Contact Us            Join today or login

foureyes
Gender: Male
Member: Standard
Joined: January 2012
INFORMATION
FAVORITE QUOTE
FOUREYES FANS
6 of 8 fans
See All
SirPurr
Sam S
Ufoureah
EvaB
WVPhotographer
lynnkah
FOUREYES IS FOLLOWING
5 of 5 artists
See All
Ufoureah
EvaB
filly421
photoguy48
WVPhotographer
 
foureyes: I'd like to thank everyone who voted for my photo Remembrance, which recently won "In Memorial--Photography (b)."

Check out my portfolio if you have a chance.
June 9 at 8:00PM
foureyes: If you like polar bears, have a look at "My Precious" in my portfolio. It was entered in the White Photo Contest, the voting for which just completed.
May 1 at 3:08PM
    beppe47: I have been reading all the comments about revising the promotion system. I have to agree with Echo7. I have been on FAR for one year. I joined with absolutly zero knowledge of photography and wanted to learn as much as I possably could. With only two reviews I was not learning anything so to gain some knowledge I had to promote my postings which by the way I couldn't afford and had to make other sacrifices.I can review and get points but who am I to tell someone with fourty years of experience what they are doing wrong??? I have gained my knowledge from reviewers who tell ME how I can improve my work,and how to go about doing that. I could care less what rating I get,five seems to be the norm. I want teaching reviews. Should I be in the #10 spot? NO!NO!NO!!! but the system of reviewing put me there. Some members have given me great teaching reviews(and you know who you are)and I thank you,others have the same review word for word for every posting.I don't know how to go about making any changes but those of you that can introduce change for the betterment of all please keep trying.
    May 8 at 11:55AM
foureyes: I'd like to make a proposal for revision of the promotion system.

What I propose is that you pay member dollars only to determine how long you are on the list, and not where you are on the list.

For example
$2 for 1st 24 hours
$4 for 2nd 24 hours
$8 for 3rd 24 hours
$16 for 4th and each additional 24 hours

with reviewers receiving 50 cents per review.

When you make the payment, your pic goes to the top of the list, and then gets pushed down as other pics get listed, being removed at the end of the 24 hour period. But of course for a new payment you can put it back on, at the top.

Thus, all pics have their chance to be seen on the first page of the listing, but if you want a second (or third or more) crack at the first page you can relist.

Comments?

Note that in the proposed schedule, two days listing requires $6 -- same as now, but with pic position changing -- and three days requires $14 -- more than now, but with a higher average position.

Whether the site could still afford to provide us with the two free reviews if it switched to the above system, I am not sure.

I am also toying with the idea that a reviewer could choose to provide a more detailed structured review (I am still working out the format) and earn more member cents that way.
April 25 at 3:18PM
    Badger: To get a picture (photo) on the front page costs about forty dollars at the moment, to get it to the top at peak times can cost well over seventy dollars, how would your proposal stop the cash rich like those we cannot name (you know who you are) from hogging the listing with their holiday snaps?

    You are proposing that a picture that is on promotion for two days generates six dollars site income, if it receives ten reviews it will make minus four dollars for the site. Are you one an economist at a US mortgage company?
    April 25 at 4:10PM
    Badger: Observant embers may use the eronious one any way they see fit to!
    April 25 at 4:12PM
    JjMayfield: I think it is a well thought out idea though it seems that it would cater only to those who can spend alot of time in front of the computer, I personally like the system the way it is now. Though I really do like the idea of rewarding the more detailed reviews.
    April 25 at 4:13PM
    Badger: Crap spelling too!
    April 25 at 4:13PM
    Badger: Note to self: Don't try adding when drinking!
    April 25 at 4:26PM
    foureyes: Dear Badger, it would be interesting to know how much of the pool of member dollars comes from our subscription fees and how much from purchases. I personally have only once bought my way as far as page 2 and usually only buy onto page 3. For some photos, I am content with the two free reviews.

    I think it important to consider the concept first, before the price. The concept can be implemented with a different price schedule.

    With regard to negative member dollars, please bear in mind that member dollars are not convertible into cash. Hence, no deficit spending is involved. But the simple answer is that then set review payment at 25 cents not 50. For that matter, the review payment could be stepped down when the pic was relisted.

    April 25 at 7:52PM
    Echo7: Heres my proposal.........Scrap the leaderboard...scrap the certificates....scrap the member cent pumps..........What i want to see is a site that is based around helping others...Whether it be for first timers or people looking to branch out to try new things. Stop the silly race for a pointless trophy at years end. Stop the disingenious reviewing...tactical voting.

    Have a front page that rotates like a slideshow....every post for the last 3 days, Alternating.

    Open up more forums for teaching & advice. Allow people to be far more honest....rather than allowing one to believe that there photo of a daffodil is national geographic quality because its recieved an all time best certificate.

    Allow for a much more harmonious community.

    Why does this have to be a race...art & photography shouldnt be this competative. It ruins it
    April 26 at 10:14AM
    foureyes: I don't have a problem with a site without rankings, I already participate in a critique only site. And of course any one can post a photo on FAR for critique only. I joined FAR because of the contests.
    April 26 at 5:05PM
    Ufoureah: Echo you are brilliant... The way things are are really screwed up.
    April 28 at 1:17AM
    photoguy48: Well I can say that I'm here to learn and become better both in taking pictures and editing them. I do try not to worry about the ranking and position. As I have progressed and Mr. foureyes has been a great help I am finding that most of the reviews are good and very basic of what the reviewer likes. On the other hand the bad reviews do not tell me what I can do better. So I like your idea. It cost to much to get a good amount of reviews in order to understand if it needs to be changed. I also find that after about 24 hours the reviews peter out...
    May 2 at 1:40PM
    blairwacha: I agree with echo7. The rating system here is based primarily on quantity of photos and how much you're willing to spend in either funny money or out of pocket. Quality of photos mean very little with the current rating system.

    Maybe to be rated you have to submit at least 50 photos initially and then the photographer rank rating is based on the highest average score of all photos submitted by a photographer. Artists could work that way too. If 50 is too many or too few to start with, that's easily adjusted, but the point is photographers are rated by the quality of their photos. People would be more careful about submitting junk that takes up precious storage space and then maybe FAR could allow for larger uploads and improve the quality of the site too.

    Look at the top ten of a category. Less than half even have a 5+star rating. What does that tell you about the credibility of the rating system?

    Blair
    September 20 at 2:29PM
foureyes: My "Curves" came in second in Color Red - Photography (a). It's something of an abstract shot, if you like that sort of thing. And for nature lovers, take a look at "Crab in a Hurry", a Galapagos shot. It was in Color Red - Photography (f).
April 21 at 12:31AM
    NinaDd: Oh, nice job, I voted for "curves" thought it was really neat!
    April 21 at 12:37AM
    foureyes: And thank you for doing so. The winning entry was really neat, but also heavy mixed media. I do sometimes wonder whether traditional and mixed media should be in the same competition, but of course the site would have to have a more unambiguous definition of what is MM if the two were to compete separately.
    April 22 at 9:31AM
    blairwacha: I agree with echo7. The rating system here is based primarily on quantity of photos and how much you're willing to spend in either funny money or out of pocket. Quality of photos mean very little with the current rating system.

    Maybe to be rated you have to submit at least 50 photos initially and then the photographer rank rating is based on the highest average score of all photos submitted by a photographer. Artists could work that way too. If 50 is too many or too few to start with, that's easily adjusted, but the point is photographers are rated by the quality of their photos. People would be more careful about submitting junk that takes up precious storage space and then maybe FAR could allow for larger uploads and improve the quality of the site too.

    Look at the top ten of a category. Less than half even have a 5+star rating. What does that tell you about the credibility of the rating system?

    Blair
    September 20 at 2:28PM
foureyes: Contest voting is completed for landscape (a) so I can acknowledge that "Cinder Cone" is mine -- have a look-see if you like true infrared. I also just posted "Pause for Reflection" for the fortunately non-blind "Reflections" contest; I look forward to comments.
April 14 at 12:25AM
foureyes: This is a belated invitation to look at two of my photos that were entered in just-completed blind competitions: Pas de Deux shows two tiger swallowtails mating, and Lily in Bloom shows, well, the title says it all.
April 10 at 12:23AM
foureyes: So, for those interested, my "Come a little closer...." (grizzly fishing in Alaska) came in second in the Fishing contest, please take a look at it if you haven't already.

And also look at the winner, Stacey Nagy's Early Morning Fisherman (the one I voted for, btw), and Homerladybells'a 3d place entry, A Good Day.
April 5 at 12:20AM
    Stacey Nagy: Congrats foureyes, I thought your shot was totally amazing!
    April 5 at 8:57AM
    foureyes: Mutual, as they say. I just posted a review of your shot -- I don't think it fair to review competitor shots until the contest is over.
    April 5 at 9:45AM
    pzoette: You are such a kind person. Clone yourself!!! Yes, I am in the neighborhood so to speak. I also can't write email so here I am. If you ever come up this way to AVAM let me know. The winner up there on this post has my email. Z
    April 8 at 11:02PM
foureyes: I posted Veil of Light earlier this evening -- the bride is my niece. I look forward to comments.
April 2 at 12:11AM
foureyes: I was pleased to see my pic Surprise! come in 2nd in Naturally Cute (d) and I congratulate the winner, Homerladybella.
March 31 at 1:03AM
    pzoette: I congratulate you on this award! I'm making up a new one as well. That is: how to write a review in which you do not necessarily like a piece but say so politely.

    I wish we could have models of how to do that...and I congratulate you for being a good reviewer as well. TY!
    April 1 at 1:52PM
    foureyes: I think that writing a review as you suggest is a matter of courtesy and common sense. Say what you like first, and be specific about what you don't like.
    Take the genre and the photographer's intent and circumstances into account.
    April 2 at 12:12AM
foureyes: OK, here's my proposal concerning ratings.

1. Most photos are just critiqued, not rated.

2. Photos either get no ratings or "commendations". Each member gets a limited number of commendations to award each month (just like present 5+ or 6 star rating system). In addition, members can earn the right to award more commendations by

1) winning contests
2) receiving reviewing contest nominations

Not sure offhand whether these would be one-time awards or whether they permanently increase the member's commendation quota, and protections would be needed I suppose against sweetheart exchanges of reviewing contest nominations for commendations.

The FAR ranking of a photographer/artist would be based on the number of commendations received relative to the number of images posted.

Anyway, that's an attempt to deal with several concerns at once: 1) putting more emphasis on critiquing then on rating, 2) avoiding revenge reviews or muting in response to ratings lower than a 5, 3) giving reviewers who have in some way demonstrated photographic knowledge more of an influence on the rankings.

Anyway, I am throwing that proposal out as a starting point for discussion.
March 29 at 7:30PM
    pzoette: Now this is an interesting proposal. The one flaw I see is that the contest awards are provided, generally, by us so it circumvents the popularity 5 contest on the surface but still depends upon those ratings, in some way. I saw something today in which the artist just asked for critiques and no ratings and I thought that was brilliant on his/her part.

    I will take a 3.5 or even a 2 if it is worded respectfully. I know I'm delusional thinking that is necessarily a sign of humanity, but I'm just throwing that in.

    But I like the emphasis on critiquing. Then there has to be a guideline to follow because 10 word repetitive critiques are as useless as a low score with no explanation. My mother can say 'this is great.' I still want to know something about why so that I know what I did well. And, since ever work is different, it can't be for the same reason all the time.

    So, who becomes the critique police??

    And, we have to remember that there are non-photographer artists here so we have to include them in the mix. I have received some of my most useful critiques from painters, for example, who do not focus (so to speak) on my focusing ability.

    So I'm agreeing but pointing out some nuisance variables.
    March 29 at 11:47PM
foureyes: It's something of a pity that FAR doesn't have a system in place for sending out belated fan notifications for blind contest entries once the voting is over. Here's a list of my entries since joining in late January that fall into that category:

Incongruous Footprints, Gateway to Heaven, Leaves of Ice, I'm Flipping for You, Eyespot, Reflections on Flight, Reach for the Leaves, Rainbow of Tassles, Crab Toss, Peepers, Graduation Green, Hey, Bart!, Chocolate Carryout, Lake Louise, Xena the Water Dog, Double Vee and Have a seat, son!

(Yes, I like entering contests). Please feel free to comment on any of them.
March 27 at 8:12PM
foureyes: As Badger suggested, my tutorial on selections, channels and masks in Photoshop has been moved to a new thread in the Photography section of the Forum.
March 20 at 9:59PM
foureyes: My comments on selections in Photoshop have been moved to the Forum/Threads in Photography/Tutorial on Photoshop Masks etc.
March 18 at 10:43PM
    EvaB: Great info. Thanks so much!
    March 19 at 10:12PM
    ducilla: Very good information! Although we can have slightly different paths this one seems to be quite easy to follow...Thanks again,dennis
    March 20 at 8:17PM
foureyes: My comments on masks in Photoshop have been moved to the Forum/Threads in Photography/Tutorial on Photoshop Masks etc.
March 15 at 10:27PM
    Kelli Lauck: this is awesome! i so can't wait to try this!
    March 15 at 11:01PM
    Keri Harrish: Thank you for taking the time to write this!
    March 16 at 12:50AM
    avmurray: This is a good explanation on how masks work. I have done a lot of tutorials lately about the subject. For those who are interested I would like to add that if you find it difficult to follow what is written above I can recommend tutorials through lynda.com. I signed up when I got PS CS5, and it is really useful if you want to know everything about Photoshop.
    March 16 at 3:21AM
    Life is but a dream.: thank you , please do not remove the above as I will refer to it when the time comes...
    March 17 at 7:13PM
FanArtReview wrote to foureyes: Congratulations! Generations won the contest "Family Photography"
February 26 at 12:10AM
    avmurray: I remember this photo. I am so glad you won with it. Congratulations !
    February 26 at 3:42AM
    donkeyoatey: Congratulations..a poignant shot!
    February 26 at 6:29AM
    ducilla: Very nice capture.definatly a winner...dennis
    February 26 at 10:38AM
    brenda collins: Congrats! It is a very worthy photograph and one of my favorite on this site. Good job
    February 26 at 2:06PM
    lynnkah: congrats my new friend its good to see you win so many contest on this site being on it for such a short time.

    lynnkah
    February 26 at 8:06PM
    foureyes: thanks everyone, it was a pleasant surprise. I am sorry I didn't respond earlier but I had a bit of a heart attack scare and was in the hospital last night for observation. It turned out to be a false alarm and I am back home now.
    February 27 at 9:32PM
    lynnkah: congratss on a yet another win that was so clearly yours. what a fantastic photgraph
    March 10 at 4:48AM
    photoguy48: Thanks Man... This looks great. I have been trying to play with masks but can't seam to get the feel of it.... I have paint shop and I'm going to see if this helps... Thanks!
    March 18 at 12:03PM
 
No work posted
.
Portfolio
RATING
Traditional Photography
Traditional Art
Mixed Media Photography
Review Stars
RANK
Traditional Photos 162
Mixed Media Photography 255
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Remembrance finished first in the member created contest "In Memorial - Photography (b)"
June 9 at 12:10AM
Pause for Reflection reached "Recognized" status.
April 18 at 10:08AM
Come a little closer.... reached "Recognized" status.
April 4 at 2:08AM
Catfrontation reached "Recognized" status.
March 11 at 3:00AM
Lake Louise finished first in the member created contest "Landscape - Photography (d)"
March 10 at 12:10AM
Lake Louise reached "Recognized" status.
March 8 at 2:08AM
Sleeping Serpent reached "Recognized" status.
February 29 at 2:08AM
Sea and Air reached "Recognized" status.
February 27 at 2:08AM

Become A Fan
Share


  Contact Us | Advertise With Us

© 2013 FanStory.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy