Take a look at the NEW RFF Gallery

[snausages]

Added some new features including a collection/albums page

enhanced performance drastically on home page and gallery pages.

added the ability to see a member collection ist on their summary page

made the "Gallery" menu clickable to show you the last 30 days of photos

Digging the extra rows of recent photos added to the gallery homepage. Thanks for tweaking that!

 

[CameraQuest]

Thank you for all your hard migration work.
Just a question regarding inline thread images pointing to the old gallery. Can you adjust the posts with a script or do I/we have to update all my single posts with a new (permanent?) link to the new gallery?

hmm. good question. not sure.

Stephen

 

[taskoni]

I rated by mistake on my own photo and looks like the vote is valid. Just to double check I voted on another picture of mine (I rated 10 - excellent) with great success. I believe it shouldn't be possible, what you guys think?

 

[MP Guy]

Some feedback:

1> I use the white RFF theme, as it is easiest for me to read the forum text on my iPhone with a white background. The gallery assumes we picked the black theme.
2> The white RFF theme points to the old gallery on the left sidebar.

I have added a white theme. just select from top menu

 

[furcafe]

That would be great, thanks.

As I mentioned in my other post, there are indeed *many* more lens makers, types, & variations than there are cameras & the level of lens nerdery on RFF is liable to make the differences very important to those who want to search for lenses. Is there a particular reason why the search function can't be based on Google-style text queries? That would seem to reduce the need for a centrally-administered uniformi/consistent lens database. For example, I distinguish between Carl Zeiss Jena, Zeiss-Opton, & Carl Zeiss for historical reasons & wouldn't want to mix them together under a single manufacturer heading.

I can't speak for other mods, but I'll be glad to add a lens or film. I've already added some lenses that I know will be used in gallery uploads, but there are *many* not yet listed.

It needs to be done in a consistent fashion. Just PM me with the details and I'll get it done.

 

[Rogrund]

I have added a white theme. just select from top menu

Great, thanks a lot! Looks so much better when you're used to the white theme on the forum.

But, how do I get to the new gallery from the main page of the forum? When I click on the "Gallery" link under the "Main Menu", I'm still directed to the old gallery.

 

[MP Guy]

Who has time and would like to compile a complete list of lenses into a spreadsheet ? 🙂

 

[MP Guy]

The main menu on left should be fixed.

 

[Rogrund]

The main menu on left should be fixed.

So it is, thank you very much! 🙂

 

[furcafe]

Exactly, that's why, IMHO, it would be a lot easier to just have a text search engine, like w/the camera data, as opposed to a centralized database w/fixed data elements. Y'all can always compile a database from the textual data that folks input themselves.

Who has time and would like to compile a complete list of lenses into a spreadsheet ? 🙂

 

[dct]

Lens data

Lens data

Who has time and would like to compile a complete list of lenses into a spreadsheet ? 🙂

Count me in, will send you a PM. But... before we start the hard work, let us think a few more days about the following.

I suppose the main driver for a moderated RFF lens DB is the fact, that collecting new lenses from EXIF data or manual input will lead to many similar miss-spelled names for the exactly same piece of glass, especially entering modern electronic zoom lenses, existing in different edition and also specifically for APS-C and full format.
Cautionary tale: LensModel="AF-S Nikkor DX 18-200/3.5-5.6 G IF-ED VR II"
One small typo and you have an additional entry for the same lens.
Given this problem I have to agree on a moderated own RFF DB.

Why exact data in a DB:
If we really want to have lens statistics and a dropdown list to the single glass,we need a correct moderated DB. The downside is the big never-ending-work to keep the DB in sync with new equipment. Are we able to accomplish this on the long term?

Fuzzy logic approach:
As already mentioned by furcafe we can forget about exact data and have the lens data as a text field without restrictions. Provide the search function (for lenses) with a normal DB query (e.g. "Nikkor & 18-200" would find all similar spellings of the above complicated example).
Additionally you could use the - mostly - correct EXIF data from the images for an initial load of the lens DB. Do we accept having completely wrong and many similar entries? Do we accept having no dropdown function for existing lenses (interesting for film users).

Are there other pros and cons to these alternatives?

 

[Lss]

I guess the new gallery specifically appeals to the more critical part of the RFF user base, as I got a 1.0 rating on one of my photos. 😀 Pretty sure I didn't click it myself as my mouse was never near the ratings.

Anyway, I think in the old gallery you could see who rated the photos. This does not seem to be the case anymore, is it?

 

[Lss]

Actually, it looks like someone went through all or most of the Street Photography Contest photos, and rated them 1.0. Good sport.

 

[furcafe]

I think we're on the same wavelength, as you've articulated my arguments in favor of a "fuzzy logic"/wiki-like approach more clearly than I did.

The problem w/relying on EXIF data is that I don't believe it's particularly useful for the majority of lenses that are going to be in the database. This is the RFF, not the DSLR Forum or Mirrorless Forum, & I think the greatest interest among lens nerds will be in various vintage lenses, which do not/cannot provide any automatic EXIF data. With the exception of the relatively few lenses that are stored in the Leica M digital database for coding purposes, any EXIF data would have to be entered manually by users using editing software (same goes w/manually coded glass for the Leicas) which brings us back to relying on user-entered data.

Aside from the administrative burden (data entry & corrections) associated w/the centralized drop-down database idea, from a user perspective, I can also foresee the list becoming increasingly cumbersome as it expands.

Good point about misspellings as there's already 1 in the database: "28/1.8 [sic] Ultron" (should be "28/1.9 Ultron") in the "Voigtlander LTM" list.

Count me in, will send you a PM. But... before we start the hard work, let us think a few more days about the following.

I suppose the main driver for a moderated RFF lens DB is the fact, that collecting new lenses from EXIF data or manual input will lead to many similar miss-spelled names for the exactly same piece of glass, especially entering modern electronic zoom lenses, existing in different edition and also specifically for APS-C and full format.
Cautionary tale: LensModel="AF-S Nikkor DX 18-200/3.5-5.6 G IF-ED VR II"
One small typo and you have an additional entry for the same lens.
Given this problem I have to agree on a moderated own RFF DB.

Why exact data in a DB:
If we really want to have lens statistics and a dropdown list to the single glass,we need a correct moderated DB. The downside is the big never-ending-work to keep the DB in sync with new equipment. Are we able to accomplish this on the long term?

Fuzzy logic approach:
As already mentioned by furcafe we can forget about exact data and have the lens data as a text field without restrictions. Provide the search function (for lenses) with a normal DB query (e.g. "Nikkor & 18-200" would find all similar spellings of the above complicated example).
Additionally you could use the - mostly - correct EXIF data from the images for an initial load of the lens DB. Do we accept having completely wrong and many similar entries? Do we accept having no dropdown function for existing lenses (interesting for film users).

Are there other pros and cons to these alternatives?

 

[CameraQuest]

Contest Info

Contest Info

Below the image is a field most contest members seem to be using for titling their image. Instead use that field for the Camera, Lens, City info.

Thanks,
Stephen

 

[divewizard]

upload err

upload err

I just tried to upload this photo. It is below both the pixel size limit and the stated file size limit, however I get a file to big error and it will not upload. Is your stated file size limit to large?

 

[hteasley]

I would really appreciate it if the "target=_blank" was removed from the linkbar links on the gallery page.

I do like the layout of the gallery linkbar better than that of the rest of the site, though, and I prefer the gallery background to the rest of the site, as well.

 

[divewizard]

I just tried to upload this photo. It is below both the pixel size limit and the stated file size limit, however I get a file to big error and it will not upload. Is your stated file size limit to large?

I just tried it again and it worked this time.

 

[brainwood]

I really like the white background for the gallery

thanks for the hard work Jorge

 

[jesse1dog]

Best of Random Gallery Picks - gone!

jesse