frankphoto

Dia dhuit Guys,<br>

I have recently renewed my subscription to P.NET. so I guess it must have something going for it.<br>

If anybody wishes to analysis my stats they are of course free to do so. I might even find it interesting, but it doesn’t validate or invalidate any opinions that I hold. The first time I contributed to a discussion on this site was on the subject of those anonymous 3/3 ratings and there was much more heat than light generated. When one of the contributors became quite rude I checked out his stats and found him to be one of the greatest hypocrites in the history of humankind…so, I did the maths, checked out the dates on which he posted certain photos, read his voluminous postings (several daily over about a 4 year period) and carefully prepared the long posting that was going to blow him away. But, I never posted my reply because I realized that exposing this ‘gentleman’ as the hypocrite he undoubtedly was, would become a sidebar to the real discussion and only fan the flame of his rudeness. And, after all, we each have the right to preach one thing and do another…. and, if we are all brutally honest we all indulge in some aspect of hypocrisy now and again.<br>

When I began using this site I found it confusing to find 3/3 ratings being systematically banged in within seconds of some of my photo being posted, and as far as know, I have never had a critique from a 3/3 rater.<br>

When I posted replies to one of the large number of threads on the subject, the antiquity and history of this discussion was frequently quoted to me…to which my reply was “ancient history is interesting but I don’t really give a fig about it. I, as a new member, can only react to how I currently find things” blah blah! If anybody is interested in my postings they know where to find them.<br>

The point is, it’s surely time to move this discussion on. Even I am becoming tired of discussing the issue.<br>

The problem, as I see it, is exacerbated by the refusal of those people to run P.NET to even acknowledge that there is indeed a problem with the rating system. Yet, every where I look on this site I read complaints, not from ‘airheads’, but from articulate, intelligent and very gifted photographers. Is it likely that all these people are simply wrong?<br>

And what about our freedom to choose….if somebody wishes to take the rating of his or her photos seriously, as far as I am concerned, that person should be entitled to do so without prejudice or ridicule from anybody else….you pays your money, and you makes your choice!<br>

So what’s my solution to this impasse? I feel that the first thing to do is to establish once and for all whether there really is a significant problem with the rating system, and the nature and scale of the problem. This could be achieved in a simple survey of P.NET members. It could also serve to discover the level of customer satisfaction with the site. As for the right to choose, as mentioned above; can we not have, when requesting critiques; the simple choice of requesting either ratings with or without name appended i.e., anonymous ratings or non-anonymous ratings. What’s wrong with giving folk the right to choose one or the other, and whom could such a simple system alteration possibly offend?<br>

I’m not saying my suggestions are going to solve everybody ratings problems, but how can they fail to cause an improvement in the service and who could possibly object? I say let’s all looks forward objectively, with only the occasional glance over our shoulder to the past!<br> <br>

SLAN….FRANK.

The sex most important things I've learned from mypur participation in photo.net are as follows listed from

1-11<br><br>

1) POW stands for Prisoner of the Week because you have been kidnapped, and will be severely tortured for one

very long week by the ROTters (see 4 below).<br>

2) POW sometimes stands for Poisoner of the Week after those ROTters who post aprox., 42,214 critiques per week

and really know where to insert the venom-tipped dagger, usually between the 5th and 6th rib at the back, and

directly into the tripes...OUCH!........avec twist (OUCH x2)!<br>

3) POW occasionally stands for Pick(ture) of The Weak(est) because The Leprechauns ( nasty little Irish elves!)

as a general rule, will pick the weak(est) photo from their victim's portfolio. For Shame!

4) ROT stands for Rule of Thirds, a form of critique practiced by ROTters.<br>

5) ROT sometimes known as the Rule of Turds, the only form of critique that most low (DOF?) ROTters are capable

of expressing!<br><br>

6) Last Christmas, in a characteristic spirit of gracious magnanimity, I wished all anonymous 3/3 raters a very

happy,holy, healthy and peaceful Christmas Holiday and a prosperous New year. Next Christmas, my sincere hope is

, through the very bowels of Christ; a pox on all your houses even unto the seventh generation! May the seven

plagues of Egypt be visited upon you and yours. I hope you never experience a minutes ease from the itch of your

genital psoriasis and trust that you will continue on using the ointment in the full knowledge that oil is about

to run out..... OH! and keep buying the scratch cards, saps!And just for luck ,may the bird of paradise, or a

feckin' vulture or something, fly up your nose<br>

7) I should moderate my postings..........I should stop using so many !'s K.O!.<br>

8) Naturally, most of my P.NET friends are not included in the sentiments expressed above..........LOL. BB &

TTFE. <br>

9) Some threads are great feckin' (a very mild Irish swear word) great 'craic'.<br>

10) Feck P.Net .........send any replies directly to my firm of solicitors:<br>

Messers., Talk, Dirty and Goodbody, Ltd. <br>

c/o Herman Goering House,<br>

The Pflatz, <br>

Fatima 13.<br>

11) I just Hate those gosh-darned, gosh and gee whizzer, 'merkin spell checquers!<br>

LOLL........<br>

SLAN....FRANK.

The dream goes something like this: I log into my e-mail 'thingy' and it's swamped with yards of messages from P.Net well wishers, all congratulating me on one my photos being chosen as 'PHOTO of the YEAR' (I dream big!) So I rush over to my site to see which of my masterpieces( o.k., I'm still dreaming) has been chosen by the Leprechauns (Irish Elves! .....O.K!...Give me patience!) only to find they have chosen the one photo I neglected to delete in the last spring clean of my portfolio of masterpieces.Now I have to defend this lesser spotted masterwork against all comers like Rachel Ann flamin' Foster , Lex( horizontally challenged [frequently I hear!] Jenkins, and not forgetting of course, Bernhardt what's-his-name...who will ever forget what's-his name? and Patrick and Tiffany and Rachel and Lex (o.k. it's a closed loop dream). Suddenly things turn very nasty indeed....My photo of a singularly delicious portwine-stew is being ravaged by a 'bite' of vampires (3/3 raters).........I kid you not! Then in a flash of ozone my bloody P.C crashes again! It may have been just a dream or perhaps a portent but don't think it couldn't happen to YOU. My advice to users of this site is.......drum roll Ginger please..........Dadaah , Dadaah, Dahdaaaaaaaaa (oh get on with it ya sap!) BE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID

Dear Lex, I have read loads of comments by you around the site, in fact your stats say you have posted 18,199 comment in the past 8 years!This works out at about 44 per month. I must admit I'm impressed...no wonder you are perpendicularly challenged.......I'd be flat on my back too! Any comments of yours that I have read have always been informative, calm, constructive, and intelligent. I may not always agree with your point of view but I always walk away with something to think about! People like you are one of the elements which makes P.Net work for people like me. I know I am totally off the point of this discussion but I always like to acknowledge plain old good manners. Thank you for your response. FRANK.

p.s., I still think the rating system stinks!

Lex and Mike, thank you for your patient and informative replies to my response above. The point I am trying to make is that almost the first experience most of us have on P.Net is of seeing our photos systematically receive 3/3 ratings. In some cases, these postings are done with such speed that they can't possibly involve any worthwhile appraisal of the photographer's work. And I have never had a direct posting i.e. with name appended, by a 3/3 rater. This is confusing and discouraging for a beginner, so it follows that the subject is going to continue to be raised by confused and discouraged beginners.

 

My reprinted response is really just an illustration of the sort of thing (WARTS AND ALL) we can expect will be repeated long into the future if the rating system remains unchanged. As a rookie of 3 months

I must admit that I didn't delve into he archives to research the ancient past on this topic, I simply reacted to how I found it. In fact I don't really give a hoot about what tweaking of the system was done in the distant past, it's only of academic interest. Certainly nothing has significantly changed in my time on P.NET (Almost one year)

 

One response to the rating question that constantly comes up is that people will always complain, no matter how great the system. I have never heard ANYBODY argue that any improvement was going to please EVERYBODY, so why make the counter argument that it can't! All we can expect is to endeavor to please as many members as possible, which in my albeit limited experience on P.Net, does not seem to be the case. I will post below some comments by some photographers I greatly admire. These people are not airheads but intelligent and extremely gifted photographers. So it's plain to me that there is indeed something amiss with the rating system in it's present form. I don't seek out negative comments on the rating system but they appear all over the site and are certainly easy to find.

 

Furthermore, there is the question of choice: if I choose to submit my photos for rating it is my prerogative and I should at least be entitled to a fair crack of the whip, and not told that to ignore the system altogether. Surely this is one of the strongest admissions that the system simply stinks!

 

And Mike, I think it's a wee bit unfair of you to pick out one line for comment and totally ignore the fact that the line must be read in the context of the proceeding line and following line, which I went to the bother of typing out in an attempt to make my meaning clear.

Thank you both for your interesting responses...if I sound a trifle tetchy tonight it's probably because I went out this morning to a local wood to photograph some Spring flowers and decided to bring along our Springer Spaniel Jess for the exercise. While I was photographing some bluebells the dog simply disappeared and after more than 8hours (I kid you not) searching we have still not managed to locate her...so the wife is has definitely given me a 3/3 for intelligence and the three big sons have the demenour of a lynch mob!

As promised above:

 

Jacqueline Robertsphoto.net patron, January 15, 2008; 07:44 A.M.

 

3/3 rater(s)

 

thanks for dropping by...but what took you so long!

 

Laurent-Paul Robertphoto.net patron, January 15, 2008; 09:38 A.M.

 

Be happy with 3/3 raters : whatever their motivation, ( jalousy beeing porbably the most obvious one ), this means people are reacting to your art. And the stronger your Art, the more difficult it will be to please

 

 

 

 

Hekate Hek, April 14, 2007; 08:49 P.M.

Dear 3/3 anonymous raters,

 

have you heard of the expression "do not throw your pearls to the pigs" ? This is how I feel (like having thrown pearls to the pigs) when I see the anonymous 3/3 ratings on my picture (you can draw your own conclusions). Thanks for rating my work anyway (but you should really, I mean REALLY get a life).

 

I'd be more interested in advice and comments that I could learn from. or in which people would tell me what the image makes them think of..

 

thank you everybody...

 

 

The issue of ratings just won't lie down and die because there will always be new members who take a little time to arrive at the same conclusion that hundreds of others have arrived at i.e., the rating system is being systematically manipulated to it's detriment by some person or persons who take the matter very seriously indeed, judging by the time and effort they expend making a complete nuisance of themselves. I will post below, a response I made last November, warts and all, when I was a new and gullible rookie on this site. This subject will never go away unless those who are in a position to do something about it, actually acknowledge that there is a problem and decide to do something positive about it instead of just dishing out more of

the same old waffle.

 

 

 

 

Everywhere I look on this site I see complaints about the rating system. It is quite obvious that it just does not work ...and it does not take long for people to realise this very obvious fact . I joined P.NET about three months ago for the same reason as most other people, to improve my photographic skills, but I feel that in the main I am wasting my time for the following reasons. When I post a photo, the first rating it receives is almost always a 3/3. Recently I posted 2 photos to be rated, and within SECONDS of their appearing in the Critique Forum they had both been rated 3/3. This has happened to me (and to other much better photographers than me)so often that I am convinced somebody out there is doing this systematically for some reason. The thing is that this reduces an already flawed rating system to almost worthless rating system. I have yet to receive a critique fron a 3/3 rater....I have a total of 138/3 ratings! There are basically two ways our photo are appraised on this site ...ratings and critiques. I find I get very few worthwile critiques, which leaves me with ratings which, as so many people before me have pointed out, is of very limited value. Lots of people tell us to ignore the rating system altogether...but why should we capitulate so easily, why should we not have the CHOICE at least? The Elves who administer this site must be well aware of the level of discontent on the site regarding the rating system .....what do they do about it....NOTHING as far as I can see, they don't even seem to acknowledge there is a problem ! Wouldn't it be interesting to have a poll of members to establish the level of satisfaction they feel regarding this and other issues. I suspect most people are quite happy with the site as a whole, but wouldn't it be very interesting to put it to the test! If this site were another type of service/business it would have to respond to so many complaints from it's customers.........perhaps we don't complain LOUDLY enough..perhaps I will in future ! A suggeston : when we post a photo in the Critiques Forum could we have the choice of selecting DIRECT RATING ONLY...I think this would be a progressive first step... but I won't be holding my breath waiting! SLAN....FRANK.

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

PS., I have just read Courtnay's posting above and she has hit the nail on the head with regards my reasons for thinking that Mike was an administrator .....It was not due to misinterpreting the Icon ! Thank you Courtnay. SLAN.....FRANK

Dia dhuit Rob, If, you say, I was mistaken in my assumption that Mike Dixon is an administrator than I can only offer my UNRESERVED APOLOGY to Mike and hope he can accept it. Sorry Mike!

I have only been a member for about 4 months and being somewhat technically challenged, I sometimes struggle with things technical.Perhaps this explains my 'shallow well' of knowledge. But I'm not a closed mind, I'm quite prepared to listen and to learn. SO, Rob, if you would be prepared to elucidate on your comments above by addressing the points I made above I might learn a lot. My experience of P.N. so far has been,in the main, positive and encouraging , but my photographic 'talent'is not of sufficient quality as to attract many critiques. In fact the majority of my photos are not critiqued...so where does this leave me? It leaves me with a rating system which, it seems, is quite inadequate. Virtually every time I post a photo some anonymous clown , within seconds, appends a rating of 3/3. At firstI found this to be very disconcerting and not very encouraging....until I realised that it happens almost systematically, and to other, much more talented photographers than me. Everywhere on this site I come across dissatisfactoin with the rating system...I have read reports of some very accomplished photographers leaving the site because of this.

So, am I mistaken in my assumption that there is something wrong with the system. And to whom do I address my complaints..I genuinely don't know how to contact 'the Elves'! Any time I come across comments buy 'the Elves' they seem to be written in a very defensive way, without addressing the issue and without even admitting that there is a problem. This has been my experience of P.N. and I'm sure other people have had diferent experiences and have very different views to mine.....and I don't have a problem with this. Sorry to be repeating myself. But Rob , I'm quite willing to learn if you are willing to explain....Slan FRANK.

Dia agaibh.....Of course it's best not to take the ratings TOO seriously, but it IS very discouraging when you initially join P.N. to have some clown banging in 3/3's every time you post a photo....it can be confusing until you figure out for yourself exactly what's going on! For all the time and effort this clown puts in, HE at least, takes it VERY seriously! Anyway, I don't really think that it's any of my business if other members decide to take the rating system seriously....that's their CHOICE and I respect that. But there should be at least be a level playing field for these members....nobody should, in as far as it is possible, be allowed to manipulate the system for whatever advantage they gain from so doing, to the disadvantage of so many other members.. It's just not good enough!

Another point of interest (I have alluded to this in my comment above)is the reaction of the site administators to the very obvious dissatisfaction of members all over this site with the rating system as it presently exists. The administrator above, Mike Dixon, has entered this discussion and offers nothing of any substance to it...as usual he isn't even prepared to admit that there is a problem in the first place! He just trots out the old cant about how the system

never worked in the past, so we will all have to put up with it now and forever, because lousy and all as the system is, it might be worse if it we try to improve it(as has been done in the past). Confused? Well wait till you are my age! This has been intresting discussion , so lets not lose sight of the main thread of the discussion by getting bogged down in the minutiae of semantics ...when I see the cut and paste's beginning, I find the discussion ususlly going off track and often ceases to remain interesting! SLAN ....FRANK.

Everywhere I look on this site I see complaints about the rating system. It is quite obvious that it just does not work ...and it does not take long for people to realise this very obvious fact . I joined P.NET about three months ago for the same reason as most other people, to improve my photographic skills, but I feel that in the main I am wasting my time for the following reasons. When I post a photo, the first rating it receives is almost always a 3/3. Recently I posted 2 photos to be rated, and within SECONDS of their appearing in the Critique Forum they had both been rated 3/3. This has happened to me (and to other much better photographers than me)so often that I am convinced somebody out there is doing this systematically for some reason. The thing is that this reduces an already flawed rating system

to almost worthless rating system. I have yet to receive a critique fron a 3/3 rater....I have a total of 138/3 ratings!

There are basically two ways our photo are appraised on this site ...ratings and critiques. I find I get very few worthwile critiques, which leaves me with ratings which, as so many people before me have pointed out, is of very limited value. Lots of people tell us to ignore the rating system altogether...but why should we capitulate so easily, why should we not have the CHOICE at least? The Elves who administer this site must be well aware of the level of discontent on the site regarding the rating system .....what do they do about it....NOTHING as far as I can see, they don't even seem to acknowledge there is a problem !

Wouldn't it be interesting to have a poll of members to establish the level of satisfaction they feel regarding this and other issues. I suspect most people are quite happy with the site as a whole, but wouldn't it be very interesting to put it to the test! If this site were another type of service/business it would have to respond to so many complaints from it's customers.........perhaps we don't complain LOUDLY enough..perhaps I will in future !

A suggeston : when we post a photo in the Critiques Forum could we have the choice of selecting DIRECT RATING ONLY...I think this would be a progressive first step... but I won't be holding my breath waiting!

SLAN....FRANK.

Thanks for the useful advice guys....I know the question sounds somewhat

obtuse, but I am a bit of a techno-eejit! Usually I go all around the World twice over trying to perform fairly simple tasks on my P.C. and then one of the kids informs me that I can 'do that by pressing ALT+XY'.

I wanted to get in a pre-emptive strike on them ! Anyway, Thanks again for the advice...SLAN....FRANK.

Recently I came across a box of old family photos, newspapers and letters. I

want to scan all these documents into my P.C.....no problem so far! I also want

to transfer this material to discs in order to share them with other family

members.

Sounds simple enough!

There are two problems: 1) How do I organise such such a diverse collection of

material in a constructive way in my P.C. ...is there some sort of software that

might help?

2) Some of the iteme are in a delicate state (letters from 1922 and photos from

1890's) how should I organise them so that they do not deteriorate further, but

I would like to be able to display them from time to time.

I really would appreciate any advice on this matter.

Thank you ....Frank Gaffney.