stevenseelig

If you do alot of shooting, I suggest you take a look at Aperture. I use the combination of

Aperture and CS2 with nik Color Efex Pro 2.0 and Ninja Noise plug-ins.

Aperture manages workflow and minor adjustments. CS2 for more complex processing.

where is the firmwire update?

thanks

steven

I am looking to rent two groups of items

1. a dance floor that can be assembled for about 10 square feet (something hard that I can put over the

carpet in the studio

2. very modern looking furniture pieces

looking to rent for 2-3 days max for a job in the chicago (western suburbs)

Suggestions as to wear to look would be great

Thanks

Steven

For a great workflow application and if you have a mac, you might consider Aperture. Much easier to use than NX and will allow you to work on RAW files and make final tweaks with Elements or CS2.

Steven

Frank,

Have you ever done such an experiment and if yes, what was the outcome?

Thanks

Steven

Carl...if i could learn to type and proof read, perhaps i might make more sense

"You have not provoked my curiosity." should have been " You have NOW provoked my

curiosity."

**post has been corrected by moderator**

Since I don't have any primary data, but PN could gather it, and do the experiment in the

background to look at performance.

While there may be fluctuations (turbulence), my experience is that is large sampling

systems, such as PN, those fluctuations rarely cause a major pertubation in output. With

large sampling, there would have to be a large number of raters shifting in the same

direction.

Carl, I am very confused as to your thoughts. I can't use them for assessment of my

images but PN can use the information in a useful way. You have now provoked my

curiosity. Can you expand on the notion or if there is another thread that would answer

this, if you would be so kind as to provide the link, that would be great.

Frank...a very simple solution is to attach PN ID to the ratings. At least in some cases I

would spend the effort to look at that raters information and pictures and decide my own

assessment of the rater....and in rare cases might ask for additional thoughts. I think this

simple step, outside the complexities of metrics, would provoke dialogue and

conversation among the PN users.

Just IMHO.

steven

Carl,

In reflecting on your position further, if the numbers do not mean anything, then the use

of ratings to rank pictures into Top Photos and to display photos based on their ranking

from high to low seems terribly paradoxical. If the numbers don't mean anything, then

get rid of the top photo sections and quit displaying pictures as if some are better or

worse based on the ranking.

Personally, when I look at the highly ranked pictures, I think they are clearly better, so I

guess I am back to the notion that PN needs to work at improving the rating system...and I

reject your notion, sorry to say, that they do not mean anything.

So PN, what can we do to improve the rating methodologies?

Steven

OK (although I am not convinced that is a correct conclusion)... how about attaching PN id

numbers to the ratings?

steven

I have used www.printroom.com for photo fulfilment for clients. If I charge enough the

overhead drops to about 18% or I get 82% of the sale price. The take the order, print and

ship to customer...and once a month they send me check.

I am not sure how visible it is to the general web/crawls/bots, etc...so you don't how much

visibility you really have.

steven

Carl,

Thanks for the note. What I have learned from your simple comment is when I receive a

4.0 rating that is well below the average and I have much room for improvement. I have

also learned that when I rate something as a 4.0 within the scheme of things, I am giving a

poor score rather than an average score. I must wonder how many people on the site

would have learned the same thing as I did from this simple statistic.

I am curious as to why you have changed your rating behavior?

I suspect, but do not know, that if ratings were normalized by individual, then people

might want to provide a spectrum of responses. If a person only rates things they like,

then their average score will be high, let say 5.5 so when they rate something a 5 which on

an absolute scale looks pretty good, in fact is really saying for that individual, they don't

like it as much as other pictures they have seen.

Providing a normalized value, like SD above or below the individual raters average value

would provide insight into the true meaning of the rater. For example, my average scores

are around 4.0 so when I give a 5, my intent is to say to the uploader, I like your picture,

but on an absolute scale it might appear to them as if I am only giving them an average

rating.

So normalization is a strategy, and perhaps both could be reflected under the pictures

(absolute and a some variant of normalization). I suppose some sort of function could be

used to allow raters to reset their values, if the make a decision to change their rating

strategy.

Having said all that, another solution path might be to simply provide the PN id of the

rater along with their rating. As the uploader, this would allow me to look at the raters

own pictures and for me to decide what level of importance to attach to their rating.

So you understand where I am coming from, I think PN is fantastic and a wonderful

resource for photographers from different parts of the world and skill sets. I joined for a

number of reasons: to get meaningful feedback on my own work was an important one,

but I also look thru the top rated pictures pretty frequently in an effort to understand how

people perceive good photographs.

