Gallery announcement

[peter_n]

I'm with you on that one Frank. I think I'm around 40 or 50 but I have edited some stuff out already.

 

[einolu]

Good suggestion Frank, this would make the gallery a true photographic tool instead of just a photographic dumping ground. People can use something like the wonderful Flickr for their other stuff.

 

[DougK]

Thanks for reminding me, I had to go do some pruning myself.

 

[RayPA]

5 is a good number. I'd also advocate for a "rule" stipulating that every new post must contain camera, lens and film information. This would only be for the duration that the pictures exist in the Recent Photos window. After that they can be moved to personal galleries (wherein the information is deleted by default). I always hesitate to comment on images that lack the specifics, because I think that most of us are here to see RF/film images. To have to ask for the information in a comment is a waste, especially when the request goes unanswered 🙂

🙂

 

[Doug]

I feel pictures posted here should only be those taken with a RF, after all that's what this site is about isn't it?

I agree, TP, but it does depend somewhat on the definition of "rangefinder camera", into which some (like me) include anything in the larger category Roger calls "direct view" cameras. And of any film format. In the interests of RF sharing, I refrain from uploading any shots from an SLR, but might include those from the digital Canon G3 if I used its viewfinder to make the shot, not its LCD. 🙂

 

[DougK]

I think Doug makes a good point, especially considering we now have a point-and-shoot forum discussing cameras that are used in much the same way as RFs. I must admit that I am in favor of the stricter definition of "rangefinder" though, unless you happen to be taking a glamour shot of your favorite rangefinder 🙂. Yeah, this would rule out my Fuji GA645 shots but I'd be OK with taking them down if the group consensus comes out that way.

 

[dmr]

IMAO, the fewer restrictions, the better. I can see a limit, however, for practical purposes.

Questions ... Are there that many true "abusers" here, or just a handful at most?

Do those who "abuse" tend tp be the regular posters, or the lurkers?

I would like to see any restrictions burden the abusers and not the user who occasionally may want to upload 6 photos.

 

[jan normandale]

Frank you beat me to the 'cap' on pix in an album. I'm with you on that one. So I have already chopped 15 pix. It was cathartic!

Jan

 

[MrBuhl]

Excellent decision - maybe not even restrictive enough.

FrankS and TPPhotog are right - I like the RF only idea, and I am the same - less than 100 I would post for all to see - with about 22 years of photos... come to think of it - maybe I'm not as talented as I sometimes like to think I am! 😀

 

[Skinny McGee]

I am trying to figure out to get read of some of the photos in my gallery to free space and also so I can post more without taking up anymore space.. I can't figure out how to delete individual photos only albums and some of the ones in the albums I would like to keep.. any info. would be greatly appreciated.....

 

[dcsang]

It's sort of odd - I can understand and fully agree with a limitation on the gallery. Makes perfect sense for Jorge since the site is growing and as such, he wants to make sure that , perhaps, quality of the images is what counts the most in the gallery and not the quantity of images.

That being said, if folks are using the gallery as a place to store images online; there are so many better ways of doing it all for the cost of about $10 USD per month via web hosting. Heck, some of you folks out there probably got free web space with your ISP hookups and haven't even bothered to use it 😀

So if you're just looking for someplace to house your images; take a look at either web hosting or any number of the other sites out there like Flickr or pBase or such and let's keep posting good Rangefinder images here 😀

Cheers
Dave

 

[kiev4a]

That being said, if folks are using the gallery as a place to store images online; there are so many better ways of doing it all for the cost of about $10 USD per month via web hosting. Heck, some of you folks out there probably got free web space with your ISP hookups and haven't even bothered to use it 😀

So if you're just looking for someplace to house your images; take a look at either web hosting or any number of the other sites out there like Flickr or pBase or such and let's keep posting good Rangefinder images here 😀

Cheers
Dave

Or, buy youself a DVD recorder and archive your photos. Last place I'm foing to store images is on line.

 

[dcsang]

Or, buy youself a DVD recorder and archive your photos. Last place I'm foing to store images is on line.

Ya.. that goes almost without being said nowadays 🙂

I should have clarified - I don't mean "store" as in "retain the only copy you have in existence" - I meant "store" as in 'display for online viewing' 😀

All my digital photos are done as you have suggested; some of my scanned images are done that way too.

Cheers
Dave