paradox1

<p>Thanks heaps Lex<br>

I am guessing it would certainly be viewed as a very welcome fix indeed by many a member here. My hat goes off to the programmer that can pull that off. "... <em>interesting</em> " lol.......well put.<br>

Cheers</p>

<p>@Robert<br /> Cool, thanks mate. That does add a little light to the question and certainly supports Mike's theory as well. Cheers<br /> @ Lex<br /> No not quite Lex. The point was..... I did not understand how the rating system worked and it looked rather confusing with lower rated images positioning themselves on the TRP whilst omitting higher anonymous rated images (using the Recent Ratings average filter). However thanks to Mike O'Day's reply it seems to make a little more sense now. Although it has certainly become a long winded yet laughable exercise with comments from people like little Timmy<br /> @Tim<br /> Haaahaha.......maybe you can give me a fews tips. I love those dark and dirty type images but that little red umbrella......priceless...... and thanks for at least attempting to read the question. Nice try Timmy...you had me on the floor in stitches.</p>

<p>Thank you so much Mike,<br /> I was really contemplating whether I had made myself clear in the question. I was beginning to think that I should have simplified it a little. However your suggestion as to the system workings makes absolute sense. It is certainly a factor that I had never considered. Thanks for taking the time to carefully read and answer the question. It would seem that many people had no idea how the system worked but were quite adept at making their own approximate interpretations and venting their opinion.<br /> <br /> @ David<br /> Being ignorant to the world and not questioning why things happen would ensure that mankind still swing in the trees. I take photos because I love doing it and as for using the web to allow others to view the world through my eyes could hardly be regarded as an ego trip. I asked this original question to better understand how things work but as usual there are a select few with very little ability to comprehend what is actually being asked. This question has no relevance to art or why it is created, rather how a website works.<br /> <br /> @ Robert<br /> I agree with you more than you probably know. However ratings are a part of photo.net and one that I do actually, to a degree, enjoy. However my asking the question of how the Top Rated system works is hardly a true depiction of character and how I judge my own art. Simply the ratings are there and I use them, whether I take it seriously is of little relevance to the question.</p>

<p>Thanks Lex<br>

<br /> LJ's "ranting" remark is all too indicative of many on this site. Lets not guild the lily anymore, when you state that, "<em>LJ's reply was basically correct</em> ". That statement has no other interpretation other than being partially correct, only when you manipulate the page using filters and therefore must be totally inaccurate. The fact is that there are all too many self inflated egos that do existing on this site and so many seem to be quite oblivious to all fact, when it suits them. Or maybe they feel that the rating system should be a foundation based on creativity and triggered by random occurrences. (I bet the guy that invents that algorithm could make a few bucks writing data encryption) For goodness sake the rating system has nothing to do with art as it must be purely mathematically based, in order for it to function within the website.<br>

<br /> However that does not address the issue as to why. Currently there are images of very good quality but that is irrelevant in many aspects of this site's measurement of rating. The criterion for images to be added to the list within the RECENT RATINGS (average) are and can only be there due to both high ratings of an anonymous nature and possibly to a lesser degree open ratings. There are simply no other parameters that can be measured to obtain such a condition (unless you are basing purely upon views, which would leave the doors wide open for cheating the system). I have been on this site for several years and am quite aware of what quality is but once again that is irrelevant in the measurement of data. There is always a select amount of images on the Top Rated (average) obtaining lesser anonymous ratings than many other images that are continually floating around in what seems to be photo.net limbo. What I am trying to point out to so many, often naive individuals, is that the system seems flawed and therefore inequitable when it is clear that equal or higher rated images are denied the chance of being viewed in a descending order, through the Top Rated page (without manipulating filters).<br>

<br /> Cheers and thanks for your obvious objectivity and focused response to what you thought you actually read in the question. It would seem that all too many individuals have lost this ability to read and answer with a dignified, educated response that is pertinent to the question.</p>

<p>LJ.......clearly you have changed the parameters of the page. You have chosen All Ratings (sum)<br>

My question is on the initial Nature page "Unchanged" using the filter of 3 days and Recent Ratings (average). It does not appear on my screen, does it on yours</p>

<p>Well heres a screen shot for you.......It it aint there. So my ranting is clearly warrented when it shows for one and not the other<br /> http://i456.photobucket.com/albums/qq286/kenboxsell/Screenshot.jpg<br /> Try finding it under nature.........and if it shows up then......clearly photo.net has a glitch</p>

<p>I am not asking as to why this image is not up to standard but as to the rating system in the way it is. The rates apllied should have put it in the the TOP RATED section. That is why I put this post on another section of this forum, but a moderator has moved it here. I did not want a critique I want an answer to the system that is in place.</p>

<p>I have been an active participant in this site for a few years. Some of those years I was a paying member. Although I must admit that within the last 12 months I have tapered off this site considerably due to lack of equity, cheating and the nature of some down right nasty individuals. However this question has always intrigued me........just how on earth does the TOP- RATED system work? Now the first things I see are images that are good, without trying to isolate anyone, but they are certainly not great and the rates applied to them are obvious. Yet on the other hand I see images that are sensational and have the required anonymous TOP-RATES yet they do not even exist within the TOP-RATED category. Yes I understand that an image is required to have at least 5 anonymous high rates but then I see images with only 5 rates, which range from 3's to 5's. Sorry but the system, from what I can see is flawed. Someone please tell me how I have clearly missed something here. Please note this is not a whine about the 3-3 thing that always annoys people but a critical analysis of how the TOP-RATED system works

<div></div>

Unfortunately I dont think that a ship of any size is going to venture too close to shore (At least not with me on the bridge). At best I would presume that the closest you will get to a land mass will be 100m, unless they plan on taking you near shore with smaller vessels. Therefore I would presume that most photography will be landscape and a large lense size will not matter a great deal. All things aside I would still be bringing a larger lens for those occassional distant bird, whale .... shots. Preferably I think that the EF 100-400 IS would be a good choice. 400mm X 1.6 crop factor = 600mm still not big enough for a penguin 100m away but still enough quality to be cropped and yet reasonably affordable (about US $1500). It has IS, not something I use much, but might be handy for a moving ship in the Southern Ocean. As for your memory I would just take a laptop and external hardrive for extra space. Other than that I always carry 3 X 2Gig cards (Ultra II has always been fast enough for me)thats over 600 RAW shots before I have to D/L. I think that your only concern will be the cold and thats the only reason I would not put all my eggs in one basket and use an 8Gig card.

Have a good trip and be sure to post a few pics when you get back

I have never been quiet that far south but I do know the cold often effects battery life considerably. As a personal preference I would be stocking up on spare batteries

<div></div>

Just a suggestion

Is it possible to remove the name of the photographer for 48 hours. This might help to stop some of the mate and hate rates that are occurring

Unfortunately I think many of the people who post these so called silly questions, which have easily found answers, are asked by people that may not even have any internet savvy. They may even be having trouble simply navigating a site and when they finally reach a page where they can actually ask the question, so important to them, they are slammed with answers such as use the search button you idiot etc. Fortunately many of the regular users never suffer from such a difficulty and therefore may well assume ignorance or laziness on behalf of the searcher. With my occupation I can appreciate the annoyance of incessant questions being thrown at you everyday. However with the internet you have the right to simply and thus politely ignore them. Please remember that there is no such thing as a stupid question, just a stupid answer and we are all here to learn.