Flickr question - invites only

Group/Pool members will navigate around flickr identifying photos they like. If they see one of yours they will 'invite' you to post it in the group by adding a comment in the comments associated with the photo.

Sometimes you may only post your photo in a pool if you have had it accepted in a consideration pool which normally takes the form of a discussion thread in the group.

Other pools are only open to photo posts of you have won a competition in a sister pool/group.

You may also be invited to join a group when the reason why is less clear. This may be because you are good, or that the group owner is looking to build up their group membership and is using a scattergun approach to requests to join.

Hope this helps.

Darrin
 
Last edited:
Sounds "elitist" to me (not your group Andrew, just the concept in general - can lead to "you're good enough and you're not good enough" - when art is something that is, imho, subjective).

Dave
 
Well of course it's subjective ... it's stuff that I like! :D I just thought it would be a fun way to collect stuff that I like on Flickr. It's much easier to navigate through a group than through a member's favorites.
 
Andrew Sowerby said:
Well of course it's subjective ... it's stuff that I like! :D I just thought it would be a fun way to collect stuff that I like on Flickr. It's much easier to navigate through a group than through a member's favorites.
Click to expand...

No no.. don't misunderstand me; I completely understand your reasoning behind creating such an "invite only" group - the photos are the ones you like so that makes sense.

I was talking from the point of view of creating a group which, for example, is "invite only" but is entitled something like "Awesome Photos That Are True Works Of Art" and it's moderated by one or two people - who's to decide what's "Awesome" and what is considered a "True Work Of Art" ya know?

That's why I think the concept, in that frame of reference, is elitist.

Cheers,
Dave
 
Have you guys seen the "Hardcore Street Photography" group? Now those guys are elitists if there ever were any. The pool has some really great photos, but if you've ever followed any of their discussions, they (especially people who administrate the group) come off as especially pompous. I think people in that group consider themselves the leading authority of what defines street photography.
 
sienarot said:
Have you guys seen the "Hardcore Street Photography" group? Now those guys are elitists if there ever were any. The pool has some really great photos, but if you've ever followed any of their discussions, they (especially people who administrate the group) come off as especially pompous. I think people in that group consider themselves the leading authority of what defines street photography.
Click to expand...

much of their stuff is not so great also.
and how does a full face portrait rate as hardcore street?
they seem inconsistent.

are they the group that dissed the hcb shot big time?
 
sienarot said:
Have you guys seen the "Hardcore Street Photography" group? Now those guys are elitists if there ever were any. The pool has some really great photos, but if you've ever followed any of their discussions, they (especially people who administrate the group) come off as especially pompous. I think people in that group consider themselves the leading authority of what defines street photography.
Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons why I despise such things.

It seems to be human nature to want to be 'better than you are' if you know what I mean. We seem to consistently want to prove ourselves 'top of the heap'.

I don't get what our collective issue is with that. *sigh*

Anyway, as I was saying, the problem is that there are cliques that are formed which end up marginalizing some folks that can truly be good photographers. But because these photographers are "not good enough" to be in said clique they may end up putting away their cameras for a long time (or forever) because they did not have the self-confidence to believe that they don't necessarily need to listen to others for validation.

Cheers,
Dave
 
I managed to get 4 or 5 photos in that HCSP group, but then I had to quit. Their discussions were boring the snot out of me, yet I had a compulsion to read them. Glad I quit.
 
dcsang said:
No no.. don't misunderstand me; I completely understand your reasoning behind creating such an "invite only" group - the photos are the ones you like so that makes sense.
Click to expand...

Sorry Dave, I read your early comment too quickly. :eek:

Regarding the HCSP group, there is an air of pompousness over there, but I personally prefer groups that are curated in some way. It tends to cut out a lot of clutter (e.g. members posting a bunch of similar photos or just stuff that isn't very interesting).
 
Dave, I admin several groups that are invite only and also belong to some like that. It's not a big deal. Usually most people will be accepted. I does help stop the "photo dumpers" who put a shot or multiple shots into as many as 100 pools without determining if the image is appropriate.

I belong to a group that has 'red' or another that has 'a bit of red' as criteria for a photo to be eligible. You wouldn't believe how many people dump pet shots, cats, cars , black and white images and on and on. Invitations help keep a pool on track.
 
jan normandale said:
Dave, I admin several groups that are invite only and also belong to some like that. It's not a big deal. Usually most people will be accepted. I does help stop the "photo dumpers" who put a shot or multiple shots into as many as 100 pools without determining if the image is appropriate.

I belong to a group that has 'red' or another that has 'a bit of red' as criteria for a photo to be eligible. You wouldn't believe how many people dump pet shots, cats, cars , black and white images and on and on. Invitations help keep a pool on track.
Click to expand...

Maybe I should clarify my clarification :D

I moderate a number of communities on LiveJoural.
Toronto, Photography, Fotography (yes... there's one like that too), CanonCameras and TorontoPhoto.

I completely understand the idea of "dumping" but the way it was posed here was that the Flickr groups are "invite only" and not "request to submit to this group/pool". There is, to me, a vast difference.

"Invite only" suggests that one needs to be invited to join the group. If one is not invited, one does not get to join regardless how often one may petition to join the group.

"Request to submit to the group/pool" suggests that one requests admission and therefore, if granted, one can post to the pool/group.

Maybe someone can inform me if what we're talking about here is the former or the latter with respect to Flickr's "Invite Only" groups :D

Cheers,
Dave
 
I had no problem with "Request to submit to the group/pool" but the "invite only" can very easily have an "air" about it.
 
kshapero said:
I had no problem with "Request to submit to the group/pool" but the "invite only" can very easily have an "air" about it.
Click to expand...

I agree Akiva, hence my comment regarding elitism.
So are these Flickr groups TRULY "invite only" or are they merely "request to submit to the group/pool"?

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom