# Frusterated - what am I doing wrong?



## Lightsped

I am having problems getting decent ratings on photos. I have tried multiple techniques and a variety of subject matter. 

If anyone has time, can they glance at some of my works and tell me what I am doing wrong? I really love photography, but lately I seem to be in a slump.

Gallery is David C. / 500px

I am open to any and all criticisms and comments. Bad or good.

Thanks for your time.


----------



## AlanKlein

Hi.  You have some very nice photos.  Just scanning through them, what I noticed is that many have little breathing room for the main subjects.  Or you've actually cropped the subject where it doesn't make sense.  Some are just touching the edge of the frame.


----------



## tirediron

The technical aspects of your work seem fine; above average even.  Focus, exposure, lighting, colour, all good.  What stands out for me (and why I suspect your ratings aren't what you want) is...   nothing.  That is, while your work is good, there are tens of thousands of images just like them, In order to get noticed, you need to stand out.  Consider concentrating your efforts on a single subject, and doing it the best you can.


----------



## chuasam

Your problem is simple - caring about ratings. Your work is technically sound but nothing about it makes me want to really look at it again and again.


----------



## Scatterbrained

While there are certainly techniques that will help you get more attention on your page (posting at the right time of day, commenting/liking tons of photos, etc), what you really need is compelling subject matter that is shot well and edited well.  You need images that make people want to take a second look.   

Of course, it helps to know that the quickest way to get "Popular" on 500px is to post a colorful, long exposure landscape; preferable with mountains or an ocean in them.


----------



## jmurphy

I don't know that much about the rating system 500px uses, but personally I wouldn't care too much about it. I know it can be easier said than done. I looked through your photos and didn't really see anything I'd call wrong with them. The only other thing I can comment on, and I really don't know what the general consensus is on this, is the variety of types of images you post. I only mention this because I recently showed a couple professional photographers my Flickr page and that was the advice I received. I also heard something similar on a creative live web class recently. Again, I'm not sure how much it really matters, just food for thought.


----------



## chainsawal

I would echo jmurphy... 

I looked at your sight.. and initially I thought..."these pictures aren't bad..." and when I saw the first lego one that was the B&W with a police holding a baton and shield, I thought it was cool... but then as I scrolled down I kept seeing the same thing over and over (macro insect, lego, etc.) and the quantity of the same type of shots I think takes away from the good ones.  They are all great pictures... nothing wrong with them.  

I know it is hard... but my advice would be to cull down the number within each 'type' ...


----------



## Lightsped

Thanks for the feedback. I'll address a few of the points mentioned here. 

- Cropping of images. The thumbnails actually open up the entire photo. Just looking at the thumbnails it would like they are cropped too much, but once the thumbnail is clicked the entire image is shown.
- Concentrating on a single subject. I am not sure what is meant here? Like just take photos of one item only? Different settings, different environments, different techniques, but always using the same subject?
- Caring about ratings. I do admit, that is somewhat of a problem. I guess its like I post something, and it barely gets noticed or liked. Its somewhat discouraging.
- Types of photos. I do really love macro photography. Perhaps that's why I have insects, legos, and items like that. I am not opposed to trying different subjects or techniques. I kind of thought I had a good variety of other types posted. 

Thanks again for the input. If anyone has any other thoughts (good or bad) on the gallery as a whole or a specific image(s) I'd appreciate hearing it.
David C. / 500px


----------



## Scatterbrained

Images in the "fresh" catagory on 500px fly by pretty fast. If you want to get noticed try posting your images around 5am eastern time. I remember loading images before leaving in the morning and  I had a dozen images in a row hit popular.  Considering that I'm really not active on 500px (I don't browse/comment/like/fave, follow, etc) that's significant.   When people mention sticking with one type of photo, they're talking about one genre.  You've got random travel shots, architecture, candids, macro bugs, macro toy still lifes, etc.   Nothing wrong with having images that are all over the place if that's what you want to do, but if you want to garner a following you'll need to focus on excelling in one genre.  People who like those kinds of shots will follow you.   Me personally, I don't really care.  The only site where I really limit what I post is 1x.  Flickr gets everything that is fit to print, and 500px gets almost everything that Flickr gets.   I'm not even sure why I even stick with 500px to be honest.


----------



## astroNikon

I don't venture on 500pix, but I looked at your photos.  I like the photos but what everyone else said .. there's really nothing stunning.
Why don't you look at what is getting "rated" and compare them to yours.  Become your own critic.  Even try to replicate some photos.

I Just looked here --> Popular Photos / 500px 
What are the subjects that are getting highly rated, perspective, how are they post processsing the photos.   and compare those photos to yours.  If you are after ratings.  It seems that you take alot of photos of things but you don't slow down to figure out how to make it more "stunning" (for ratings). Of course, many of those "popular" photos I just looked at look heavily processed.


----------



## chuasam

Mmmm Boobies go a long way towards getting a high score.


----------



## unpopular

I think you are too product-oriented. You're too wrapped up in being a great photographer that you're not actually *making* any photographs. You seem to have a collection of odd objects, but I am not any closer yo understanding anything about how you see the world around you. Your body of work has a very literal sense to it that I don't think people find very inspiring. It's going to be hard to critique on a technical level because they are all so sterile. Your catalogue looks like corporate newsletters; there's just nothing there besides facts and figures about a wide number of things.


----------



## gsgary

http://vimeo.com/m/100946762


----------



## unpopular

^^ I know exactly where that was filmed. God. The sound quality of that space just brings back SO MANY MEMORIES!


----------



## Lightsped

Thanks for the continued feedback.

Wow I am not looking for any pity, I feel it is noteworthy to mention I am a beginner. I have never been paid to take a photograph, and I have never attended any kind of photography school. Everything I have learned has been online tutorials. Unfortunately I have no photography friends in which to share ideas, experiences, or stories with.

I suppose I am still searching for narrowing down what I like to photograph. I do notice that on 500px and several other photo sites it seems a fairly large portion of the members have galleries that have a variety of photos. I mean, there are the members who just do bugs, or just do snowy landscapes, or whatever, but many have a large variety of types of photos. 

Maybe I should move over to 1x or a similar website where ratings aren't so important. I do know one thing, while I am a beginner with no professional or educational experience, taking photos is something I really enjoy. I always have one of my Nikons with me at all times in hopes of getting a decent shot of whatever I can.

Thanks for the time and feedback and I would still be interested in more tips or ideas in which to build on.


----------



## gsgary

Try looking at shooting a project


----------



## Overread

A few thoughts:

1) ANY community run voting system on a website open to the public is more a game of networking and posting at the right time and even learning what is "popular" within that niche community than it is about raw skill in the craft. Some communities will LOVE HDR so if you only post them you'll get liked up quick - others will hate it and will ignore or vote you down if that's all you post. 
So the lesson is to treat it as fun and don't get hung up upon rating systems. Unless its peer reviewed by a fixed group of skilled and respected individuals. 

2) Honing ones skills is part learning to judge feedback, but also starting to set your own goals and targets in the sand. Once you've got that person standard and intent you can better measure yourself - you can aim toward it and give some structure to how and maybe what you shoot. 

3) Projects, specific concepts, subjects etc... can provide short term structure and a focus for your learning. This helps you focus rather than trying to "Do everything at once." Note I'd avoid things like 365 photo projects for this - they are more fun rather than strict learning tools (they tend to work ok for the first few weeks and then quickly fall apart for most).


----------



## W.Y.Photo

You have the technical aspect of photography down, but your subject matter is just boring.

What you need to do is spice it up. Leave your comfort zone with your next photos. Do things exciting, new, or that you've never tried before and get people to actually be interested. Not only will this increase your ratings and quality of images, it will also increase your excitement and interest  for photography and your skill with it.

You can write a novel with the best grammar, vocabulary, and literary elements ever used; but if its boring to read noone will give it a second though. This holds true with photographs as well, if not more so.


----------



## Braineack

Lightsped said:


> If anyone has time, can they glance at some of my works and tell me what I am doing wrong?



posting on 500px instead of improving skill.


----------



## pthrift

I agree with the other sentiments here...don't get caught up in ratings, especially as a beginner.  Mobs are fickle.  


Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S4. probably at work.


----------



## gsgary

Don't worry about it look how many likes I have on here and I'm a right tosser


----------



## Braineack

gsgary said:


> Don't worry about it look how many likes I have on here and I'm a right tosser


I'm beating you by one.


----------



## gsgary

Braineack said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry about it look how many likes I have on here and I'm a right tosser
> 
> 
> 
> I'm beating you by one.
Click to expand...

You won't by the end of the day I'm going to tell everyone how wonderful their photos are


----------



## CameraClicker

What is your real goal for photography?

At one of the social photo sites there is a "Featured Photos" reel.  Every few months someone asks how you get featured.  Also, every few months someone wants to limit the number of photos you can post on a daily basis.  Some people think posting fewer photos will raise the quality of photos generally.  Others think fewer postings will let their photos be seen by whomever is involved with posting to the featured photos.  500px has some algorithm that determines what the rank is, and the rank determines the order of favourites.  None of that means the photo is great.  The simple way to get a high rank at 500px is to shoot scantily clad and nude women.  Decent light and good poses help, too.  That's probably cynical.  Over saturated landscapes seem to do quite well too.

Most photos get a second or less of attention.  Then the page is turned or [next] is clicked.  At 500px, you need to have something in the square thumbnail that will make the viewer want to click on the image to see it full size.


----------



## astroNikon

Lightsped said:


> Thanks for the continued feedback.
> 
> *(1) *Wow I am not looking for any pity, I feel it is noteworthy to mention I am a beginner. *(2) *I have never been paid to take a photograph, and I have never attended any kind of photography school. Everything I have learned has been online tutorials. Unfortunately I have no photography friends in which to share ideas, experiences, or stories with.
> 
> *(3) *I suppose I am still searching for narrowing down what I like to photograph. I do notice that on 500px and several other photo sites it seems a fairly large portion of the members have galleries that have a variety of photos. I mean, there are the members who just do bugs, or just do snowy landscapes, or whatever, but many have a large variety of types of photos.
> 
> *(4) *Maybe I should move over to 1x or a similar website where ratings aren't so important. I do know one thing, while I am a beginner with no professional or educational experience, taking photos is something I really enjoy. *(5) *I always have one of my Nikons with me at all times in hopes of getting a decent shot of whatever I can.
> 
> Thanks for the time and feedback and I would still be interested in more tips or ideas in which to build on.



(1) Looks like you didn't get any pity.  The wonders of TPF  lol
(2) Neither have I. I've only read things online, youtube, used TPF.  You can also join a local camera club and get more exposure to other photographers.

(3) Instead of what sounds like you are trying to force yourself to get better, step back, and have fun with what you want to do. Don't just take a snapshot of something (except bugs, because they are not good at waiting for you to pose them or get in position) but think about the photograph some more.  Take a shot from a different perspective --> http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/subscribers-forum/367952-here-s-thought-ponder.html

(4) Why are you infatuated with ratings?  Ignore them.
If you enjoy it then you will learn more and it will get better.  Photography isn't one of those things you learn overnight.  It will takes years to develop more artistic capabilities.  Just have fun, and challenge yourself with a project or something.  Try to duplicate something that you really like, then do it again and improve up it.

and ignore the ratings.

(5) maybe stop taking photos of everything and put more thought into what you want to take a photo of.  I go out and take photos of things, go home and think about how I can improve it.  I then go back and redo photos.  This really teaches you alot.  Then I started using my hands like a movie producer to "frame" the image so I can see what I want to take and the perspective.  Then you can add things such as distortion, etc and go on from there.

It's really quite fun, when you do photography for fun instead of ratings.
:thumbup:


----------



## astroNikon

gsgary said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry about it look how many likes I have on here and I'm a right tosser
> 
> 
> 
> I'm beating you by one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You won't by the end of the day I'm going to tell everyone how wonderful their photos are
Click to expand...

I'm going to have to do this too  ... that's how I rate myself  lol


----------



## sscarmack

You want a popular photo?

Boobs ranks #1
Milky Way ranks #2
Sunsets ranks #3
Birds rank #4


Shhhhh don't tell everyone though, then everyone will become popular


----------



## astroNikon

sscarmack said:


> You want a popular photo?
> 
> Boobs ranks #1
> Milky Way ranks #2
> Sunsets ranks #3
> Birds rank #4
> 
> 
> Shhhhh don't tell everyone though, then everyone will become popular


I never knew a Candy Bar had so much following


----------



## Designer

A couple of the posters have already mentioned that there is "no there there", or words to that effect.  Try to get some human interest going.  If you look at the "popular" photographs, you see lots of human interest, and they don't even have to be OF humans necessarily.  Even the fox picture has some interest because of the way the eyes are staring back at the camera.


----------



## sm4him

gsgary said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry about it look how many likes I have on here and I'm a right tosser
> 
> 
> 
> I'm beating you by one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You won't by the end of the day I'm going to tell everyone how wonderful their photos are
Click to expand...


If you actually carried through with that, I've a feeling you'd spontaneously combust as a result of the effort. :lmao:


----------



## ronlane

sscarmack said:


> You want a popular photo?
> 
> Boobs ranks #1
> Milky Way ranks #2
> Sunsets ranks #3
> Birds rank #4
> 
> 
> Shhhhh don't tell everyone though, then everyone will become popular



Flowers (Macro) seem to rank up there about #5 too 

OP, I would agree with others and say, don't get so hung up in the rating. It's a "game" more than anything else, I've seen photos on there that are good (not great) get very high ratings and then there are some that look amazing and they get okay to good ratings.

One other suggestion about it though, if you want better results. Be VERY selective about the photos that you put up, selecting only the very best ones.

Good luck.


----------



## sm4him

Several have already said it, but it bears repeating: Above all else, do NOT let whether or not your photos are "popular" be the main goal.
Look, I like getting "likes" here or trending on 500px as much as anyone (okay, I admit. I probably like it more than most&#8230, but it's NOT. THE. GOAL.
The goal is quality, professional photos that *I* am proud to have created. Everything else is gravy (and sometimes, if it's REALLY outstanding, it's bacon.  )

You've gotten a lot of good advice on improving your photos--subject matter, composition, etc.  Dig through these posts and find those things that will help you grow as a photographer.  

I'd suggest using 500px as a learning experience. Pick a category that you've posted something in; particularly something you thought would "rank" better than it did. Now go to "Discover", choose Popular and then choose that category. Look at the pictures in that category that have the highest rankings. How are they different from yours? Study them and really try to objectively see how yours compare. Use that to get a better understanding of what you need to do to improve your skills.

But just for funsies, I'll also add a few things I've noticed about my OWN 500px experience:
1. WHEN you upload ABSOLUTELY matters. The day of the week AND the time of day can make a big difference in how well the photo does. Experiment with this. I once took a couple of photos that hadn't done well when I initially uploaded them. I removed them, and then re-uploaded them at times I thought might work better. They both did substantially better and one became Popular.
2. Title matters. With all those hundreds and hundreds of thumbnail images to browse, you have but a fleeting instant to grab someone's attention and make them look at YOUR photo. And you have only TWO things with which to garner that attention--the photo itself and the title. 
3. Don't upload too much at once. I've found that uploading one, or at most, two photos a day is the best way to have a chance at getting a photo to go popular. MOST people have a tendency to not really go through your photo stream and "like" a multitude of photos. They click on the ONE that caught their eye. So, if you upload sixteen pictures, you are essentially competing with yourself and spreading the votes out.
4. It really does help to spend some time, especially in the first few hours after uploading a photo, "networking," as it were. I refuse to like a photo that I don't truly think is a great picture, but I *DO* spend some time in the Fresh and Upcoming categories, liking other photos that really are good--and then ALWAYS comment on the photos you like. No need to beg and do the "I voted; please visit my profile" kind of statement. I don't ask them to look at my work at all, but I find that at least half the time, they WILL go look at the photos of those who comment on theirs.  Do that yourself as well--I always look at the photos of people who comment on mine. Again, I won't "like" any of them unless I truly do think they deserve it, but I always go look. It's just good manners. 

Just for fun, I uploaded two photos this morning (and discovered that I haven't been on 500px in way too long).
One was an Osprey shot that is one of my better shots from this summer. The other, a sunset photo that is, in my opinion, just "nice." Not spectacular or breath-taking, just "okay." It's got some pretty swirling colors in it, which is the only thing that makes it at all attractive, imo. The scenery is just not compelling, and I didn't have an ND filter at the time to really make the sky look incredible.

The Osprey shot has already become Popular, less than two hours after uploading.
The sunset shot actually moved up faster than I expected but now seems to have stalled out at about a 58. I don't expect it to go much higher.
The point is--they have performed pretty much exactly as I expected them to, because I've learned (at least to a greater degree) to evaluate my photos. Don't expect a mediocre photo to do better than mediocre in the ratings.


----------



## astroNikon

sscarmack said:


> You want a popular photo?
> 
> Boobs ranks #1


Kinda like this --> http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...pictures-my-truck-chick-kept-getting-way.html


----------



## sscarmack

HAHA, exactlyyyyy. Sex sells


----------



## robbins.photo

Ok, so I spent all night watching the movie old yeller in a continuous loop while listening to angst ridden rock, I think I can now give a properly sympathetic response.



Lightsped said:


> Wow I am not looking for any pity,



Ahh crap.  Oh well.



> Maybe I should move over to 1x or a similar website where ratings aren't so important. I do know one thing, while I am a beginner with no professional or educational experience, taking photos is something I really enjoy. I always have one of my Nikons with me at all times in hopes of getting a decent shot of whatever I can.
> 
> Thanks for the time and feedback and I would still be interested in more tips or ideas in which to build on.



Ratings only have the importance you give them.  If you want some free advice, ignore the ratings or if they are too difficult to ignore, change websites.  Life is too short to get bogged down by the silly and unimportant.


----------



## ronlane

robbins.photo said:


> Ok, so I spent all night watching the movie old yeller in a continuous loop while listening to angst ridden rock, I think I can now give a properly sympathetic response.
> 
> 
> 
> Lightsped said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow I am not looking for any pity,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh crap.  Oh well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe I should move over to 1x or a similar website where ratings aren't so important. I do know one thing, while I am a beginner with no professional or educational experience, taking photos is something I really enjoy. I always have one of my Nikons with me at all times in hopes of getting a decent shot of whatever I can.
> 
> Thanks for the time and feedback and I would still be interested in more tips or ideas in which to build on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ratings only have the importance you give them.  If you want some free advice, ignore the ratings or if they are too difficult to ignore, change websites.  Life is too short to get bogged down by the silly and unimportant.
Click to expand...


Robbins, please go back to your regularly scheduled TV and music.


----------



## chuasam

You're doing great for a beginner then. You've got the technical nailed. Now go out there and take photos of things that move you. (not cars and buses).


----------



## unpopular

Hey lightspeed - you know that cliche: amateurs photographs things, pros photograph light? It's pretty much true, except that I like to add that artists photograph ideas. 

It's not so much what is around you, all over the world that's pretty constant. I can have a pretty good idea what a shanty town in S. Africa looks like from a generalized level without having been there. I know this through all the informative images I've seen. But what is life LIKE in these places? What might a photographer who lives there think is a worthwhile subject? As an outside photographer, what are my thoughts and feelings?

In my opinion arts is about finding the purpose to things. You're attracted to certain odd objects, but describing them clinically I don't think works well as showing it's value and what aspects you find interesting, be it visually or conceptually.


----------



## sm4him

chuasam said:


> You're doing great for a beginner then. You've got the technical nailed. Now go out there and take photos of things that move you. (not cars and buses).



What's wrong with taking pictures of buses?!?!? I do it for a living (well, that and about 16 job descriptions. But I *do* work for public transit, and I do take a lot of pictures of buses)&#8230; :lmao:


----------



## pgriz

sm4him said:


> chuasam said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're doing great for a beginner then. You've got the technical nailed. Now go out there and take photos of things that move you. (not cars and buses).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with taking pictures of buses?!?!? I do it for a living (well, that and about 16 job descriptions. But I *do* work for public transit, and I do take a lot of pictures of buses)&#8230; :lmao:
Click to expand...


Yeah, but not all of us can do a "Sharon Monet".


----------



## gsgary

sm4him said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm beating you by one.
> 
> 
> 
> You won't by the end of the day I'm going to tell everyone how wonderful their photos are
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you actually carried through with that, I've a feeling you'd spontaneously combust as a result of the
> 
> I want my like button turned off because it's embarrassing because nobody likes me
Click to expand...


----------



## astroNikon

sm4him said:


> chuasam said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're doing great for a beginner then. You've got the technical nailed. Now go out there and take photos of things that move you. (not cars and buses).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with taking pictures of buses?!?!? I do it for a living (well, that and about 16 job descriptions. But I *do* work for public transit, and I do take a lot of pictures of buses)&#8230; :lmao:
Click to expand...

That's very moving.
Emotionally I mean .. not just transportation-wise


----------



## The_Traveler

OP, you are coming up against a realization that comes to most or all of us eventually and painfully.
Taking technically adequate pictures is a skill that virtually anyone can acquire with some amount of experience and a bit of innate ability to understand how the camera and light interacts. 
Smart cameras provide a huge boost to virtually anyone thus the billions of OK pictures but the ability to get beyond technically adequate, to 'create' images that people remember takes work, insight, effort and some talent. 

If you've ever seen the movie 'Amadeus', it might be enlightening to you about the gap between adequate and good art.

You have some skills; that shows.
I have no idea if you have any talent or creativity.


----------



## ronlane

The_Traveler said:


> If you've ever seen the movie 'Amadeus', it might be enlightening to you about the gap between adequate and good art.



Isn't that the movie about the white kid from Detroit that wanted to be a rapper? :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## astroNikon

ronlane said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you've ever seen the movie 'Amadeus', it might be enlightening to you about the gap between adequate and good art.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that the movie about the white kid from Detroit that wanted to be a rapper? :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:
Click to expand...

No, that movie was about M&Ms
or Em&ms
something like that ...


----------



## ronlane

astroNikon said:


> ronlane said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you've ever seen the movie 'Amadeus', it might be enlightening to you about the gap between adequate and good art.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that the movie about the white kid from Detroit that wanted to be a rapper? :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, that movie was about M&Ms
> or Em&ms
> something like that ...
Click to expand...



M&M's, I thought that was the one with the Russian Gazzillionare with the tiny Giraffe?


----------



## robbins.photo

astroNikon said:


> ronlane said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you've ever seen the movie 'Amadeus', it might be enlightening to you about the gap between adequate and good art.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that the movie about the white kid from Detroit that wanted to be a rapper? :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, that movie was about M&Ms
> or Em&ms
> something like that ...
Click to expand...


So if your a white kid from Detroit and you want to become a rapper you need to change your name to Amadeus and eat M&Ms?  

Huh.  Learn something new everyday I guess.


----------



## robbins.photo

ronlane said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ronlane said:
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that the movie about the white kid from Detroit that wanted to be a rapper? :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:
> 
> 
> 
> No, that movie was about M&Ms
> or Em&ms
> something like that ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> M&M's, I thought that was the one with the Russian Gazzillionare with the tiny Giraffe?
Click to expand...


I thought that was about a Russian guy and his elephant.. Putin's Pachyderm, or something like that.


----------



## ronlane

robbins.photo said:


> ronlane said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, that movie was about M&Ms
> or Em&ms
> something like that ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M&M's, I thought that was the one with the Russian Gazzillionare with the tiny Giraffe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought that was about a Russian guy and his elephant.. Putin's Pachyderm, or something like that.
Click to expand...


You may be right about that, Putin's Petite Pachyderm. But wasn't that a movie based in Philly??


