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

Thought that the increase from 5 a-day was a daft idea in the first place.
Glad now that others are seing some sense in the 5 a-day limit.
If members want to get criticism of a sequence or a group there are other threads rather than the Gallery.
Anyone can always start a new thread

jesse
 
Agree with other posters that stronger editing is something that should be encouraged here. It would make people think hard about what they photographed and why and if its really worthy of posting. Otherwise it would be great if gallery software could kick in to only show say 5 of a 25 shot upload and a link created to the users RFF personal gallery to view the rest.

My eyes glaze over and leave the gallery if I see a page filled with images from one member.

yeah too much work and it would be simpler if they got rid of the 25 and hour limit. My personal take is one a day would encourage a more discriminating upload.
 
-1

Not all of us have time to upload everyday, so they upload once in a while. Also, some pictures are in a series and sometimes these series are more then five pictures.

Wouldn't it make sense if the pictures uploaded in one day by one member were clustered and showing just one of them on the new pictures overview? Still enabling bigger uploads without overflowing the gallery.
 
5 per day sounds reasonable, I don't think I ever uploaded more. 1 per day limit makes you do it regularly if you want to show your work, and life does not always allow you regularity. I appreaciate looking at a series of 5 or 7 photos from someone whose work I like. Maybe a monthly or weekly limit isn't a bad idea, especially as I don't believe that those who upload a lot would do it all in one batch if that happens.

But, to be quite honest, I don't really care. It's very easy to browse through quickly if I want to. And the photos with girls will get by far the most views in any case :)
 
Addy101 said:
-1

Not all of us have time to upload everyday, so they upload once in a while. Also, some pictures are in a series and sometimes these series are more then five pictures.

Wouldn't it make sense if the pictures uploaded in one day by one member were clustered and showing just one of them on the new pictures overview? Still enabling bigger uploads without overflowing the gallery.
Click to expand...

Fine if you don't have the time to upload each day. You're not obliged to! If you want to keep series photos together with a one-a-day limited upload, you can put them in a personal gallery. There they can be viewed together.
 
HuubL said:
Fine if you don't have the time to upload each day. You're not obliged to! If you want to keep series photos together with a one-a-day limited upload, you can put them in a personal gallery. There they can be viewed together.
Click to expand...

It's not about keeping them together, for that you have other sites and can link to them, but viewing them as such as they come up. The first today and tomorrow the second and so - we're not talking about a TV series, and even those many prefer to watch in a row.

Let's be reasonable with five.
 
A compromise maybe?

Something like how photos by contacts at flickr are displayed... uploads are unlimited but only the latest five per user show up on the gallery top page.
 
Time for a campaign, sounds like. Every campaign needs a jingle. {pulls out accordion}

Five a Day / That's Good for Me / Just the Best / for Ya'll to See

Five a Day / Not Five & Twenty / Pick your Best / Five is Plenty

....add your own verses...
 
I think five a day is a sensible limit, which I still observe. If you have a themed collection of images, maybe start a thread and link to an outside gallery?

(I gotta say I recently had some duplicates appear, owing to some glitch in the upload process. )

Randy
 
I remember I hit an hourly limit a few weeks ago as a fairly new poster.

I am good with whatever limit helps to bring back people to view the gallery. Best to not discourage the wealth of experienced opinions and critique here.
 
jonmanjiro said:
A compromise maybe?

Something like how photos by contacts at flickr are displayed... uploads are unlimited but only the latest five per user show up on the gallery top page.
Click to expand...

This is what I like!

Too many people round here are pushing from their on position. I'm not allowed to post more then one a day means for some folks one a week and that seems unfair to me. If there is to be a limit, it should be a limit by week. If you really want five a day, you should opt for 35 a week in stead of five a day.....
 
I think that limits are silly and unnecessary. Most people will self-limit themselves, especially if they don't receive the positive reinforcement of feedback complimenting their work.

Ocassionally, some folks may find a burst of energy, creativity, insomnia, OCD or a simple anal-expulsive impulse to overdo it (I've been guilty more than once), but I honestly haven't come across anyone who is a chronic "offender."

Furthermore, in the case of more than a few folks here, I actually enjoy seeing their creative process or the strong thread of a documentary, portrait, landscape or other project unfold when they dump more than the usual number of images into the Gallery.

Two people recently come to mind whose volume not only doesn't bother me in the least, but actually serves to enable to see a little more deeply into their process, vision, etc. I'm thinking of Blaz (bk1970), whose foray into all those gorgeous images of corrosion and peeling paint were remarked upon favorably and frequently by many of us. The immersion into his work in short, but big bursts has been really enjoyable and revealing (a bit of double entendre, as the photos reveal a bit about Blaz and more still of his subject matter as it sheds layers of paint). His more recent investigation of peeling outdoor posters in B&W is just as captivating and I look forward to seeing more of it. And seeing it in exactly whatever way he opts to share with us.

In a similar vein, Maiku has graciously admitted to sometimes posting a lot of images all at once. I enjoy seeing his reading of urban geometry, city life and his recent slew of decaying abandoned buildings. He presents it as chunks of an emerging oeuvre. It works for me seeing it that way.

And, even my friend Keith who started this thread, whose work I always enjoy, I think would be stingy with his work if he didn't ocassionally post a whole bunch of photos at once (I'm thinking of his wonderful collection of old photos, his studies of art in the making, his great shots of life in Australia, etc., etc.).

I could go on and on about folks who might ocassionally exceed a limit and by doing so actually be rewarding us with their generosity.

Does anyone take offense at seeing more of koolazumba's fine landscape works ... Lynn's seascapes ... Paulfish's work capturing life in Alabama or recording his view of life as a cancer patient (then, thankfully, cancer survivor) ... Dotour showing us Zagreb ... Mike Lehrman's Manhattan or bushwick1234's Brooklyn ... Robert Hill Long's Oregon or his exceptionally sensitive study of his sister. I really could go on and on and on here....

I understand where some of you suggesting limits are coming from and I respect, but strongly disagree with your prescription.

I see the virtual gallery here as very much like any physical gallery space any of us might walk into. What do you do when you see wall after wall of images you like? You probably linger and enjoy. Your mind wanders. Maybe you even let what you see filter into questions of how to let your own work evolve and grow.

What do you do when you enter a room in the same gallery where you see things that don't do it for you? Simple. You keep moving until you see something that catches your eye. Or you go home. It think we can all treat RFF's gallery in the same fashion. Linger where you like and move on where you don't.

Think about it for a moment. When our old friend Frank Petronio was actively posting to the gallery expertly-made images of nude/semi-nude women, did very many people (except perhaps folks who don't like seeing nudity on the web) complain over how many images he put up at once? Never to my recollection.

Now, I'm sure I post plenty of duds that the rest of you skip over. I'm cool with that. Keeping skipping by. But why would you want to limit the amazing range of creativity, vision and talent that others offer to share?

So, rather than imposing some arbitrary limit (1 per day, 5 per day, 25 per hour...?), why not simply vote with your eyes and your computer mouse?

I suppose most of you know of Mayor Bloomberg's well-intentioned regulation (currently stayed by a court) to protect New Yorkers from themselves by limiting their intake of sugary beverages. Are we on RFF not capable of policing our own intake (and output, too) of empty photographic calories???

By the way, I think the rising volume of images being posted is only partly due to the nearly unlimited quantity we're allowed. I think it also owes a lot to the wonderful job Jorge Toralba has done in making the gallery very user friendly for both posters and viewers/commenters. Thank you to Stephen and Jorge.

We have lots of folks posting who never did so before and that's a good thing. We should encourage more people to participate by being friendly and supportive rather than making anyone think we're going to judge them harshly by what they see, how the see it or how much of they choose to share. I doubt that this website will ever descend into the often meaningless and unusually unfiltered, unedited mess we all see frequently on Flickr.
 
One additional thought. When the mythical Mexican Suitcase was finally found, did anyone think, "Gee, I wish there were less of those photographs"? Or that someone ought to destroy all those unprocessed rolls and unprinted negatives that Garry Winogrand left behind?

Curation and editing aren't easy, especially not to do them well.

Perhaps, via our comments, we can help someone else who is struggling to master their body of work by making a constructive suggestion in their gallery postings.

Many folks might be posting less for attention of the laudatory kind and more for attention of the critically constructive feedback kind.
 
I utterly and completely agree with Rob - and not because of his kind words about my work for which I thank him. What he wrote is precisely as it should be.

As this thread got bigger and bigger today I already started thinking that my days of posting in the gallery are probably over if it happens, and toying with the idea of starting my own picture posting thread as an alternative.

When I think about it, those 5 per day were the reason i never regularly posted before. It's not because I'd want to post 20 pictures. It's because I don't like to be limited in this way. I don't want to think about how many do i have left... I don't want to put myself in this kind of position, period. We're not in school (system) anymore, at least i'm happily and permanently out for quite a while. It's death of everything creative.

Thank you, Rob.
 
Harry Caul, I visited that thread to which provided a link. Your series is exactly why I am against imposing arbitrary limits. Thanks for sharing the link, as I'm afraid I missed the thread and the fine images (and commentary) until you brought it to my attention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom