All I hear about PS is negative........

All I hear about PS is negative........

208 posts
26 July 2014
Bob
Photographer
Bob
stolenfaces

Common sense tells you that ...

Since when did Common Sense play any part on internet sites and forums? Surely that concept died around 23rd August 1991.
Bob

Posted 15 Aug 2014
dominicdgt
Photographer
dominicdgt
stolenfaces
Which people ? Common sense tells you that the pictures which are viewed most are the ones with least clothes. Do you think such a fatuous and fake feature would attract suitable models, or would it attract hopeless wannabes ? Whilst I use Facebook extensively I am not interested in stalking young models (or old models) nor in having them follow me. If Facebook is so essential for models why do they need any modelling portfolio site ?
Many models set and hold on to images on Model Mayhem based on the views and comments they get, it's a popular tool on that site. I feel we're getting to a stage where no Facebook profile and no real sense of who you are and it can be more likely for models to pass on by especially if faced with choice or uncertainty. I personally think Purestorms driving force for decisions is based hassle, or the lack of it in a lot of the policies in place. Clearly when faced with Facebook links there were concerns about cross platform access which might have had issues for safety, I don't get it and the ratio of my site use has shifted accordingly.
Posted 15 Aug 2014
Edited by dominicdgt 15 Aug 2014
I'm not bothered by image views, I do like comments though

Posted 15 Aug 2014
mattharper
Photographer
mattharper
redbaron

I really cannot fathom what you have against viewing stats. I doubt anyone uses them in the primitive way you suggest. If you are considering which images to replace on your own portfolio the stats help provide some insignt into which images are working. I would not compare hits on a nude with a fashion image, thats idiotic but I may look at several fashion images and see the views for one confirm my own opinion that is it s weakest and needs replacing.

Equally if I was looking for inspiration in a specific genre the views on other portfolios may help in getting a feel for what works and what does not.



Labourites don't like accurate, unarguable statistics

Posted 15 Aug 2014
digineil
Photographer
digineil
mattharper
Labourites don't like accurate, unarguable statistics
Labour and the ConDems are the same thing. This is why so many people don't vote
Posted 15 Aug 2014
stolenfaces
Photographer
stolenfaces
mattharper
Labourites don't like accurate, unarguable statistics
Are image views accurate unarguable statistics ? Of course they aren't, only someone simple would think that. Also: if you view ps on a large monitor you don't need to click on the pictures to see them at a viewable size (unlike other sites where the thumbnails are tiny squares) When you click on a picture does that mean you liked it or were you just clicking because you thought the thumbnail made the model look enormous or generally wierd, or you thought the outfit looked nice, or the location looks familiar. You only need to look at the comments on photos to know that many of the viewers wouldn't know a good photo if it bit them on the arm and probably haven't booked a model for years (if ever). For any serious model one paying photographer who likes one of their images is worth hundreds of thousands of drive-by views. To base your image selection on popularity would very likely be counter productive. I find the image views on mm useful because there is no loaded date on mm so in looking for the most recent photos of a model they are more likely to be ones without so many views. The lack of uploaded date or copyright date on mm is a serious failure for those selected models to work with. So to your little post - image viewing stats are as reliable as most of the propaganda statistics put out by the Torys that simple people think are true and meaningful, but educated people know are deliberately phrased to give a false impression. At least UKIP don't pretend that their stats are anything other than made-up.
Posted 16 Aug 2014
mattharper
Photographer
mattharper
I see, so the image view counters don't work accurately. That's going to disappoint some people.
Basing image selection on popularity is what most people do, as they remove and add images, they are bound to keep the most viewed (image views tell you this) and on comments. To think otherwise would be odd.

Posted 16 Aug 2014
EdT
Photographer
EdT
stolenfaces
Which people ? Common sense tells you that the pictures which are viewed most are the ones with least clothes. Do you think such a fatuous and fake feature would attract suitable models, or would it attract hopeless wannabes ? Whilst I use Facebook extensively I am not interested in stalking young models (or old models) nor in having them follow me. If Facebook is so essential for models why do they need any modelling portfolio site ?
Which people? Maybe the 700 who have joined the other site in the last week compared to the "however many" here? And maybe they need both Facebook and a modelling portfolio site, rather than one or the other. And, how about this for a good idea, it might be really good if they could link the two together. Oh sorry, really dumb idea. Seriously, the fact that this site has become a graveyard compared to PP, and that most here people are saying it would be a good idea, doesn't make you think that, maybe just this once, you're not on the side of the majority?
Posted 16 Aug 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
stolenfaces

When you click on a picture does that mean you liked it or were you just clicking because you thought the thumbnail made the model look enormous or generally wierd, or you thought the outfit looked nice, or the location looks familiar.



Or in my case (on another site) I click on any thumbnail I think looks exceptionally tacky so I can add the model/photographer to my huge "block" list!  smiley
Posted 16 Aug 2014
mattharper
Photographer
mattharper
mph

Or in my case (on another site) I click on any thumbnail I think looks exceptionally tacky so I can add the model/photographer to my huge "block" list!  smiley


How many are you up to now? 
Posted 16 Aug 2014

Well I like the stats features on the other sites. Its fun and it tells me if people are interested in my images and whether it is worth paying the subscriptions.I pay for a few sites and need to decide which are most effective.I have no way of knowing if any of the new images I added on this site have even been looked at.

They are actually much bigger than thumbnails on Star now and you don't really need to click them because it just doubles the size but people are doing so.There are more suitable jobs there.I have also added images which illustrate what a particular role is looking for.

This site also only lets me have a small number of images for the price of the other sites so I need to be more selective and retire those that are not effective.

Posted 16 Aug 2014
EdT
Photographer
EdT
catherinewilliams
Well I like the stats features on the other sites. Its fun and it tells me if people are interested in my images and whether it is worth paying the subscriptions.
I get the impression some people here don't think that members should have fun. It's not the purpose of the site.
Posted 16 Aug 2014
Rawandthecooked
Photographer
Rawandthecooked
I think I have said this, a site with the features 0f the purple place not run by Napoleon and his henchmen would work fine. Surely one of you guys can right a bit of code!


Posted 16 Aug 2014
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
LOL

Posted 16 Aug 2014
anthonyh
Photographer
anthonyh
People are wasting time posting on this thread. This site will evolve...or it won't. In which case it will go the Net-Model route....

What members post won't make any difference.....which is what happened to N-M....

Posted 16 Aug 2014
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join