----------



## Designer

The_Traveler said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of the posters have already mentioned that there is "no there there", or words to that effect.  Try to get some human interest going.  If you look at the "popular" photographs, you see lots of human interest, and they don't even have to be OF humans necessarily.  Even the fox picture has some interest because of the way the eyes are staring back at the camera.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are coming up against a realization that comes to most or all of us eventually and painfully.
> Taking technically adequate pictures is a skill that virtually anyone can acquire with some amount of experience and a bit of innate ability to understand how the camera and light interacts.
> Smart cameras provide a huge boost to virtually anyone thus the billions of OK pictures but the ability to get beyond technically adequate, to 'create' images that people remember takes work, insight, effort and some talent.
> 
> If you've ever seen the movie 'Amadeus', it might be enlightening to you about the gap between adequate and good art.
> 
> You have some skills; that shows.
> I have no idea if you have any talent or creativity.
Click to expand...


I've not seen that movie, and according to your post, I am in need of the ability to recognize the gap between adequate and good art.  

So be it.


----------



## vintagesnaps

I saw a few of your photos among many that are good enough but rather run of the mill, a few that to me seem to have potential. There's one in B&W of a building interior (dome) that has some interesting pattern to it and would be a great subject for probably a number of different photos - seem like you saw something there that you thought would make a good photograph. It could maybe use some adjustment in contrast since it seemed more grayscale than B&W but has an interesting composition. There's also one of a green bug on an orangeish-red leaf that has some pattern to it in the antenna and the veins of the leaf. Some I agree seem in too tight but I think it works with that one because of the balance to the photo. There's also a B&W of barbed wire that again could be an interesting subject for a number of different photos - in this one I'd think about the aperture and depth of field and what you want in focus. I think you might want to start thinking about which of your photos you think are your best and not necessarily show so many. And if you're posting your photos on a website read the Terms & Conditions, because many seem to not be much more than a photo grab in that they want users to sell/license thru them and the terms are often not going to benefit you as a photographer (depending on the site it might make as much as 80-90% of a selling price/licensing fee, and some have terms that allow them to use, distribute, sublicense, etc. users' photos).  It takes a lot of time and practice and learning to get good at photography, and ratings on a website aren't necessarily that meaningful (they often seem to be more popularity contests than actually choosing what's good).


----------



## astroNikon

ronlane said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ronlane said:
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that the movie about the white kid from Detroit that wanted to be a rapper? :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:
> 
> 
> 
> No, that movie was about M&Ms
> or Em&ms
> something like that ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> M&M's, I thought that was the one with the Russian Gazzillionare with the tiny Giraffe?
Click to expand...

Yup, the Russian Guy


----------



## The_Traveler

Designer said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Designer said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of the posters have already mentioned that there is "no there there", or words to that effect.  Try to get some human interest going.  If you look at the "popular" photographs, you see lots of human interest, and they don't even have to be OF humans necessarily.  Even the fox picture has some interest because of the way the eyes are staring back at the camera.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are coming up against a realization that comes to most or all of us eventually and painfully.
> Taking technically adequate pictures is a skill that virtually anyone can acquire with some amount of experience and a bit of innate ability to understand how the camera and light interacts.
> Smart cameras provide a huge boost to virtually anyone thus the billions of OK pictures but the ability to get beyond technically adequate, to 'create' images that people remember takes work, insight, effort and some talent.
> 
> If you've ever seen the movie 'Amadeus', it might be enlightening to you about the gap between adequate and good art.
> 
> You have some skills; that shows.
> I have no idea if you have any talent or creativity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've not seen that movie, and according to your post, I am in need of the ability to recognize the gap between adequate and good art.
> 
> So be it.
Click to expand...


Sorry, I was replying to the OP and somehow got you caught in there.

L


----------



## robbins.photo

ronlane said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ronlane said:
> 
> 
> 
> M&M's, I thought that was the one with the Russian Gazzillionare with the tiny Giraffe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought that was about a Russian guy and his elephant.. Putin's Pachyderm, or something like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You may be right about that, Putin's Petite Pachyderm. But wasn't that a movie based in Philly??
Click to expand...


Pretty sure the one based in Philly was actually Dochevsky's Diminutive Drongo.  Not a bad flick, pretty good special effects really.. well, you know, for the time, and for Claymation.

Lol


----------



## dennybeall

Looking at the first four pages of the most popular photos and what stands out to me is the bursts of vivid color that pull your eyes in and then you see the main subject. Seems if you don't have a half naked female handy you've got to really bear down on the color button. It's absolutely right to shoot all kinds of subjects but I think if you focus on publishing your best shots one or two subject areas you'll do better.


----------



## MidnightUK

Some while back a friend encouraged me to post daily on Blipfoto for a while.  I quickly found that I paid more attention to my work intended for posting, but not in a good way.  

I started almost subconsciously taking photos that would please other posters instead of myself.  I started changing my processing to suit other posters.  I found time was used up on this stuff instead of being used for my own benefit.  

If people stopped following me I wondered what I had done wrong (instead of accepting people tend to drift from poster to poster unable to maintain a long list of people to follow).  If I did not post, I felt I might have let my 'followers' down.  

I only posted for 3 or 4 months, then told myself to get a grip and resigned from the place to do other more beneficial things.  I am glad I did it for a short while as it caused some benefit in the way I looked at my work, but overall it was not healthy for my photography to stay there.  

Frankly the only people you need to please are people who pay you.  Unless you have long term hope of obtaining some kind of market via being noticed on photo sites, you are better off elsewhere, getting paid or having more fun, rather than hand wringing over a fickle audience who give likes as 'return thank you' markers for being fawning to them.

Don't let photo sites crush your confidence at this early stage.  You seem to be doing fine technically, but you are not giving yourself a chance to grow artistically.  Very few photographers or artists of any kind can produce perfect work right at the beginning of their art life.  I would stop posting there, at least for a while - find yourself instead of loosing confidence.

Above all be proud - you are doing ok so far and you will continue to improve, just as all posters on this forum will have gone through a similar learning curve.


----------



## xFireSoul

Just to trow in some thought. After some time you will stop to care about the rating and votes in 500px. I was like that already. 
There are some famous photographers already and it is hard for the new one to shine.


----------



## Derrel

If you want pictures to get high ratings on 500px, then you need to post over-saturated, cliche-type landscapes with a chit-ton of post processing done on them.Or focus on semi-nude,conventionally beautiful 20-something year-old women in seductive poses and trashy outfits. No alt girl type models need apply.

500px is the graphic novel of the field of literature, the Applebees of the sit-down restaurant world. Your photos are not "slick" and "trendy" enough to get high ratings on a superficial site like 500px,which caters to an audience of people who like kitschy, over-worked stuff and who favor style over substance, and who like the facile over the sophisticated. It's a lot like Keeping Up With The Kardashians, as opposed to Masterpiece Theatre; popularity does not directly correlate with quality, or aesthetic values. If you like happy, shiny people, 500px is for you.

If you shoot just to try and gain high ratings on 500px, you'll be striving to please a very low common denominator, and will then be *shooting to conform, not to excel, not to be unique, but to fit in with the herd*. A lot of the work shown on 500px is exceedingly "of the moment", and will look cliche and dated within a few years, once the next new software processing fads take over from the current faddish stuff.


----------



## Derrel

CHECK THIS OUT!!!!!!!!!!Why This Bot's Crappy Photos Got Way More Likes, Favorites and Comments than Your Good Ones


----------



## Designer

An entirely worthwhile video.  This guy's "brain dump" is food for thought.


----------



## Derrel

Designer said:


> An entirely worthwhile video.  This guy's "brain dump" is food for thought.



Yes, I thought his video was actually worth linking to, since it addresses the OP's question in a very pertinent way, with a successful,proven method to GETTING "likes", and also getting "views", and getting one's work "out there", on social media sites. For those unwilling to follow links, the video's creator basically says that getting hit, likes, and recognition involves on-line networking and JOINING THE COMMUNITY, which means posting images, joining groups, and following and commenting on the work of other people in the group.


----------

