh de beer

Thank you John.

JH

Tyler.

I am a newcomer to PN, but I understand that it works as follows:

If you access the Gallery/Rate photos options, and rate there, it will be anonymous, even if you are a registered paying or non-paying member.

If you go to Rate catagory - same story

If you rate a photo after it is no longer in the Rate recent (critique forum) queue, it will show your name.

I understand that this was done to prevent hate-rating. Now members can vote anonymously, safely and often a bit cowardly (the 3/3 raters without comments).

Hope your not more confused now. Good luck.

JH

I am glad to have read this post and comments. I have always wondered about the text accompanying requests for critiques. My initial thoughts were that some were trying to hard to "convince" everyone to leave comments and critiques on their specific request. I thought that the mere fact that you submit "a request for critique" is enough, and I myself is guilty of sometimes only making a few ">>>" because the system forces you to write something.

I regard most of you as the most knowledgeable on this site, and therefore I think I was wrong in my approach.

My question is this: do the majority of you agree that it will be better when an amateur like me submit a photo for critique, to specifically indicate on what I would like it to be critiqued, e.g. the use of light, the angles, the composition, the different point of view, or even the use of some alternative method?

Thank you.

JH de Beer

I don't believe for one moment that the images are selected randomly from the entire database. I suspect however that they are pulled "randomly" from a certain set of images, meeting certain requirements e.g. average rating above 6, views and ratings > set number etc. A bit like "sort at source" that you get in the payment industry (banking).

I agree with John and Carl on most issues raised, although I'm certain that we are in the minority. My choice not to utilise - I must admit John had me with "eschew", English not being my first language - PS for excessive post-processing is also a personal one. It revolves around spending time behind a computer (or rather spending less time there!), but even if I liked computers and knew how to use PS effecectively, I still prefer the "honest image", obviously with the standard and often necassary post-processing.

The next bloke like exactly the opposite. No problem. And I must admit that there is some "PS masters" strutting their stuff on PN.

I second Carl, that it would be great to have some system whereby images are displayed according to their "heavily manipulated" v "not manipulated" status, using the exsisting PN guidelines.

Interesting thoughts Yoni. I have also noticed that the majority of images picked are heavily post-processed. I am not even going to try to discuss the merits of either approach.

What I will say however is, that the day that a "straight" photo makes it up there, will be a grand day in my PN life. There is a few potential photographers' work I can recall (take John Crosley as an example) that can do it.

Back to your post, it is a good proposition. I would however still argue that PS cannot salvage a useless photo. And that original light, texture and visual qualities obtained by good technique and equipment should and will always reign supreme. Regards. - JH -

John, a very interesting and nice post - I couldn't agree with you more. Just one thing though, where do you see the top rated folders as you have mentioned?

Thanks for keeping it up, you are not a lone voice in the desert. I for one. like your approach.

Regards

-JH-

Michael and mario

Thanks guys, I am clear and crisp on this one now. Regards. JH

Don't scream immediately, I know all of you know this by now, and I have

searced but couldn't find the answer. I am also fairly new to PN. So please

bear with me.

If I open up an image of mine, and click on the number of ratings, a screen

display anonymous ratings and direct ratings (also displayed is the name of

the rater which helps a lot under direct ratings). My questions is: what is

the difference between anonymous and direct ratings, and how must I rate so

that the photographer will see that it was I that gave him that rating?

Thank you in advance.

JH de Beer

Brian

Thank you for the detailed response. I will definitely not brush the advice off - I want to be on photo.net, I need to be. While I have your attention - it's a fantastic site.

This morning my workspace is sorted out. I don't know if the strange name is from SA, there was no other account detail. But I take your word for it - and I know nothing about IT.

But, since this morning all my images are gone. And from where I sit also those of everybody else's portfolios or images I try to access. Did this usually happen as well?

I will be trying to dial-up through another ISP to see if that works better.

Thanks again Brian.

Regards

JH

I hope this is the right forum. "My Workspace" button went haywire! If I click

it I am told I am somebody else [Workspace for Shafie Ebrahim], my portfolio

is missing, and worse - PN tinks I'm not a subscriber anymore!

Seriously, how do "we" fix this?

PS: Did the reboot/logout/login thing - no use.

Thank you.

JH de Beer

Tod - thanks for your valuable feedback. I searced through the posts as provided and I now have a much better understanding of ratings.

And I wish I could change the "does" in the question to "do"..... English is obviously not my first language.

Thanks again.

JH

I am a new subscriber, and have noticed that a photo will not appear on the

Top Photo Rated forum - although the photo's rating will be higher than those

appearing last?

My apologies if this has been answered already somewhere - I did google it and

couldn't find any answers.

Thank you in advance.

JH de Beer