Compare this sight to what it used to be

I though maybe my memory was bad. I had some wild notion that when I

started visiting this sight the TRP was varied and interesting. So I

did a quick check of the TRP of now and then:

 

TRP for past year: 12 bird pics on first page

 

TRP for 1 year ago: 4 bird pics on first page

 

TRP for 2 years ago: 1 bird pic (and some stunning pictures!)

 

TRP for all time: 9 bird pics (most of them from this year)

 

When someone visits the site for the first time, the TRP is one of the

first things you look at. If back when I started I had looked at the

TRP and saw only bird pictures I would have simply surfed on.

 

What has happened to this sight? In just the last 4 months it seems

to have totaly changed in character. Maybe that's just the end

product of popularity and it's becoming the AM radio of photography

(for those outside the U.S., AM radio here sucks). What can we do, if

anything.

 

And no, I do NOT blame the admins. I'm merely doing some public mourning.

Ed, interesting thoughts. i agree that things are getting increasingly weird and that its kind of sad, and not the site management's fault particularly. between the robots, the hackings, the ever increasingly influx of certain types of photos over and over, the mindless commentary announcing the sprinkling happy ratings all over by the thousands, the harsh personal attacks -- AM radio is not a bad analogy.

The biggest change I've seen in the site in the past year or two is that it has become much, much more stable. In the past, the system would be down for a few hours quite frequently, and it would be out of commission for a few days occasionally. Performace was often so slow that it could take a few minutes for each link to load.

 

In a sense, it's actually a testimony to how much the site has improved that the feedback forum is generally filled with complaints about the rating system and TRP--nice that that's the worst "problems" it has.

I too have noticed a difference. Seems the typical comment these days only is to either say how great a shot is or how great a shot is. I miss the days of somewhat decent conversations regarding photos.

"When someone visits the site for the first time, the TRP is one of the first things you look at." <p> That's odd! I didn't know this page existed until I had surfed the site for nearly two years! My first exposure was to the Leica Photo Forum and I was so absorbed by the Leica lore that it took me some condiderable time to become aware of the "issues" that seem to occupy the minds of a particularly expressive group of admirers and critics. By no means should this be construed as negatively critical, but rather as pointing out that there are many who subscribe and surf who are not primarily concerned with how their images are appreciated (or not) by other surfers. I suppose my views are not acceptable to the minority who insist that the only creditable critic is one who also offers his work for evaluation, but rather there is a significant number who peruse the site just out of a sincere interest in the general field of photography and admiration of advanced skills in displaying photographer's works. The selfish notion that it is for the advancement of the reputations of the participants is fatuous and ill-directed.

I had to look up "fatuous."

Actually, I see a lot more manipulation of the photos themselves compared with 5 years ago, that is the biggest difference to me. I'm not saying the photos aren't bad, or good, just different. BTW, I think this is the second time I have ever been to the trp.

I surfed here regularly a long time before I ever posted anything. About once a week I would check the TRP simply because there were interesting things to see. Eventually I went out and bought a camera and started taking pictures, and it was a while after that before I had the nerve to post any simply because I had seen so many fine pictures on this sight that I knew I could never compare to them.

 

I think that if you started out as a photographer and first came to the sight looking for a place to post or find camera info, the TRP wouldn't have been where you were looking. But as an audience (which was me) that used to be the place to go. My guess is I was not alone in that.

 

I guess that as the audience expands, it flattens out, and the rating system becomes self-selective. Surfers looking for birds, nudes and sunsets will like the TRP and stick around. The rest will pass it bye. The result is more votes for the lowest common denominator and fewer rewards for the inquisitive viewer looking for something genuinely rewarding.

Unfortunately My Flamingo Extermination Service has gone nowhere; no calls at all, so I've parked the car and gone to work at McDonald's...:)

However, if you have the time, I have a flamingo kit in one of my folders. Even if you don't like bird photography, this kit will help you get the drift on this style of imaging at little cost and the learning curve is pretty quick.

John,<p>

I loved your Flamingo extermination kit. I downladed it and used it as a plug-in in photoshop to redo an image that I am especially proud of. Guess what, no flamingos. Here is the link to the photo if you want to check it out <p>

http://www.photo.net/photo/3260615

How about the fact that 13 of the top 25 images of all time were taken in the last four months? I remember posting the same statistic at the beginning of March , that 13 of the top 25 of ALL TIME had been taken in the past eight weeks!

Out of the million or so pictures uploaded to P.net, that must tell us something about how things have changed.

And 10 of those 13 pictures are of birds.

 

They're all very nice bird pictures, but a casual visitor to this sight would find none of the variety that is still here, but buried deep. Remember, this sight should be something more than just a way to stroke our egos. It should be a way to excite and inspire non-photographers.

 

Maybe it should just change its name to the Internet Audobon Sight and be done with it.

Actually, changing the name to www.imaging.net would be closer to what it is.

Yes, this SITE is quite a SIGHT, isn't it...

[sarcamse] I have the solution! Instead of complainig here why don't you all go out, or into your studio, and shoot some real good photos? [/sarcasme]

 

oops when was the last time I uploaded a new photo? turning deep red...

<em>I have the solution! Instead of complainig here why don't you all go out, or into your studio, and shoot some real good photos?</em>

<p>

What's the point. The won't get onto the TRPs so why bother?

<i>Actually, changing the name to www.imaging.net would be closer to what it is.</i><p>

 

"Photography" has been called "imaging" for over a century. What would the point be of picking a word that means the same thing?

Actually calling it imaging.net would be more inclusive than photo.net. Photo.net connotes that an image or discussion be somewhat loosely related to photography, if it were imaging.net many aspects of design work, digital collages, or digital drawings ect... that don't start or have any aspect of a photo contained in them could be included. This site has moved beyond just photography into a larger realm of design and imaging, just look at some of the images in the galleries for example. I am not trying to be confrontational, Jeff, just an observation.

I like bird pics. I suppose one man's pidgeon is another man's pile.

I?ve been here for a while now, and I have to say, with out a doubt this site has to be the best out there. I never worry about the numbers game(rating). I have rated before but now I rate photos by words.

 

I believe that some just use the numbers to jack-up their ?number of photos rated?, some just like to antagonize, and others are sincere and will add the words to back the rating up.

 

The one thing that is with out dispute. Is the talent that?s on this site, I am in awe of some of the photos that reside on this site. Personally I have learned a lot from everyone here, and ignore the negativity. As someone said, shoot more and worry less. Just my 2.2 cents

 

 

Dave