| Ranked Posts: 2723 |
| Buckinghamshire |
|
 #23 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 05/04/2006 @ 00:06:42 |
   |
|
I think it'd be wrong to assume that anybody would be at a disadvantage just because they don't have a digital camera, but that's just me splitting hairs...
As for my shots - well, I just haven't been taking any! I took a few landscapes in Serre Che, but haven't processed the rolls yet. Hoping for some good stuff but you never know...
I think the defining factor in this thread though, is just the difference between snapshots and proper photographs - it's no bad thing, just that I'm more used to seeing photographs, and can't appreciate what makes a snapshot special for the people who have taken it. I'm just not very good with holiday snaps, and tend to mark them down without thinking - or remembering that I'm not on a photography site. |
 |
| Goneboarding - Not a substitute for human interaction |
|
|
|
|
|
| #22 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 04/04/2006 @ 23:48:14 |
|
|
| In reply to post #21 ... |
sorry maybe that came across as harsh, i don't mean make sure they are perfect, but the one below is not very good! Of course maybe i am lumping myself into the photographer elitist club as i've taken a few pictures in my day and maybe i'm wrong to say anything about picture quality.
As for not everyone having a digital camera i know you're right cuz i don't own one! But even pics i scan on my crappy dell scanner are better resolution/clearer than the pic below. Some of the pics the guy submitted are ok, but that one is not, i'm sorry to be with Afro on this (and sorry to the photographer but as it goes on nfolio as well, if you don't want criticism why upload your pictures to a public forum?)
Nevermind, this arguments been done already. Said what i wanted to say. |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 1531 |
| Forum Mod |
| Berkshire |
|
| #21 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 04/04/2006 @ 23:42:43 |
|
|
| In reply to post #19 ... |
The mod's should do a better job of screening the pics for ones like the one PB put in this thread though
jeez - you'd have us doing your chores if we gave you the chance!  
this isn't a photography website
which is why i'm not about to overly mod photographs and create an elitist gallery.
Whats 'crap' to you, might be the pride and joy of someone else and contrary to your beliefs, not everyone has a digital camera. |
|
|
|
|
|
| #20 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 04/04/2006 @ 22:38:18 |
|
|
oops, replying to my own post 
Just had an idea as i looked thru my own gallery. When you're submitting pics a minimum/maximum pixels should be told so we can resize our own pics accordingly. Looking at my pics of harmony bowl, the lines across are just from it being resized oddly...on my computer screen it looks fabulous (if i don't say so myself  ). Would also save people uploading low resolution pics, although it wouldn't help for blurry images. |
|
|
|
|
|
| #19 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 04/04/2006 @ 21:58:46 |
|
|
| Revision #1 (Last edited: 04/04/2006 @ 22:05:54) |
| In reply to post #18 ... |
I agree with both sides....
That pic is crap, obviously taken with a camera phone or something so why is it necessary to uplaod it to a site like this? Unless its of Terje and all you had was your camera phone to capture it, it just seems odd to upload a crap pic like that.
I also agree that there shouldn't be ratings on the gallery pics. PB's right, this isn't a photography website and if you want your pictures rated put them on nfolio or something like that. The mod's should do a better job of screening the pics for ones like the one PB put in this thread though. Even i've submitted some crap pics in the past and if i had been told they were too blurry to put up i would have been ok with it.
As for Afro, where are your wonderful pics then? Snow scenes are hard to capture on film (or digi if that's your thing), so why don't you show some examples of how to frame subjects well on snow. I know that snow scenes aren't my forte so i don't even bother bringing a camera with me unless my sis'll lend me her digi for the day.
edit: just looked at the latest pics in the gallery and have to say, Ugly's pic is amazing! That should be used as a reference for quality and composition  Way to go Ugs  With almost everyone having digital cameras, there really isn't a reason for bad quality pics like the ones uploaded, sorry... |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 5154 |
| Forum Mod |
|
| #18 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 04/04/2006 @ 20:40:05 |
|
|
| My whole point to the thread, as I said in my first post, was that it's not necessary to make people feel sh*t about their own photographs by rating them so low. My whole point is that ratings on a forum like this for photographs are pointless. Let people share them, and look at them, and in some cases enjoy them, but with the exception maybe of Afro, and other very keen, and talented photographers, who are we to judge? |
|
I am in shape! Round is a shape!!
Myspace
The facebook of powder |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 1476 |
| Forum Mod |
| Devon |
|
| #17 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 04/04/2006 @ 20:33:33 |
|
|
| In reply to post #15 ... |
Are you trying to say that's a nice pic PB ?  |
|
| Wake up to your imagination, ride along on your inspiration! |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 2723 |
| Buckinghamshire |
|
| #16 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 04/04/2006 @ 19:09:10 |
|
|
| In reply to post #15 ... |
I'd give it a low rating actually - but then I generally get spoilt with decent quality pics, considering I'm a photographer and most of my friends are either pros or take commissions.
The main problem with that shot is that it's not at all sharp - you can't pick out any definition in the tracks, so you can't really feel stoked at the powder run they've obviously just come down.
The blue of the sky is nice, but the colours are muddy where you really need detail, both in the trees and on the run itself.
Technically speaking, it's on the wonk (horizon line isn't straight) and there's a dark mark (a thumb?) at the bottom left.
On Nfolio, I'd give this shot a 1 out of 10, meaning on GB it would get 0.5 out of 5.
But then I'm an arsehole as well.
I do see what you mean though - unfortunately people don't take the time to look through the gallery these days, but in all honesty I don't have the time to go through thousands of shots much like this one, that either don't have anything to them (i.e. a focal point) or are so badly taken that all I'd be doing is giving them low marks - so I choose to ignore them, which is a shame because no doubt I've missed out on hundreds of excellent shots.
Like I said though, I'm spoilt as far as good photography is concerned, and so am always going to mark a blurry shot of a cliff drop down, while someone else might go 'wow - a cliff drop!' and give it top marks.
What got me recently though was that every single rating was wiped off the site when it was revamped - and I just don't want to go through thousands of shots that to my eye all look the same.
I do think there's a lot of crap that's gone up though - but as I said, my opinion, as well as Wildebeest and all the other photogs I know, is going to be very different. I'd rather people took a little more care over what they uploaded, and only put up their best shots, but then it would be a difficult job as a gallery moderator to decide what deserved to be put on the site and which ones should be refused. |
|
| Goneboarding - Not a substitute for human interaction |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 5154 |
| Forum Mod |
|
| #15 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 04/04/2006 @ 18:55:49 |
|
|
Can anyone tell me why this photo warrants a rating of 1.67??!! It's up now coz I voted it 'properly'
Seems no-one is interested in this subject anymore, which is disappointing. |
|
I am in shape! Round is a shape!!
Myspace
The facebook of powder |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 5154 |
| Forum Mod |
|
| #14 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 01/04/2006 @ 12:19:54 |
|
|
Right, I'm bringing this up again because there has been another instance of poor ratings in the gallery.
The photo's in question are those of ten_8_0 hitting the park. Yes a couple are blurred a little due to motion, and some are from a little distance, but come on, 1.3 odd average rating??!! It's just not necessary, I personally think it was ok, it's difficult to capture movement when someone is in the air, and you need to look at it from a different perspective! And then, what, oh woah, another scenery shot that gets a rating of 4 average, what a surprise!!
Can the ratings please be removed??!! |
|
I am in shape! Round is a shape!!
Myspace
The facebook of powder |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 5154 |
| Forum Mod |
|
| #13 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 20/03/2006 @ 16:21:34 |
|
|
| So has nobody else got any thoughts on this subject? Starnzy, any input from yourself regarding this? |
|
I am in shape! Round is a shape!!
Myspace
The facebook of powder |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 5154 |
| Forum Mod |
|
| #12 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 18/03/2006 @ 17:52:50 |
|
|
| In reply to post #11 ... |
| Were they reinstated then? Either way, I still think they should be removed again, in favour of Pic of the Week. |
|
I am in shape! Round is a shape!!
Myspace
The facebook of powder |
|
|
|
|
|
| #11 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 18/03/2006 @ 17:27:20 |
|
|
| In reply to post #9 ... |
| The ratings got dropped when the site was upgraded. |
|
_____________________________________________________________________________
I don't need to shout about what qualifications I have got and haven't got, I know I'm good! |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 272 |
| West Yorkshire |
|
| #10 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 18/03/2006 @ 14:47:04 |
|
|
| In reply to post #8 ... |
Stuart, that's exactly what I'm talking about!  |
|
| Fully paid up member of the donald ducked knee club. |
|
|
|
| Ranked Posts: 1531 |
| Forum Mod |
| Berkshire |
|
| #9 Re: Unnecessary gallery ratings 18/03/2006 @ 13:15:54 |
|
|
| In reply to post #1 ... |
totally agree with you PB.
I'd take the ratings with a pinch of salt.
Take a look at philw's gallery. Every picture is a winner, but hardly any of them have even been rated! |
|
|
|