Express your nature.

Upload, Share, and Be Recognized.

Join with Facebook
or join manually
X
Posted By:WitchGirl
Comments:

Old Comments:

2009-01-18 15:28:37
OGO50, you don't understand which my problem is...i perfectly agree with tags and descriptions..i do not post pictures deliberatly without them...and i'm not waiting my pictures to be liked by all the viewers..i know it isn't posible! "Do you post photographs for the pleasure of the viewers or just for your own ego? "--If you want to make an accusation/affirmation..you should understand first the situation and what it's about...you could see that my ego has nothing to do with my anger for the flagged picture.Have a good day!
2009-01-18 06:18:39
Do you post photographs for the pleasure of the viewers or just for your own ego? If you have information for a pic you should include it as a tag or a comment whether you think it needs one or not. That is just common courtesy for viewers. I've seen many birds, for example with no tags and would like to know the species. Many landscapes are beautiful on their own...but it would be nice to know where they are located. On the other hand, art photography is just that. BTW..it IS Amber Tamblyn, one of the actreaaes in the movie "The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants. That's my two-cents worth. ;)
2009-01-18 06:01:36
We should not flag a photo for those reasons.
2009-01-18 04:01:37
Exactly Skip...this is the thing i don't agree to..
2009-01-18 03:55:06
I understand what you are saying Witchgirl, Its one thing for people to vote down your pics or complain on here about the tags, but I think it's wrong to press the flag button and get rid of the pic altogether for that reason. And I think there might be other motives to get rid of it.
2009-01-18 03:50:03
I never go to search, in order to see if a picture has been posted before, unless a picture I find looks familiar to me, but I do go through atleast five or six pages of the newly added pics to be sure I'm not posting the same pic. I can usually remember what's been posted in the last few weeks. I mean the popular pics.
2009-01-18 03:44:56
i understand what you say connie...the problem here is if that is a reason for flagging a photo as inapropriate...just because it doesn't have a tag or descriptions...whatever..it's useless
2009-01-18 03:35:10
I forgot to add that putting information THAT MAKES SENSE under 'tag, helps to search if the photo has already been posted.
2009-01-18 03:02:39
Photo of flowers - caption not needed. Photo of rare or unusual flowers - name & location needed. Photo of a pigeon - caption not needed. Photo of a pigeon in a beautiful plaza - location needed. Photo of a creek - caption not needed Photo of a creek in a beautiful meadow - caption needed. That's just my opinion ;-)
2009-01-17 22:32:01
Most tags are useless..if you need a tag that says 'mountain' or 'beautiful girl' to tell you that you're looking at a photo of a mountain or a beautiful girl you're in pretty bad shape..it would be useful and helpful sometimes to know more about an image..names of birds and cityscapes especially...maybe even the name of the mountain or the pretty girl...but often the information given to identify photos is erroneous, and worse than useless..a really fine, fisrt class image should be able to stand alone on the merits of its formal qualities..the particulars of its content are secondary if not irrelevant..
2009-01-17 22:13:04
Dear WitchGirl: Please...if a person gives you their reason for voting, please don't call it "crap". It is their opinion and that counts for them in their voting. That's what a vote is...an opinion. I personally like this photo and I gave it a positive vote. That is MY opinion. :-)
2009-01-17 21:08:53
So Mirar, you only will vote positive for this pic if it had a tag with "girl"??? No more questions...
2009-01-17 21:00:59
yes right ...and the tag will make her more appropriate??Are we voting pictures here or tags and descriptions????????
2009-01-17 20:58:14
i add the information if i know it..i have pictures with tags and informtions too..this reason is crap!!
2009-01-17 20:56:09
If you don't know who it is, you can still tag it. "girl" would do. "beautiful girl" would do too, even though it's subjective. Add "portrait" too, maybe? It can't be that hard.
2009-01-17 20:41:39
That's an honest answer and reason Mirar, which in principle I support. If an up-loader repeatedly offends by submitting pictures without explanations, then it is enough reason to vote their pictures down. It is disrespectful to viewers of pictures to not have info relating to the image. So WitchGirl, will you please consider adding information to your pictures?
2009-01-17 20:41:36
"I'm voting this down due to lack of info."?? Sorry, but if you like to learn something you should go to wikipedia.com! You should vote for or against a picture if it's look good or not, and not if there are tags, captions or informations about it! What if an uploader just haven't any information about a pic? Has he lost from the beginning? Should he or she NOT upload it then? Is it necessary to know that this is "Ambler Tamblyn"??? Does it look good or not? THAT is the question!!
2009-01-17 20:27:58
How about tagging the image and giving it a description? Is that Ambler Tamblyn? I'm voting this down due to lack of info.
2009-01-17 18:20:56
I think it has to be alot of people, unless they have some sneaky way of doing it, but their reason would probably be laughable too.
2009-01-17 18:17:51
i posted this picture again..don't know why it was flagged as inappropriate...give your reason mister or miss!!i'm waiting!! :|