|
nevenneve
Apr 5, 2007, 3:48 AM
Post #26 of 36
(2097 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2004
Posts: 454
|
Just because someone has a set of rules they enforce on the world looking out does'nt mean the rest of the world could give a crap. Look through the archives and I guarantee 1 has more use than five. The worst pics of rc.com thread ran out variety long gefore the well dried up.
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Apr 5, 2007, 3:04 PM
Post #27 of 36
(2084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
This is not a photography site, these ratings are a bit harsh.
I rarely rate anything below 3. I base my ratings on
5: I would look at it over and over again, technically or thematically perfect. Yes, I said "or" not "and".
4: Almost perfect. If only this was not like this but like that. Still a good image I enjoy looking.
3: Nice one. Far from perfect, could be better, but I still enjoy it. A good attempt falling short.
2: Overrated, or I do not like it. Good attempt but misses horribly. You shall not submit everything you shoot.
1: I do not want to see it again. Ever. It is not related to climbing, sucks, has horrible jpg artifacts, shot with a camera phone, or the user tried random photoshop filters.
(This post was edited by melekzek on Apr 5, 2007, 3:06 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
sidepull
Apr 5, 2007, 3:32 PM
Post #28 of 36
(2077 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335
|
climbsomething wrote: C'mon Thom, you've been a mod/ed type around here for a long time. You should know better than to start these kinds of threads. They always come off as whiny and they never resolve anything. I have only voted a few times since the new 5-star system was put into place. With the 5-star versus 10 "star" rating in place now, and the fact that the photos get rotated off the front page even less regularly than before, the photo voting has become even more meaningless.
Agreed. This does sound whiny and the current system leaves much to be desired, particularly the lack of rotation on the front page.
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
Apr 5, 2007, 4:00 PM
Post #29 of 36
(2063 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
This isn't prophotog.com, grayghost.
I use a bell curve sorta thing, i.e. 80% of photos are 2, 3, or 4 with a few 5's (magazine quality), and 1's for out of focus, camera phones, rear end or blatant chic shots.
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Apr 5, 2007, 4:24 PM
Post #30 of 36
(2060 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
sidepull wrote: climbsomething wrote: C'mon Thom, you've been a mod/ed type around here for a long time. You should know better than to start these kinds of threads. They always come off as whiny and they never resolve anything. I have only voted a few times since the new 5-star system was put into place. With the 5-star versus 10 "star" rating in place now, and the fact that the photos get rotated off the front page even less regularly than before, the photo voting has become even more meaningless. Agreed. This does sound whiny and the current system leaves much to be desired, particularly the lack of rotation on the front page.
And there is no decent way of browsing the images anymore....
|
|
|
|
|
svilnit
Apr 5, 2007, 4:26 PM
Post #31 of 36
(2058 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 582
|
thomasribiere wrote: So your vote on my pics is not inaccurate as I showed them to my friends and parents (who enjoy it)! I think you are a bit harsh, but why not afterall, as your system is consistent. Knowing it makes me accept it. I so hope than I can get one 3-star pic or two in a near future (well, hoping is not enough, I will try to improve the quality of my pics).
Not trying to offend Thomas, however, I could show a steaming pile of dog shit to my friends and family and they say "great shot!!"" ooooo aaaaaahhh
|
|
|
|
|
TBlake84
Apr 5, 2007, 10:05 PM
Post #32 of 36
(2041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2007
Posts: 49
|
thomasribiere -
I am a senior photo major in college and am also a landscape shooter. I have one big piece of advice for your landscapes : Bracket your shots when shooting in high contrast light (like the pictures you pointed us to). When you get the images on your computer back home, combine the normally exposed image with the underexposed image to obtain a greater tonal range. This eliminates any blown out areas of snow and helps you keep detail. There should be many tutorials that explain how this works and how to do it better then I can in a forum. If you have any questions, PM me.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Apr 5, 2007, 11:25 PM
Post #33 of 36
(2029 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
wow it's been a while since this came up.
Honestly, who cares. If you photos are rated highly what does it get you?
If your work is good, it's not going to hold you back that some idiot bombed them. I mean when you interview for a photog job does anyone say "I saw your photos on RC.com and they were rated poorly"
I have a pretty stress free life, but it must be awesome if this is the biggest issue in your life.
I certainly won't vote on your photos just to counter balance them. Just doesn't make sense.
And once again the moderators of this site show that they are busy using there moderator status to boost there own status. I remember not that long ago a moderator hacked into someones inbox or something similar after they got flamed by a poster.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Apr 5, 2007, 11:46 PM
Post #34 of 36
(2023 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Can't you just not allow votes on your photos if you're all sensitive-like?
And I will continue to rate chick shots 5, to spite you overserious chickhaters. DURRR
|
|
|
|
|
piton
Apr 6, 2007, 2:56 PM
Post #35 of 36
(1996 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1034
|
ratings on this site is just dumb. it's more of a popularity contest.
|
|
|
|
|
kevinheiss
Apr 17, 2007, 3:03 PM
Post #36 of 36
(1766 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 26, 2004
Posts: 272
|
i'll be honest, they are nice pictures only because it is something that not many people actually see in person. But as for something that really stands out, I would disagree.
The first one is just boring, it is just a picture of the top which can be taking from any mountain top. So I would give it a 2.5.
Second one has a little more details, with the frozen waterfall which gives you a good sense of height but again it isn't anything which is special. Anyone who is up there can take that picture. Maybe a 3
The third one is a litte more interesting then the first one as you included a little more mountains with great use of shadows. I would only give it a 3.
Go to usefilm.com and creat an account there with you submissions.This allows you to get comments from other people in the photography world. But to get comments, you have to post comment on other peoples pictures.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