Critiques and suggestions would likely be more valuable to me then ratings, but I did a

small experiment the other day and decided I was going to write a critique on each

picture. In about 20-30 minutes I got thru 3-5 pictures..so meaninful critiques take alot

of time, but IMHO, much more enriching.

I hope some of what I suggest could be incorporated into PN..although I suspect you have

heard it all before and for various reasons/rationale decided not to implement.

Regards,

Steven

Well, I think I had asked a simple question..as to the actual average value of aesthetics and

originality along with their standard deviations on PN. Sadly, I have not seen the answer to

that question. Hoping that this is not lost voices in the woods.

Steven

Well, that could be contained within some guideline... rate whether you like or not...but at least for myself, I try to keep my rating averages close to 4..which by necessity means I hand out a few 1 and 2 to compensate for the 6 and 7...and in fact some pictures do not qualify for anything better than a 1 or 2....

Not sure you have to force ratings on everything... just if someone only rates a 6 on high quality pictures only, then the rater will have to ponder what to do when they find something they really like...because a 7 might not look at that impressive.

Anyway, I think it is experiment worth trying if PN would be willing to implement and let's see where it goes..and maybe in the final analysis it is a terrible idea, but I think not.

I don't know any of the movers and shakers at PN, but hopefully someone does....and perhaps an inquiry can be made...

Knowing individual ratings and the PN ID attached to those ratings would allow us to focus on certain responses and exclude other responses based on our individual assessment of the raters....and this strategy would not require a change in the rating systems at all.. just display of the data.

All of this is IMHO...

Steven

My main reason for the initial post is I have been involved in an FDA regulated environment and as part of the quality control process we have used "subjective human ratings of the appearance" of something. Over the last 15 years, it is quite apparent that every individual rater tracks pretty much along their own average which may be substantially different from other raters. Thus, to "know" the meaning of the rater there are two choices: either train everyone to the same standard, or normalize each rater for themself. The first path on PN would be ridiculous and a terrible idea, because diversity is good. But it would be computationally trivial to normalize each rater to their own pattern and then express how many standard deviations above or below their mean value their rating of a particular picture was. Alternatively, provide an estimate of percentile for that particular individual....probably a better approach sense mean/SD assumes normal distribution, but percentile would not require normal distribution.

Then use the percentiles to calculate controversy index..which would likely be more meaningful. But beyond the numbers, I believe there is merit to attaching the raters PN ID which would be even easier to implement, I think. I would like to understand why someone rates my pictures either high or low....that is the way I learn... so with ID, I could ask the person the reason behind their rating... was it the fuzziness of the back eye, or the missing tooth in the grin or BW might have been better over color.

If PN wants to set itself apart from much of the rest of the garbage on the internet, I think this would be a good start.

Just IMHO. Thanks to the link re controversy index....similar concepts are involved...

Oops... a simple number...for the whole site, for the past month or year or whatever time, is there an average number for A and O with their respective SD. Someone at PN must know..help!

Steven

My main reason for the initial post is I have been involved in an FDA regulated environment and as part of the quality control process we have used "subjective human ratings of the appearance" of something. Over the last 15 years, it is quite apparent that every individual rater tracks pretty much along their own average which may be substantially different from other raters. Thus, to "know" the meaning of the rater there are two choices: either train everyone to the same standard, or normalize each rater for themself. The first path on PN would be ridiculous and a terrible idea, because diversity is good. But it would be computationally trivial to normalize each rater to their own pattern and then express how many standard deviations above or below their mean value their rating of a particular picture was. Alternatively, provide an estimate of percentile for that particular individual....probably a better approach sense mean/SD assumes normal distribution, but percentile would not require normal distribution.

Then use the percentiles to calculate controversy index..which would likely be more meaningful. But beyond the numbers, I believe there is merit to attaching the raters PN ID which would be even easier to implement, I think. I would like to understand why someone rates my pictures either high or low....that is the way I learn... so with ID, I could ask the person the reason behind their rating... was it the fuzziness of the back eye, or the missing tooth in the grin or BW might have been better over color.

If PN wants to set itself apart from much of the rest of the garbage on the internet, I think this would be a good start.

Just IMHO.

Oops... a simple number...for the whole site, for the past month or year or whatever time, is there an average number for A and O with their respective SD. Someone at PN must know..help!

Steven

Does anyone know what the mean and standard deviation is for aesthetics and

originality ratings are on PN?

Is possible for the rater id be attached to the ratings they provide so the

merit of rater can be judged or at least attach what their mean and SD A and O

ratings are?

Thanks

Steven

As a individual trying to improve my abilities, I would love to have expert critiques and yes, I might be willing to pay. As an expert in another field, I am commonly asked what I think and most of time I do not wish to comment either because I have no real opinion or because it is not worth my time to think intelligently about a response. But I do offer my expertise based on my level of interest and what people are willing to pay me..that is sort of a free market model.

So perhaps one can figure out a similar model here. To get an meaningful expert opinion, the expert must have an interest in the topic. If they are trying to offer 100 critiques per hour... it will degenerate into form comments...not particularly helpful to anyone.

Alternatively, if I see a picture that I have a meaningful, IMHO, comment, I could either comment as we currently do, for free; or I could offer my comments for a PN credit (more thought is needed on PN credits). The photographer could review my work, my other critiques and decide whether they wanted to pay my requested PN credits or not.

A members PN credits would accumulate or decrease and perhaps to cover the cost of implementation, people could buy PN credits for $1 a piece.

With this accounting we could feature the top PN credit members weekly ...those offering the most valuable critiques and advice. And at the end of each year, the top 3 PN credit members would receive some cash fee for their efforts....

Just a random thought...

Steven

I said this in one of the other posting thread, but I will say it here as well....

I think it would be relatively straightforward to attach the person's name to the ratings. Perhaps in list form in a separate detail window. Why? 1.) Because then there will be accoutability for the rating. 2.) the poster can ask why a certain rating was given...both on why a bad rating and why on the good side..this would be an enormous feedback tool. 3.) In my mind a rating of 3/3 by a person whose own work is 6/6 is different than a rating of 3/3 by a person whose own work is 3/3. 4.) If individuals are just going around and rating high or trashing, then that will become obvious very quickly..and their ratings discounted.

Just a thought.. but I would love it if PN implemented something like this....

Steven

A couple of thoughts....and then I will duck...

1. Get rid of the TRP section and offer only individual groups. That would force those who want to look at the nudes to go to the specific section...I know my wife was offended by the TRP nudes..but when I showed her the portraits, still life sections she was very impressed.

2. Not all ratings are equal. A rating of 6/6 from someone whose own pictures are rated 3/3 is different than a 6/6 rating from someone whose own pictures are rated 6/6. For critiques on my pictures, I always look that that persons own portfolio. This give me guidance as to the credibility/credence of the persons comments and thoughts. Several things would be nice. In addition to the rating values, also report out the percentiles and attach the average ratings of the rater or better attach a listing of the raters names like is done with the critiques. People tend to be more considered if they know there is accountability.

Thanks

Steven

I guess accusation of misconduct can happen at anytime, anywhere..and I certainly do not carry around a video camera around to protect myself attached to my head recording every detail of my life....mmmm... could a new reality tv program!!!.......but that seems excessive..

I was wondering whether official photographer societies have professional guidelines that address the issue?

Thanks

steven

I am a 50 something semi-pro photographer trying to improve on my portrait work. A couple of models/

actors/actresses or aspiring to be want me to do tfp work in my studio. I will be obtain a model release

for promotional purposes of my studio, but someone suggested that I have a third person (observer) in

the studio, as one of the models is in her mid twenties. There will not be in nude work.

What are the "standard" code of conduct in the business?

Thanks

Steven

There is a new tutorial with the link to a new script that actually imports to Aperture all of your images when shooting in a burst, I tried it and it works, even on a very fast shooting burst.

The tutorial is here

http://www.apple.com/uk/pro/techniques/aperture/tethered.html

The script is here

http://www.automator.us/aperture/

I am waiting eagerly for the macbook pro core 2 duo and the nikon WT-3A for the fall, winter studio shooting season....hoping to pop pictures up on a 23 inch monitor as I shoot to show the client...(a marketing gimick, but I think it will be much fun as well)

https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?

mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=632736&fcc_id=

'CGJ1143EA'

link to the office of engineering and technology FCC....has the full manual submitted on

august 4, 2006...

I recently had a huge problem with my Belkin card reader corrupting cards so that neither my computer or camera would recognize the cards. I saved the images with Rescue Pro, reformated the cards in the camera and Belkin replaced the reader and everything seems back to normal. The card reader blew both Lexar and SanDisk cards. This was true for both the D70 and D200 cards.

Card readers apparently can do very nasty things...

steven