Wading through images

[John Holme]

Hi everyone,
Of late it appears that some people upload a flood of pics per day, Yes they are good, but I feel it would be better to upload a maximum of 3 pics per member per day.
Why, well in my opinion more people would comment on more shots if they didn't have to wade through 200 or so shots per day.
I would also like to get in touch with the odd member to share advice. Would it be possible to include an email address in their profile so one could send a private message to them?
Thanks

John

[patrick]

totaly agree with you john.

[RedEyes©]

its been discussed before and i agree but the powers that be decided to keep it the same

[nicolas orillard]

would be good John
and it would, i believe, improve the global quality of the shots uploaded.

email adresse or direct link for chat would be a good way to contact members other than via forum.

rgds,
Nicolas

[dave_h]

A couple of points...

You can "wade" thru 200 pictures in 4 clicks as latest images are arranged in 50's.

People comment on pictures they like and limiting the number of pictures that can be uploaded won't change this.

[dave_h]

OP, you say.... "Why, well in my opinion more people would comment on more shots if they didn't have to wade through 200 or so shots per day." Really ? How can anyone possibly know how many comments are being posted and by how many people ?

[Nikodamus]

OP, you say.... "Why, well in my opinion more people would comment on more shots if they didn't have to wade through 200 or so shots per day." Really ? How can anyone possibly know how many comments are being posted and by how many people ?

You can get a pretty good feel for that. If you go around commenting on photos or just reading the comments of others, you see how many comments are made. Some photos get quite a few, others less so. Usually the photographers that comment a lot get the most feedback. In any case it makes sense - fewer photos appearing on the main page every day would mean the commentators were spread less thinly. The photos that do exist therefore, would receive more attention.

[TPilgrim]

I believe with less images being uploaded you would get;
Better quality images uploaded as people would only upload their favorites, not 4 slightly different angles of the same shot.
Better quality of feedback as people would have more time to write detailed comments if they arent commenting on loads of images.
and, more people would add the camera data as the old 'i dont have enough time too add that' excuse would disappear, uploading one rather than 5 gives you more time to write about the image and what you were trying to achieve.

But all of that is assuming people want to learn and improve their photography.

[John Holme]

Thanks for your comments, I guess the powers that be, are only interested in how many pictures are uploaded, maybe they think its a competition with other web sites,
I am aware that 50 can be viewed at the same time, how can you possibly view a thumb nail of an image and decide whether or not to comment on it, and its not about how many comments its about missing some great shots because if you miss a night you will have to go back to 250 -300 to get back to the last page you viewed the previous time.

But if thing wont change why bother asking for "your comments"?

[Medley]

I disagreed with this before, and I disagree with it now. A few points:

I've browsed the galleries of the folks replying here. John, you have 48 images. If this limit was in place today, and you had just discovered the website, you could have those images online in 16 days. Patrick: 196 images, 66 days. Dave: 72 images, 24 days. And so on. So now ask yourself: If I was a new member, would I religiously upload three images a day for 24 days, just so I could be a part of the gallery? What a great way to limit new members!

OK, so let's give the new people a bye. Unlimited uploads for the first day or two. John (not to pick on John, but it WAS his suggestion) gets 3. What are the chances that his images are going to stand out? The site is still being semi-flooded with images, and the only people who lose out are the ones that made this gallery what it is. The alternative is to make new people take weeks (or in some cases months) to get galleries to our level.

And then there's this point: I go on a two week vacation. I take hundreds of photos, and cull them down to about 25 or so. Now, never mind that it's going to take two weeks to upload them- I'm OK with that. But I have a 15 or so photos that I think are very good, and 10 that I'm looking for input on. Which ones am I likely to upload first (me being an average user and all)?

Yes, upload limits are a great way to improve the quality of the images here. They're also a great way to reduce the average comment to "Nice image, I gave it a 5". Higher quality images, but LOWER quality feedback, because people are only going to upload their quality images. It's no longer about getting feedback on so-so images, it BECOMES a competition of the highest quality images we have. Is that really the direction we want the site to go?

- Joe U.

[dave_h]

John, you say ..."its about missing some great shots because if you miss a night you will have to go back to 250 -300 to get back to the last page you viewed the previous time."

So you want to limit the number of shots everyone else can upload so that you don't miss a great shot ? really ? Thats a bit, er, selfish eh ?
Also, are you saying that you open every single picture before deciding to comment on it ? If so, then thats your choice but don't try and get limits imposed on the rest of the site members if it takes you a while to go thru them.

Tpilgrim, you say that limits will bring... "Better quality of feedback as people would have more time to write detailed comments if they arent commenting on loads of images." Really ? Surely people are commenting on the pictures they like, regardless of the number uploaded.

I've said it before but..If someone wants to upload 50 pictures of their dog, all in one go, then fine. Most people will simply ignore them and move on. The poster will soon get the message.

This is a wonderful site with some wonderful images from around the world. The last thing we need are limits.

[RedEyes©]

check out Ephotozine, they employ a restrictive system, although new members are allowed to upload several images at once. It is one of the most successful photography sites on the internet, indeed they have a subscription based system for members wishing to take advantage of the extras of which many do. They must be doing something right for it to be so phenomenally successful as it is

Yes, upload limits are a great way to improve the quality of the images here. They're also a great way to reduce the average comment to "Nice image, I gave it a 5". Higher quality images, but LOWER quality feedback, because people are only going to upload their quality images. It's no longer about getting feedback on so-so images, it BECOMES a competition of the highest quality images we have. Is that really the direction we want the site to go?

- Joe U.

surely this is exactly what it should be about, improving the quality of your photography, i know i would rather upload one very high quality shot of the standard i am at than 20 very average ones. Any photographer worth his salt wants a high quality portfolio rather than one full of grab shots.

As for religiously uploading 3 images a day etc etc, not all photographers have massive amounts of material so the time limits you refer to are neither here nor there. 72 shots in 24 days but what about when i have nothing to upload. Personally i go through phases where i have material to upload and then long periods where i don't by limiting the uploads at least the material you have lasts you longer and you may actually employ the thinking that you would rather upload what is in your opinion your current best work.

Dave_h as for someone wanting to upload 50 pics of their dog etc ... yes fine and most people will ignore it, but then along comes someone with 50 shots of their cat etc etc. Yes they may well get the message when no comments are left etc but it doesn't stop the next person doing it. Add to the fact that the uploads are vetted before they go live and the problem multiplys. If the shots are left over the weekend as they often are and you have 100 dog or cat shots on block which for me just makes my eyes glaze over and i go off somewhere else, so the OP does have a valid point. I have been on this site for years now and it happens time and time again. Funny how the site that employs the restrictions is hugely successful, and this place isnt.

Just my thoughts i am not suggesting either of you are wrong, but there is certainly a strong argument against your line of thinking

[Medley]

Designed to capture and inspire readers, features are full of practical shooting advice and tips from top professionals, giving you the chance to learn new tricks and fine-tune your skills. Whether you’re a part-time amateur or a full-time pro, Digital Photographer aims to challenge and motivate you to take your best shot.

Whether you’re after advice on specific photographic genres, or you want to learn how to use your new DSLR from the ground up, we cater for your needs.

Every month there’s also the chance to develop your post-production talent with a host of creative tutorials. Learn to banish blemishes or correct colour casts as you load up our free CD and, with it, all the essential resources to follow each step-by-step.

With a passion for photography equal to our readers’, we understand the needs of the digital photographer. This is why every issue we pack Digital Photographer with as much inspiration and encouragement as its 148 pages will allow. Pick up a magazine, be inspired and send us your efforts.

Every day we receive a wealth of images from our talented readers, and we’d love to see your efforts too.

I put these words in quotes because they're not mine. They came from the "About the Magazine" link. You know, the one that's on the main page of the gallery. And that's my point. The gallery isn't the product (unlike Ephotozine). The forum isn't the product. The magazine is the product. I think some of us forget that sometimes. The magazine caters to both amateurs and professionals, shouldn't the gallery do the same? Why on earth would someone publish a magazine designed specifically to pique our inspiration and creativity, only to restrict that creativity on it's website? I'm positive that not all of the magazine's subscribers are professional photographers. (I'm positive of that because I personally know of at least one who isn't ) Should they have any LESS access to the website, any LESS right to upload their images than anyone else?

"Pick up a magazine, be kind of inspired and send us two or three of your efforts" just doesn't sound the same. You can argue all you want for it, but I don't think it will ever happen.

- Joe U.

[Nikodamus]

Before debating over whether gallery restrictions are a good thing or not, why not just poll the users? A poll on the main page should give some insight as to what the best setup should be.

[RedEyes©]

i think you are right, hence the reason why i spend 90% of my time elsewhere looking at an individuals ONE shot for the day