Bug Reports Part 1: the list (expanded version)

Discussion in 'Photo.net Site Help' started by Leslie Reid, Feb 16, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Favorited Gallery (Other PN User) Does Not show Thumbnails or Preview Images. Maybe related to size of gallery marked as a favorite, but only shows an broken image links. Clicking on "View Gallery" does work and takes you to the user gallery that has been favorited.
    Favorited-Gallery-Not-Displaying-Previews.jpg
     
  2. G-P

    G-P Administrator Staff Member

    I will certainly not deny that we've had our own set of challenges - trust me I'd be there with you 100%. But putting this all on photo.net doesn't take into account that photography has been evolving...and photo.net was not evolving with it in v1 of the site. Now many will say that they loved the v1 site and we should have kept it, sure OK but that doesn't help us in backend support and design issues, mobile (I could go on) - and certainly doesn't address the fact that usage was on the decline with that site as well so to say usage is because of v2 doesn't take into account v1 was also an issue. In many ways photography has been evolving and v1 of photo.net was not. See Instagram, Facebook, Snap, 500px and recently Upsplash - all showing significant growth in varying degrees - all tied to photography in their own way...and there are more examples of this I'm sure we all could add in of how photography changed and how people consumed and discussed photography. Beyond that its clear we were no longer the only game in town as we were in the early days. In short, from my view - Photo.net stayed the same while photography and how people did it and consumed it evolved. Now some people get upset because they were just happy with the old site the way it was (trust me I get it), but the numbers don't lie usage was on the decline from 2007 (when NameMedia purchase it) while these other sites thrived. Should NameMedia have been more invested in the vision and evolution of photo.net - yes...absolutely I would agree with that so we can point to that and I would not disagree with it. You have heard me say it before but here goes, one more time....we HAD TO UPDATE THE SITE because no one could support it in its old version - code was from early 90's there was one person that could support it and if he decided to stop working one day or got hit by a bus it would have been just unsupportable (if thats a word) and would have died. In short, WE HAD NO CHANCE in v1, and some of you would say we have no chance in V2...to which I will say...maybe your right, nothing is impossible....but I will also say - at least we're trying and we can support the site with todays workforce and are now in an environment where many more things are possible - and that is a start. On a personal level I am invested in this site and again no it hasn't gone as smoothly as I/we wanted - but I can tell you that we're trying to make this place better every day. I don't know any other way...but I can tell you we'll keep trying.
     
    Phil_Light and Sandy Vongries like this.
  3. Glenn:

    I’m not a subscriber anymore and just stop by every so often to see if any of my favorite photographers have reappeared; they haven’t, and that’s material to my comment.

    Your complete response above, the only one that you’ve parroted literally for years now, was not completely factual at the release of V2 and it still isn’t. As I’ve stated on several other occasions, we don’t care what computer language you speak and we understand the need to stay current. What we don’t understand and what I’ve never heard you address properly is why you took a fully functioning site, gave it to programmers that obviously had never picked up a camera and let them turn it into a shell of what it was before. That is diametrically opposed to any other site or software offering on the market.

    If you really want to try and salvage a site that photographers (not FaceBook clickers) will use, then give V1 to some knowledgeable programmers and let them modernize it to whatever programming language you want, but retain it’s functionality! Then release it on a new site. I hate to say it but your brand name is toast here on Photo.net, the site is flawed beyond repair (especially with the current programmers) because you lost functionality.

    Give me a modernized V1, with its full functionality, and I’ll be your first subscriber.

    Mike
     
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2018
    Ray House likes this.
  4. Glenn, you have the art of missing the point down to a fine science. The issue is not whether or not the site needed updating. The issue is with the poor design, shoddy implementation and negligent follow up.
     
    Ray House and Not Here like this.
  5. Sandy Vongries

    Sandy Vongries Administrator Staff Member

    "You can't go home again"
     
  6. That is not what I said, if you’ll just read what I did say. But if you want to pursue that frivolous line of thought; I’ll offer that I can and have “run away from home”, along with about 98% of the photographer’s on this site. And that’s a real shame.

    Mike
     
  7. G-P

    G-P Administrator Staff Member

    @gordon and @mike - I see neither of you have portfolios here any longer. When is the last time you tried to upload a photo? How would you know about improvements on that side of the site unless you used it on a regular basis? I think you've both gone too far in your assessment of v2, I really do. @gordon - right back at you about missing the point...my point was we admit that v2 hasn't gone as we intended, but that we'd keep at it and continue to make improvements. Would you prefer the alternative? Again, we will keep at it - that is my point. @mike - My point about activity was on a macro level of photography - and that placing blame at the feet of v2 of the site is misses many other factors in play - again because photography has evolved more than photo.net has in the same time period something we could not do with v1.
     
    Vincent Peri likes this.
  8. I really do feel like I’m talking to jell-o at echo canyon. There will never be meaningful, helpful dialogue until the defensive, guilty attitude about V1 is retired. Nothing most of us have said has anything to do with keeping V1; it’s been about the loss of functionality in V2.

    As for posting... why? Photo.net is a supplier asking for my consumer dollar and I’m being very honest in telling you that for over 10 years I was a happy client and you blew it and alienated me and a whole lot of other clients. It’s your job to make us want to come back.

    Non-sensical, random responses stretched over 2 years isn’t going to make that happen.

    Mike
     
    Phil_Light and gordonjb like this.
  9. Sandy Vongries

    Sandy Vongries Administrator Staff Member

    Who bailed out? Most of us here are working to try to help move things ahead. You might try talking to that tabloid time machine guy, otherwise, the past is gone.
    Golly, a lot of your "consumer dollars" at risk for a subscription! :rolleyes:
     
  10. Who bailed? Surely you jest with a that short memory. I do believe it was Photo.net that dropped an untested site on us without discussion or warning. With the majority of the membership bailed, I guess the < 50 posting photographers will have to share the consumer costs.

    How’s that “working to try to help” thingy working out for you? Has management all of a sudden gotten chatty about their plans? Yeah, I didn’t think so.

    Look, my argument isn’t with you and I apologize for my sharp tone. But even you have to be tired of the way this site has been run into the ground. I stopped counting at well over 100 of your newest uploads and in those you have 1 comment. That’s not what a photography site should be about.

    Have a good weekend, I’m running away from home again, this is a self defeating forum.;)

    Mike
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2018
  11. G-P

    G-P Administrator Staff Member

    Our forums generate roughly 1.5M-2M page views/month - there are a large number of people that come here to read our forums yet - they don't participate for any of number of reasons that we can speculate on. 1.) came to us via a Google search and found answer to their question therefore have no need to participate 2.) are shy and will read until they become comfortable with the community 3.) realize this forum isn't for them because (insert speculation here) but to say its only 50 people here is not accurate.

    Tracking comments is available - but not sure you would know about it Mike because you haven't been in that side of the site for a while by your own admission.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page