Please ... can we limit the daily gallery upload to something sensible?

robklurfield said:
Is quality a number? Is there a metric that can quantify it? Can it be measured? Is bigger better? Is less more?

Was there a vote here? Democracy in action? I think not. A few members voiced strong opinions. A few other members voiced less vehment views. But total up the number of participants in this thread and it doesn't add up to a democratic anything. Should this be a democracy? I can't answer that.

Well, a person, one person, owns this -- Stephen -- and I respect him for that. He pays the bills so he does rightfully get to be the final arbiter here. And, the rest of us are able to be here at all only because he does that. I can live with that fact. I can live five posting per day or one per day or 25 per hour.

Does a limit make the gallery better? Who can say? Any of us might come up with better selections when forced to choose. On the other hand, we might also come up with selections that are no better or even worse than before.

Did having a limit so high that, for all practical purposes, there was no limit ruin the quality in the gallery? I don't think so. Will having the limit we used to have ruin the gallery? Of course not. Might some people leave in protest? Sure. But haven't we also had refugees here who fled in fits of outrage? (No names, please.)

Keith, you certainly didn't step on my toes. If one of us is right, is the other wrong? I don't think so.

I mostly agree with Joe "Bag Alley" here.

Stephen runs a nice portal for us. I am glad he does so. If wants to run this as a democracy, he can post a thread with a poll and hope he gets more participants than this thread drew. If wants to make a decision as he has here, consulting a few of us who got a little "vocal" that's his right, too, given that the rest of are not paying the bills.

I think this site is probably many things to many different people -- probably many things at different times to any one of us. Is it a gear site? Sure. Is it an image site? Sure. Can it both? Isn't it already?

Did any of us like everything we saw in the gallery with old limit? No. Did the percentage of images you liked versus the ones you didn't like change when the limit went out the window? Should anyone's personal likes or dislikes influence how many images we ought to be able to post? Do we attract or scare off people by having limits or not having limits?

One question that never got asked here -- and it's kind of none of our business, but very much Stephen's business -- is: did the cost of storage for this data get better with the new implementation of the gallery? Is it right for us to expect unlimited storage for free from Stephen? Has new cheaper storage technology made this tenable for him? He is certainly very generous to us all. I assume that he does reap some business benefits from this largess but I can't imagine that this generosity could or should be a bottomless pit. (I have spent money with his other business, having purchased at least one lens that I remember, largely, because I read about it here on the site. I've done the same with several other sponsors. We all should patronize their businesses whenever we can because of their support for the site and also because they're all good guys.)

Could we prosper with an honor system in the gallery, self-limiting ourselves? Are we mature enough? How many people ever posted 25 images in a day? How many did that with regularity? Were the images bad? Did anyone ever bump into the 25 per hour limit?

Anyway, here's my hope: that everyone who has been posting images in the gallery continues to do so and that new people continue to join us. If this change encourages that, I'm all for it. If it doesn't, I hope see the difference and manage to persuade each other and Stephen to adapt if we got it wrong this time around. In the end, I have to say that I come to the gallery whenever time permits to be and feel surprised, inspired, moved, tickled, tormented, envious, generous, glad, thankful, etc, etc. There's an awful lot of great work in there. If some of is sometime trifling or even bad, that's only an opinion.

IF YOU REALLY CARE ABOUT THE GALLERY, TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO COMMENT ON THE WORK OF SOMEONE YOU'VE JUST DISCOVERED. It's really easy to fall into the trap of exchanging compliments with or focusing on our friends. The encouragement you give to someone you don't know might make a huge impact and make you a new friend.
Click to expand...


Thanks for your input Rob and a lot of what you say makes sense and it seems we really only disagree on one point.

I never really requested the gallery to be taken back to a five a day limit but I definitely felt that it needed to be trimmed back ... maybe a poll would have actually been a very good idea. 'Leave it as is, five a day, seven a day, ten a day or whatever.' I would always go with what the majority thinks is fair because I'm only one voice ... but being an honourary Aussie I'm not backward in expressing my opinion of course. :D

I uploaded my limit of five last night and it felt like old times ... is it an improvement to what we had? I can't answer that for other people! Maybe we need more input here yet?
 
Keith, I haven't shot five worth posting any day for a while. This is good, as it forces me to focus on enjoying the work of others rather than despairing over my own.
 
back alley said:
too amny places to post is why i stopped using the gallery here...plus the lack of feedback was a major disappointment for me.
editing is key, yes...but this isn't about editing...or my penchant for bags or your lens tests...gear and photography can be complementary but this action goes against that compliment...
hey, this is only my opinion...but i think it's a mistake, i think it's wrong.

and that's all i will have to say on the matter any more!
Click to expand...


So after stamping your foot a couple of times you're taking your ball and leaving?

It's worthwhile reading my original post along with the thread title because you seem to think I've solely instigated a change in the gallery that you think is wrong. All I did was voice my opinion and open up a discussion and I was surprised when Stephen stepped in and made the change. I've highlighted the important part for you in case you missed it?
Please ... can we limit the daily gallery upload to something sensible?

The new gallery layout is terrific though it did take a little getting used to .... I like the dropdown menus and the over all look is pretty classy IMO and I thank Jorge for his efforts to move us into a more modern layout.

However, and I'm not singling anyone out here, to open the gallery main page and find that someone has uploaded over twenty images in one hit because they can is not doing the gallery justice. A twenty four hour maximum of five was sensible and a slight increase in that would have been fine but twenty five is over the top. I don't want to look at a page of one person's images when I click on the link.

YMMV of course.
Click to expand...
 
I am coming late to this thread, but I for one welcome putting a limit on the number of postings per day. In just the last few weeks, I have noticed that a few users of the gallery seem to take no effort to be selective about the images they post in the gallery. In at least a few cases, I have seen virtually identical pictures posted (with only perhaps they slightest change in crop or angle), and other times I have seen identical images posted in black and white and color. I understand that sometimes such juxtapositions might be justified, but it often feels like people just keep throwing up images hoping to get positive feedback.

Even if one shoots multiple rolls of film every day, I find it hard to believe that most of us couldn't find 5 images a day that were clearly better than the rest of our images.


--
Bill
 
Keith said:
So after stamping your foot a couple of times you're taking your ball and leaving?

It's worthwhile reading my original post along with the thread title because you seem to think I've solely instigated a change in the gallery that you think is wrong. All I did was voice my opinion and open up a discussion and I was surprised when Stephen stepped in and made the change. I've highlighted the important part for you in case you missed it?
Click to expand...

it's not my ball...I read the whole thread originally ...I didn't blame any one person...why is my opinion characterized as stamping my foot but its ok for others to do so without being made fun of?
 
I do agree with Keith in a smaller daily limit to the number of daily uploads to the gallery. It seems that a large number of people including me liked the limit of 5 images per day and Stephen has agreed to that limit. Perhaps there should be a poll to see where the majority stands on this matter considering there have only been a bit over 100 posts on this thread.

Mike
 
back alley said:
it's not my ball...I read the whole thread originally ...I didn't blame any one person...why is my opinion characterized as stamping my foot but its ok for others to do so without being made fun of?
Click to expand...


I'm not making fun of you Joe, you know I regard you as a mate, but I really felt you were singling me out for rocking the boat to suit my own ends.
 
Keith said:
I'm not making fun of you Joe, you know I regard you as a mate, but I really felt you were singling me out for rocking the boat to suit my own ends.
Click to expand...

well, you did start the thread...and i do believe that you had a moment of being pissed off at someone who posted a bunch of crap pics and then you decided to vent about it.

that being said...it's nothing i haven't done myself so i'm not judging you...

as far as a limit...it wont stop crap pics from being posted but then who am i to say what's crap or not.
 
back alley said:
well, you did start the thread...and i do believe that you had a moment of being pissed off at someone who posted a bunch of crap pics and then you decided to vent about it.

that being said...it's nothing i haven't done myself so i'm not judging you...

as far as a limit...it wont stop crap pics from being posted but then who am i to say what's crap or not.
Click to expand...


So are we good?

I prefer you as friend rather than foe! :)

Apologies if I offended you ... and I will confess I have opened the gallery main page on several occasions over the last few months and gnashed my teeth at what I saw! :eek:
 
This thread made me realize that I've wasted my time appreciating gear and not enough time appreciating the images. My hat's off to anyone that can regularly produce their quota day in and day out.
 
Thank you Stephen! Thank you Keith, Rob and Joe - all your arguments were plausible, and Stephen's decision is fully legitimate. Stop chatting and start shooting.
Believe me, we have to work really hard to fill up our daily quota of 5 decent shots. :)

Cheers,
Ivan
 
The pressure is on!

The pressure is on!

Wow!
Five a day.
Lucky to post one a month for me.
Whatever limit is set should work for me.
Stephen can let this run for a while and readjust the limit again if needed.
My humble 2cents:)
 
After processing shots from a recent vacation (not a picknick ;)) and starting to upload the first set, I hit the new/old "5 a day" limit and had to dig up this thread again, as I haven't commented on this topic before - I just thought it was a strom in tea cup.

Although I do agree that 25 per hr is opening the door way too much, as you will always have a very few members who will max this out. If also very few members dislike that, a healthy discussion certainly helps to clarify one's point of view.

I guess with the set up of the new gallery, there have been some thoughts behind the new limit and if these have not been completely overboard, I do not really see the point making a full fall back to the old limit.
Between 25 per hr (totals to 600 a day) and 5 a day is certainly enough wiggle room, just my "5 cents".
 
This voice of pragmatism confronts the voices of theory.

I wonder what experience will cause others to say.

Frankly, this week, I'm not sure I posted five images in seven days. But, what happens when one creates a great series that work best together?

Of course, one solution, as someone else observed, would be Chris Crawford's approach of creating a running thread in a forum rather than the gallery. I think his approach is terrific.

On the other hand, what is the gallery for if not images?

The question I have is do we need to treat the gallery here in the same manner as some of those very silly "groups" on flickr with complex rules (ie, "post one; comment on six or we ban you....")?

Thanks, Icebear, for pouring some sweetener into the proverbial teacup.

600 per day? Could a person with a job or an actual life find time to commit such an atrocity? Is that what we're protecting ourselves from???


icebear said:
After processing shots from a recent vacation (not a picknick ;)) and starting to upload the first set, I hit the new/old "5 a day" limit and had to dig up this thread again, as I haven't commented on this topic before - I just thought it was a strom in tea cup.

Although I do agree that 25 per hr is opening the door way too much, as you will always have a very few members who will max this out. If also very few members dislike that, a healthy discussion certainly helps to clarify one's point of view.

I guess with the set up of the new gallery, there have been some thoughts behind the new limit and if these have not been completely overboard, I do not really see the point making a full fall back to the old limit.
Between 25 per hr (totals to 600 a day) and 5 a day is certainly enough wiggle room, just my "5 cents".
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom