Hair Stylist
BIYOSHIPATRICK
Posts: 155
New York, New York, US
am i the only one who thinks this?
Photographer
Robert Sanders
Posts: 905
Los Angeles, California, US
Great, now we have to do math!
Photographer
空
Posts: 5264
New York, New York, US
I Believe in 90% 10%.
It is a common saying to spend 80% of your time on the future and present.
Only 20% of your time on the past and problems.
Hair Stylist
BIYOSHIPATRICK
Posts: 155
New York, New York, US
general "rule " to life
20 % of the people have 80% of the money
you wear 20 % of your wardrobe 80% of the time
20% of the people are getting 80 % of the work
20 % of the people on this site actually should be
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30131
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
patrick hair wrote:
am i the only one who thinks this? I prefer the 2% rule - ie 2% of us are exceptional in some way ...intellgent , creative , evil etc
Photographer
空
Posts: 5264
New York, New York, US
Patrick,
You spend too much time worrying about others.
Photographer
EL PIC
Posts: 2835
Austin, Indiana, US
Us 1 % ers belive in 1 % - 99 % rules.
EL
Photographer
59899
Posts: 477
New York, New York, US
i think 100% of the information u wanted to get accoss should have been in your opening post, so 100% of us could understand u
Photographer
4C 41 42
Posts: 11093
Nashville, Tennessee, US
Marksora wrote:
Patrick,
You spend too much time worrying about others. Yeah, but is he spending 80% or 20%?
Photographer
Al of Avalon
Posts: 413
San Antonio, Texas, US
patrick hair wrote:
general "rule " to life
20 % of the people have 80% of the money
you wear 20 % of your wardrobe 80% of the time
20% of the people are getting 80 % of the work
20 % of the people on this site actually should be Hey, I represent that remark!!!!
Hair Stylist
BIYOSHIPATRICK
Posts: 155
New York, New York, US
no i spend too much time on airplanes
Hair Stylist
BIYOSHIPATRICK
Posts: 155
New York, New York, US
no i spend too much time on airplanes
Hair Stylist
BIYOSHIPATRICK
Posts: 155
New York, New York, US
and 20% of the time double posting apparenly
Photographer
空
Posts: 5264
New York, New York, US
patrick hair wrote:
and 20% of the time double posting apparenly That was funny.
Model
Just AJ
Posts: 3478
Round Rock, Texas, US
patrick hair wrote:
am i the only one who thinks this? I think you are correct on both counts, but only because this is not a "commonly recognized" business philosophy.
Photographer
Farenell Photography
Posts: 18832
Albany, New York, US
patrick hair wrote:
the 80 % - 20% rule is defintately in effect on MM
am i the only one who thinks this? There's a reason why I flunked wretched Calculus. Can you elaborate on the 80% -20% schtick for all us unedu-macted schmucks like yours truely?
Photographer
C R Photography
Posts: 3594
Pleasanton, California, US
I've read 20% of this post and am 80% bored 
Model
Mistriss de morte
Posts: 620
Wilmington, Delaware, US
i go by the 100% rule....
this 80% 20% thing... what?
Photographer
Photocraft
Posts: 631
Ann Arbor, Michigan, US
patrick hair wrote:
general "rule " to life
20 % of the people have 80% of the money
you wear 20 % of your wardrobe 80% of the time
20% of the people are getting 80 % of the work
20 % of the people on this site actually should be But if this site weeded out all but that 20%, where would you're 80-20 rule be then?
Muhaha.
Photographer
udor
Posts: 25255
New York, New York, US
Jayne Jones wrote:
I think you are correct on both counts, but only because this is not a "commonly recognized" business philosophy. Wrong:
Pareto principle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Pareto principle (also known as the 80-20 rule, the law of the vital few and the principle of factor sparsity) states that for many phenomena, 80% of the consequences stem from 20% of the causes. The idea has rule-of-thumb application in many places, but it is commonly misused. E.g., it is a misuse to state that a solution to a problem "fits the 80-20 rule" just because it fits 80% of the cases; it must be implied that this solution requires only 20% of the resources needed to solve all cases. Mathematically, where something is shared among a sufficiently large set of participants, there will always be a number k between 50 and 100 such that k% is taken by (100 â k)% of the participants. However, k may vary from 50 in the case of equal distribution to nearly 100 in the case of a tiny number of participants taking almost all of the resources. There is nothing special about the number 80, but many systems will have k somewhere around this region of intermediate imbalance in distribution. (you can read the full article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
Photographer
Rich Mohr
Posts: 1843
Chicago, Illinois, US
UdoR wrote:
Wrong:
Pareto principle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Pareto principle (also known as the 80-20 rule, the law of the vital few and the principle of factor sparsity) states that for many phenomena, 80% of the consequences stem from 20% of the causes. The idea has rule-of-thumb application in many places, but it is commonly misused. E.g., it is a misuse to state that a solution to a problem "fits the 80-20 rule" just because it fits 80% of the cases; it must be implied that this solution requires only 20% of the resources needed to solve all cases. Mathematically, where something is shared among a sufficiently large set of participants, there will always be a number k between 50 and 100 such that k% is taken by (100 â k)% of the participants. However, k may vary from 50 in the case of equal distribution to nearly 100 in the case of a tiny number of participants taking almost all of the resources. There is nothing special about the number 80, but many systems will have k somewhere around this region of intermediate imbalance in distribution. (you can read the full article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle I always thought it meant... a lil a dis... and a lil o dat 
Photographer
Hadyn Lassiter
Posts: 2898
New Haven, Connecticut, US
I thought he left out a zero and was speaking of my 80-200 2.8.
Photographer
UnSeenYou
Posts: 332
Cleveland, Ohio, US
Miz Beth wrote:
i go by the 100% rule....
this 80% 20% thing... what? It means that 20% of the models get 80% of the work.
I agree that it is more like 90-10. Or like here in Cleveland it is more like 95-5.
We all have to start somewhere, but damn, this is tooooo easy to be a model and to have decent images. And, photogs it should be easier to constantly upgrade, shouldn't it?
Photographer
Farenell Photography
Posts: 18832
Albany, New York, US
UdoR wrote:
Wrong:
Pareto principle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Pareto principle (also known as the 80-20 rule, the law of the vital few and the principle of factor sparsity) states that for many phenomena, 80% of the consequences stem from 20% of the causes. The idea has rule-of-thumb application in many places, but it is commonly misused. E.g., it is a misuse to state that a solution to a problem "fits the 80-20 rule" just because it fits 80% of the cases; it must be implied that this solution requires only 20% of the resources needed to solve all cases. Mathematically, where something is shared among a sufficiently large set of participants, there will always be a number k between 50 and 100 such that k% is taken by (100 â k)% of the participants. However, k may vary from 50 in the case of equal distribution to nearly 100 in the case of a tiny number of participants taking almost all of the resources. There is nothing special about the number 80, but many systems will have k somewhere around this region of intermediate imbalance in distribution. (you can read the full article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle Ugh...head about to explode...serves me...right for...asking. 
Photographer
Done and Gone
Posts: 7650
Chiredzi, Masvingo, Zimbabwe
So, 80% of 20 people have 80 bananas. 20% of the bananas are overripe and about to spoil. 80 gorillas want to eat the bananas but 20% of the gorillas will fall asleep. Does that mean that ONE FIFTH of all pointless blather is nonsense or FOUR FIFTHS of all people are gorillas?
Photographer
Wade Images
Posts: 296
Seattle, Washington, US
UdoR wrote:
Wrong:
Pareto principle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Pareto principle (also known as the 80-20 rule, the law of the vital few and the principle of factor sparsity) states that for many phenomena, 80% of the consequences stem from 20% of the causes. The idea has rule-of-thumb application in many places, but it is commonly misused. E.g., it is a misuse to state that a solution to a problem "fits the 80-20 rule" just because it fits 80% of the cases; it must be implied that this solution requires only 20% of the resources needed to solve all cases. Mathematically, where something is shared among a sufficiently large set of participants, there will always be a number k between 50 and 100 such that k% is taken by (100 â k)% of the participants. However, k may vary from 50 in the case of equal distribution to nearly 100 in the case of a tiny number of participants taking almost all of the resources. There is nothing special about the number 80, but many systems will have k somewhere around this region of intermediate imbalance in distribution. (you can read the full article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle Ouch! My brain hurts! Keep in mind you east coast guys have a three hour head start.
Photographer
Mark J. Sebastian
Posts: 1530
San Francisco, California, US
Michael L. wrote:
So, 80% of 20 people have 80 bananas. 20% of the bananas are overripe and about to spoil. 80 gorillas want to eat the bananas but 20% of the gorillas will fall asleep. Does that mean that ONE FIFTH of all pointless blather is nonsense or FOUR FIFTHS of all people are gorillas? 4/5 are gorillas! ::shakes fist::
Photographer
udor
Posts: 25255
New York, New York, US
UdoR wrote:
Wrong:
Pareto principle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Pareto principle (also known as the 80-20 rule, the law of the vital few and the principle of factor sparsity) states that for many phenomena, 80% of the consequences stem from 20% of the causes. The idea has rule-of-thumb application in many places, but it is commonly misused. Farenell Photography wrote:
Ugh...head about to explode...serves me...right for...asking. Wade Images wrote:
Ouch! My brain hurts! Keep in mind you east coast guys have a three hour head start. Well, when I was in business (and taught this in seminars to my staff), to summarize one of the applications of the Pareto Principle is simply this:
20% of your efforts causes 80% of your results and 80% of your efforts produce only the remaining 20% of the result.
One way to work more efficiently is to identify what excactly is that 20% of your workstrategy that is producing the 80% results.
After you identify this, you could expand that efficient workstrategy, and actually having more time available for leisure time or more projects, for example.
It translates to many other applications, including photography... I mean, how much of my work is actually making me money and getting me published, vs. how much work am I wasting... e.g. while browsing MM and drivelling about the Pareto Principle... what an irony... 
Photographer
Farenell Photography
Posts: 18832
Albany, New York, US
UdoR wrote:
Well, when I was in business (and taught this in seminars to my staff), to summarize one of the applications of the Pareto Principle is simply this:
20% of your efforts causes 80% of your results and 80% of your efforts produce only the remaining 20% of the result.
One way to work more efficiently is to identify what excactly is that 20% of your workstrategy that is producing the 80% results.
After you identify this, you could expand that efficient workstrategy, and actually having more time available for leisure time or more projects, for example.
It translates to many other applications, including photography... I mean, how much of my work is actually making me money and getting me published, vs. how much work am I wasting... e.g. while browsing MM and drivelling about the Pareto Principle... what an irony...
I think I got it but don't quiz me on it afterwards. I might flunk it 2 or 3 times before it finally sinks in...much like my driving test.
Photographer
Photocraft
Posts: 631
Ann Arbor, Michigan, US
UdoR wrote:
...
One way to work more efficiently is to identify what exactly is that 20% of your workstrategy that is producing the 80% results.
After you identify this, you could expand that efficient workstrategy, and actually having more time available for leisure time or more projects, for example.
...
Sure, your efficiency would go up, but my efficiency would go down. Don't do it!
Photographer
Charlie Schmidt
Posts: 855
Kansas City, Missouri, US
Mark Sebastian wrote:
4/5 are gorillas! ::shakes fist:: I knew they would find out we were gorillas....now it is all bad....how will we get the 80 bananas?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Photographer
J Sigerson
Posts: 587
Los Angeles, California, US
Michael L. wrote:
So, 80% of 20 people have 80 bananas. 20% of the bananas are overripe and about to spoil. 80 gorillas want to eat the bananas but 20% of the gorillas will fall asleep. Does that mean that ONE FIFTH of all pointless blather is nonsense or FOUR FIFTHS of all people are gorillas? 20% of the male gorillas are scoring with 80% of the females (on Gorilla Mayhem)
Photographer
Rich Davis
Posts: 3136
Gulf Breeze, Florida, US
EL wrote:
Us 1 % ers belive in 1 % - 99 % rules.
EL After all they made up a rule just for us, so we have to live up to their expectations. 1%ers forever!
Photographer
Jay Bowman
Posts: 6511
Los Angeles, California, US
Michael L. wrote:
So, 80% of 20 people have 80 bananas. 20% of the bananas are overripe and about to spoil. 80 gorillas want to eat the bananas but 20% of the gorillas will fall asleep. Does that mean that ONE FIFTH of all pointless blather is nonsense or FOUR FIFTHS of all people are gorillas? Dayum!!
That was the best laugh I've had all day...
Photographer
Karl Blessing
Posts: 30911
Caledonia, Michigan, US
80% complaining/chatting/laughing 20% shooting photographs
Photographer
Jay Bowman
Posts: 6511
Los Angeles, California, US
UdoR wrote:
One way to work more efficiently is to identify what excactly is that 20% of your workstrategy that is producing the 80% results.
After you identify this, you could expand that efficient workstrategy, and actually having more time available for leisure time or more projects, for example.
It translates to many other applications, including photography... I mean, how much of my work is actually making me money and getting me published, vs. how much work am I wasting... e.g. while browsing MM and drivelling about the Pareto Principle... what an irony...
Hmm...
Oddly, if you identify, isolate, and maximize that 20%, you'll free up plenty of time to waste here at MM. This will, ironically, lead people to believe that you are really not making money, getting published etc.
A conundrum...
Photographer
udor
Posts: 25255
New York, New York, US
Jay Bowman wrote:
Hmm...
Oddly, if you identify, isolate, and maximize that 20%, you'll free up plenty of time to waste here at MM. This will, ironically, lead people to believe that you are really not making money, getting published etc.
A conundrum... Well... it's not really that bad, since, especially if you do lot's of postproduction, you are a lot in front of the computer... and online...
BTW, my last published image was on Monday for the NY Daily News, Rush & Molloy, page 25 with photocredits, but it's not fashion. Some fashionshots are in the current issue of Supermodels Unlimited from a fashion benefit, showing Steph (newhall) and Raymond Anthony (also on MM).
Oh... and I am waiting for a ton of magazines to come with more stuff... LOL
... and checks are in the mail to me as well... so they say... LOL
But, if I would be able to free up time... I may be able to date again... and maybe to procreate sometimes before I turn 78!
Photographer
Longwatcher
Posts: 3664
Newport News, Virginia, US
While in principle the 80-20 rule should apply to the business of Photography, it does not apply to the Art of photography as creativity is way more random. It won't apply to anything that is of an artistic or truly creative nature.
I had learned it as a similar rule in that 20% of your customers will generate 80% of your income so you should concentrate on those 20% and drop the 80% unless they have high potential to become part of the 20%. This is why we have crappy customer service these days.
Of course it didn't work for my career field at the time I was taught it (Imagery Analyst for the USAF) , neither did TQM, zero defects and a lot of other management techniques which while providing useful tips just did not seem to work out every time they tried it. That is because in that career field that 1% which generate 80% of your work for the day is person that wants to stay alive and it is your job to help him.
Also the darn enemy kept ruining the best laid management schemes.
The only management technique I got out of that that actually applied, was don't hold a meeting if you have nothing to discuss - just cancel it.
Just my opinion and experience,
As my grandfather would say College is good in Theory.
|
