Gallery Trimming to Save Storage

Status
Not open for further replies.
Folks,

A lot of good ideas have put up in this thread, and more will probably follow. Let's see what ideas and possible gallery guidelines develop.

RFF does need to establish reasonable and fair trimming guidelines for long term solutions. Anyway, any gallery trimming will be delayed until 8/15.

Stephen
 
CameraQuest said:
Folks,
A lot of good ideas have put up in this thread, and more will probably follow. Let's see what ideas and possible gallery guidelines develop.
RFF does need to establish reasonable and fair trimming guidelines for long term solutions. Anyway, any gallery trimming will be delayed until 8/15.
Stephen
Click to expand...

Thanks Stephen:)
 
Well, I did just delete most of what I had up here. wasn't particularly rushing to do it but it gave me a little kick in the pants to change what I have here.

Plus, I was just given a scanner (birthday present; thanks, Mom!) so I want to post only shots I've scanned my self.

And this gave me a reminder to get serious about putting up a few pages of my own some where.
Rob
Pitxu said:
I can't understand why so many guys are rushing to delete their photos?

I understood that this would be done automatically on July 1st. And only to photos over 18 months old.

Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
 
leicasniper said:
I deleted mine because I have multiple domains with terabytes of space that I can host them on. Since space appears to be critically short here, just decided to let someone else use it.
Click to expand...

ummm if you have images somewhere, how about putting a link in your profile or signature. I'm always interested in people's work.
 
nzeeman said:
...also you can save photos which have a lot of views and comments and delete others. for example 50+ views and photo stays. that will delete many of my photos - but in future i will try harder to make better photos. :)
Click to expand...
A very fine idea, I think! Maybe make it 100 views... But better put in a minimum time for the photo to accumulate those views, keeping, say, those posted less than 1 year ago. This would save a lot of my older photos from deletion. :D (of course they're on my computer as well, but there are the Gallery comments in context that are saved too)

Edit: Oh, and BTW, Jan you have been one of the more prolific gallery comments posters, and I still appreciate that! :)
 
Last edited:
Well, if you have to cut, you have to cut.

But I'm not very happy with this decision, as for me it too is the only place where I post images in public to check for reactions. I have other sites, where the images are presented in far bigger resolution, but these places are heavily protected, I don't want my work to be misused.

One consequence of such a cut will be that many XPan images, which I and others have posted during the last years, will simply disappear. New images don't come so often, as this beautiful camera slowly fades away. :(

A limitation to a maximum number of images seems feasible to me. It may force people to think a little about quality, before they publish. At least that is a little hope :)

Just my 5 cents.
 
CameraQuest said:
Folks,

A lot of good ideas have put up in this thread, and more will probably follow...
Click to expand...

If you insist :)

The reason I still have left older images of mine around is to save the comments people made. I could not care less about the image because as you have already mentioned, I have copies on my own computer. There are tonnes of images that have few views and no comments - for sure they're be nothing lost in purging them.

I always astonished when I go back and see that old pictures of mine are still being viewed on a regular basis (1700 views! http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=1645&ppuser=510
 
Easy fix...Delete the ones not taken with a Rangefinder...
That's what I did since some here did not welcome them because the camera used to take them was a SLR...
 
I'm coming in a little bit late on this thread, but what the heck, it's never stopped me before.

I deleted my images here a long time ago mostly because it's such a pain to manage them here. However, I'd hate to see images managed based solely on the length of time they've been here. For what it's worth, I'm in favor of purging inactive accounts and establishing (or re-establishing) a disk space quota for each user account. A politely worded email to users over the proposed disk space quota should help take care of those; if they don't respond in a reasonable period of time, then I'd say do whatever you need to do to free up the space.
 
DougK said:
I deleted my images here a long time ago mostly because it's such a pain to manage them here.
Click to expand...

Actually, I like the Photopost software they use here. It really does all I want. It lets me show off a few photos, it's fast and easy to use, and is not bloated like the popular photo sharing sites are.

I've become accustomed to it and enjoy using this place as one of my primary on-line places to display photos.

DougK said:
However, I'd hate to see images managed based solely on the length of time they've been here. For what it's worth, I'm in favor of purging inactive accounts and establishing (or re-establishing) a disk space quota for each user account.
Click to expand...

Agree with ya 100% on these points! :)
 
We can certainly limit the disk space used by a member. However, this will only force the member to delete files before new ones can be uploaded. It will not get rid of current overhead. There are 9 gigs of gallery images and 5 gigs of attachments. We could get rid of old attachments and old gallery files then reduce the size of allowed attachments and gallery images. I will discuss with Stephen what his options are. But, either way, people are not going to be happy. I could implement an immediate disk space limit to start forcing people to move out unwanteds.
 
yeah

yeah

would be nice to one time email blast those whose accounts will be affected.

Also, deleting the attachments reduces the value of archived messages IMHO. Search tools will return links that no longer have the attachments there.

Deleting or trimming old galleries, unless user linked or referenced would have less impact on archived messages, and one would think that RFF users have their gallery images safely stored elsewhere.

leicasniper said:
Again, kill the inactive accounts before limiting those who actually use the site.
Click to expand...
 
I have spent many hours in cleaning up image files to post them here. I am willing to remove all or the vast majority of files, but I would request the assistance of RFF to allow to access hundreds of image files simultaneously and not go through each file to have it removed from RFF. The Gallery is not very user friendly right now for taking care of batches of images.

HELP!
 
At one time, I was banned at PN for a week, and I was offered to get all my images transferred to me if I wanted to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom