Nikon Wednesday Pic comments

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by marklcooper, Oct 4, 2009.

  1. This post is in regard to Lex's comments at the end of the just closed Wednesday Pic #40.
    I'd like to propose an auxiliary thread to the weekly Wednesday Pic. The extensive kudos and thanks could go here along with some of the longer discussions about various topics brought up in the Wednesday Pic thread itself. I would still like to see a little bit of discussion in the Wednesday Pic thread itself.
    A couple months ago when my OCD kicked in (I didn't think it was that obvious Matt) I decided to count the number of pics contributed by each of the various Nikon cameras. This generated a bit of discussion related to that week's Wednesday Pic.
    http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00TuXS?unified_p=1
    Any comments?
    Thanks - Mark
     
  2. For the sake of clarity - and because it takes so long to load the Wednesday Pic threads - I'm reprinting my comments at the end of Wednesday Pic #40 here:
    Moderator's note - Because this thread has taken nearly 3 minutes to load, I'm closing it for now. We'll see you all for Nikon WedNEsDAy PiC #41. -- LJ
    Some interesting issues have been raised in this thread, which Shun and I anticipated and have discussed in the past: How wordy should these Wednesday Pic threads be? Since both photos and words add to the length of these threads, and affect how long it takes to load the entire thread, we've arrived at the point where we need to discuss this issue.
    We're not trying to replace the existing No Words Forum. The original No Words concept originated elsewhere, the goal being to provide an outlet for sharing photos without the potential complications that result from the fuzzy concept of "How many words is 'enough'?" But some other forums have adopted a modified version, the NW/W type threads, in which some words are acceptable.
    The weekly Nikon Wednesday Pic threads are closer to the NW/W concept, but have grown beyond anyone's expectations. They're unique. They're a great morale booster and great for the sense of community. They've also presented some unique challenges that we've needed to deal with, both as community members and for the moderators.
    So far, my rule of thumb has not been to impose a word limit but, rather, a time limit based on how long it takes one of these threads to load from an empty cache onto my browser, using a basic DSL connection. As I'd mentioned in previous threads, including this one , if it takes longer than two minutes to load a Wednesday Pic thread from an empty cache, we may need to consider closing the threads rather than simply allowing them to remain open until the next Wednesday Pic session.
    Generally speaking, I believe it's best to let problems resolve themselves. But there have been a few instances of problems occurring on the Wednesday Pic threads that are more difficult to resolve because the threads have become so popular. In the past year we've dealt with:
    • A few cases of commercial spam.
    • Some trolling by a couple of folks (not regular participants) who just wanted to stir the pot. And, as is often the case, rather than ignoring the trolls some well-meaning folks attempted to engage them in constructive dialog. This never works. That's why they're called "trolls". Stirring up trouble is a hobby and entertainment for the dedicated troll. And it's why we have moderators.
    • Deliberate posting of multiple photos by a couple of folks who refused to cooperate with the one-photo-per-person rule. I'm not talking about simple ignorance of the rules - I'm not worried about the new participant who isn't aware of the rule. That's not a serious problem. But we've had a couple of folks who repeatedly posted multiple photos even after being warned, including one who signed up under a pseudonym to continue this practice.
    • A couple of photos that didn't quite meet our safe for work/school viewing policy (not a big deal, but it's happened a couple of times).
    It may be time to open a discussion to the community about how to proceed with these Nikon Wednesday Pic threads in order to find some consensus about how many words is enough, given the rough guide I've given of how long it takes to load an entire thread from an empty browser cache.​
     
  3. it seems as though the success of the wed pic is slowly choking it to death. that's a pity.
    i must say, i'm surprised that <1kb text consumes more bandwidth than >300kb of image, but if i'm reading the moderator's post correctly, this seems to be the case.
    i enjoy going "around the world" on wednesday via this thread. a few words to identify the location or set the scene, or to mention specifics of the gear used, seem ample to me -- otherwise, i prefer images to speak for themselves.
    if the thread becomes too large, i believe the most democratic way to deal with it is to simply close it down when the 2-minute limit is reached. it's regretable if that cuts some participants out, but what other manageable system is there?
    any other problems: i trust the moderators' judgement.
     
  4. Gosh! Three minutes is a long time. I just timed it here with an empty cache and a cable modem connection. It took about five seconds. Guess I should count my blessings.
     
  5. If its not broke, don't fix it.
    ITS NOT BROKE
    Its perfect the way it is. = Its growing for a good reason
     
  6. Perhaps if some one funds a better connection for Lex, the thread can continue to grow ! :) So, let's pass around the hat. I think Lex deserves a FIOS account. What about you ?
    ( Note: I do not suggest we REALLY pony up for a high speed line for Mr Perpendicularity , but it would seem to raise the limit if it were the case. )
     
  7. Kent, my basic DSL connection is just a reasonable compromise between the dialup I used until late 2007 and the faster DSL and cable services that I can't afford. If I was still on dialup, as a moderator I wouldn't be able to support the concept of a photo-oriented thread at all (and, in fact, still discourage them on the b&w forums I also moderate). I rarely even looked at the NW type threads or NW Forum until I got DSL.
    For moderators these types of threads are very time consuming. We support them because of the benefit to the community. But we must also consider the entire community and whether the length of the threads is making them inaccessible to others who might like to participate.
    I don't think any of us anticipated these Wednesday Pic threads would grow from double digit posts in 2008 to hundreds of posts and thousands of words by late 2009. It's a mixed blessing. But definitely one we should embrace and nurture.
    I would like to see some self-policing and self-restraint, of the type that participants impose upon themselves, rather than externally by moderators, with the goals of both preserving the unique character of camaraderie in the Wednesday Pic threads and of remembering that the emphasis should be on the images, not the words about those images.
    This is one of those instances where I'd like to see some consensus among the community. I'm looking forward to some thoughtful input from everyone here.
     
  8. John, I appreciate the offer but it wouldn't solve the other problem - accessibility for the entire community.
    Improving my personal access wouldn't help others who don't enjoy fast ISPs. We have to consider the entire community, not just the moderators and those who happen to enjoy faster connections and computers. It will always be a compromise.
     
  9. Well as one of the guilty ones of being wordy...... I will try to be less so, for both the thread's sake & for those with not as fast as mine DSL line. Mine is supposedly 1.5, but all I get at best is 1.3 for download. Sure wish I was in Europe where the DSL lines actually move.
    I have attempted to comment on all shots each week - much due to the fact that I know what it feels like to get just a tad of encouragement. It does become a huge job. I finally had to deal with the fact that I wasn't happy writing some less than good comments & I felt like a broken record repeating myself.
    This week I explained myself & thanked people for commenting on my shot. Then I commented which shots I enjoyed the most - that's what I'm planning to do from now on as long as it's OK with our moderators.
    As for how I like the thread - well I've kind of enjoyed it as it is. As much as I've enjoyed leaving comments to each & every one who posts - I've had to accept that I simply do not have the time with all these entries. The thread is popular & that's just the way it is.
    Anyhow - that's JMHO - I will follow what the forum decides & what Shun & Lex decides. They're the ones who have to moderate the forum after all & that's a big job.
    Big thanks to Lex & Shun for their great work & support. I've grown a lot with their help & the help of this forum. I hope to be a part of it for a long time to come.
    Lil :)
     
  10. I support what Lex is doing now: Close the thread when it takes to long to load.
     
  11. Ditto the big thanks to Lex and Shun. They do a terrific job.
     
  12. I, too, may be one of the guilty ones. It is nice that someone comment on my photo, so I do the same. I enjoy the thread as they are very inspiring and enjoy as if I were going around the world. Any comment is encouraging especially to a learner like me.
    I do appreciate the moderators, Lex & Shun, for keeping this forum in order and I will follow whatever is decided by them. I am learning a lot here. My wish is to once in a while have someone pat on my back :)
    Ken
     
  13. This thread is unique because it's different from No Words. I know we have feedback forums but none has allowed the interplay that this one has. The Thread has turned Photo.net into a closer community. I feel that this thread has caused much more personal interaction than posting in other discussions. Everyone seems to be on the same page here. Its been a long time since I've belonged to a Photo Club and I been getting that feeling because of the interaction that takes place here.
    No place else on Photo.net does this occur. Theres no interaction on No words. The critique forum is cold and the ratings system is often too anonymous. This becomes a group discussion on photo comments that allows you see many different points of view. Doest;t happen anywhere else like this.
    For many members this thread is a high point of the week. Its growing because it has the right mix. Lets not screw that up. Ny luck or chance or for whatever reason it working better than anyone expected and in ints current form giving large amount of enjoyment to many.
    I know that I'm starting to ramble on, but I really don't want to see any changes made to the way that this unique thread works.
     
  14. I've been enjoying viewing and participating in the thread but it has reached a critical mass. I like hearing comments about peoples shooting notes or a reaction to an image, but perhaps we can just dial back the 10-12 inches of comment and analysis and the constant thanking and re-thanking text, it quite tedious. There is art in brevity. Let's keep the focus on the photography. Keep comments to a sentance or two and, importantly, keep the 700 pixel sized jpeg'd image squeezed down to around 100-150k.
     
  15. I have not been on this site very long , and therefore do not have the background as to the past nor do I have any professional expertise.
    I am a late comer to this art. My prior " artistic "endeavors have been in cooking. Before you roll your eyes, I am learning that there are similarities. A cook combines ingredients in a variety of ways to produce different results . A photographer does much the same with the photographic ingredients of subject, light, etc.
    This thread show cases the variety of ingredients and how they are put together. It is a learning tool, an encouragement to try different things.
    I do apologize if my trying to comment on all the photos is clogging the forum, as that certainly was not my intent.
    While I understand that this is a subjective art, as Ken Yamamoto stated, " Any comment is encouraging...." For those of us, who are trying to improve, this post provides a outlet /venue to post and receive some comment / critique .
    I also post on the Now Words forum, but this allows for exchange and interaction. Since it is growing, something must be appealing .
    Lex and Shun, kudos to you both for what you are doing, but I do hope you still allow for the comments .
     
  16. Maybe it would help to simply give the thread's users the social permission, as it were, to feel comfortable commenting on fewer of the posted images. Perhaps strive to make it common (and acceptable) to select 10 images on which to comment? The thread would become easier to navigate.

    But as for bandwidth... it's the images, not the words. Just a couple of fairly large JPGs will contain far more data than all of the written words in a seriously verbose Wednesday thread. So the only issue with the text is the physical scrolling - and it's only part of the heft. Mostly, it's all them photos. Perhaps just terminate the thread early on, and roll it over to as many sequels (#40, 40.2, 40.3, etc) as necessary to keep them all nice and hors d'oeuvres sized, instead of 7-course-meal sized. If it was broken up into a few threads, folks who are watching it could just refresh the most recent sub-thread, and anyone coming along to visit could just follow links forward/backward through a chain of them. Yeah, that would require moderator action, ad nauseum.

    Oh, and for what it's worth, part of the page rendering delay can be the speed of the computer and web browser being used, not just the pipe connecting it to the internet. Just for fun I cleared the caches on two computers here at HQ. One is a speedy desktop machine with a hard link to my router, one hop from the cable modem. It rendered the page, with all images, in under 15 seconds. A modest laptop, using the same pipe but getting to it over in-house WiFi, took just over 30 seconds... but I think most of that was the computer's performance, not the extra WiFi link in the mix.

    While I understand Lex's concern about the lowest common performance demoninator, I think that folks with particularly slow rigs are used to some web destinations being pokey... and the much larger collection of folks with zippy platforms and connections have reasonable expectations that they can digest large, complex pages at a quick pace. It's not like this is a site for quilt makers, every one of them dialing up AOL from rural homesteads... this is (generally) a site with tech-savvy users that tend to throw a fair amount of hardware at their communications needs.
     
  17. Here's my OCD kicking in again. I've not double-checked any of my numbers.
    Wednesday Pic #40 had 203 posts (including Jose's) with 130 displayed pictures.
    The total picture size is 22,046,004 bytes
    Average JPG size is 169,585 bytes
    Min JPG size is 25,937 bytes
    MAX JPG size is 643,800 bytes!!!
    Number of pics over recommended size limit is 11
    Number of pics over 200,000 bytes and less than 300,000 bytes is 29
    Comments to follow with the next post. I'm including my handwritten notes if anyone cares. I started with Jose's pic as #1 and just scrolled down.
    00Uf8C-178131684.jpg
     
  18. I submit that we do a better job of sizing our pics for web viewing. Does the data contained in a 300K JPG show any more detail than a 200K JPG, assuming they have identical dimensions?
    I agree with Matt in that the text/comments don't take up much bandwidth...just real estate on the screen.
    Thanks - Mark
     
  19. I was about to mention some text stats, but Mark seems to be working on stats already. My quick count indicates that the acknowledgment comments between participants range from around 500 words to 2,000 words each. Those include just the lists of names and brief comments on each photo.
    The total word count per thread has typically been around 20,000 or more per discussion. By itself, text alone doesn't necessarily bog down access even for folks with slower ISPs or older computers. However, because these words are added to photo-laden threads, it's a burden for moderators. Re-loading the threads several times a week - sometimes a few times a day - to keep things on track, which involves:
    • Ensuring that spammers aren't taking over the joint (we occasionally get porn spammers on photo.net, tho' so far no actual images).
    • Ensuring political or other contentious issues don't lead to flame wars (one significant occurrence this year, with very time consuming followup e-mails with the offenders).
    • Ensuring wonky code doesn't bugger up the thread and lock it up. Apparently some browsers or offline text preparation software will occasionally insert code that's incompatible with photo.net's spam-filters. This has occurred many times this year, including on at least a couple of Wednesday Pic threads. Also very time consuming for moderators to deal with since we must get someone with admin access or a programmer to unlock the threads.
    • Etc.
    Even with the thread cached it still takes time to load. I've checked it from a neighbor's home, using a much faster PC and slightly faster DSL. It's still time consuming.
    Most participants don't need to review the thread every day. Moderators don't have that option. Every time a thread is bumped to the top of the queue by a new post, chances are a moderator will have to review it to ensure everything is running smoothly. That's what makes photo.net different from most interactive sites. Doesn't matter if it's a 2,000 word inoffensive compliment to each participant, a paragraph of spam, or a six word insult intended to troll the thread and stir up trouble - it takes time for moderators.
    And, as Mark's data shows, especially regarding file sizes of our uploaded photos, many of us could do a better job of doing our part to make these weekly photo sharing threads as enjoyable as possible for the entire Nikon Forum community.
     
  20. (good idea about starting this discussion thread today)
    I like the idea of starting 2 threads each week for the Wednesday Photo,
    ----------------
    1) Photo of the Week - few words or few sentences about where or why or what, along with Exposure details, many people find those very interesting for different reasons, and seeing them as text next to picture is best, it doesn't take much effort by the poster
    -----------------
    2) Photo of the Week comments - praises and discussions and dialogues that develop from it, because even if people "restrict themselves" in comments, others still can find the "restriction" still not restricing enough
    -----------------
    If the generation of #2 thread could be automatic, and make it transparent to Jose, I am sure he would appreciate it. When I hinted at the creation of this thread back in 2008 when I saw a Pentax thread of this type, I knew I couldn't be the person starting it each week, I am glad Jose found the commitment to keep doing it week after week. Also having a LINK within the threads (to each other) would be appreciated.
    10 months ago I used to contribute every week, and only Lil used to have long comments (and we all enjoyed them, and how she made everyone's pictures feel appreciated), but these days there is way much text from many people, and there are way many people who appreciate them, however, a separate thread would make more sense. There are times I want to see the comments, and there are times I just want to see the pictures (and technical details from the poster) and nothing else, I want to make my own personal observations and motivation.

    I am sure the Wednesday thread is a favorite of both those who contribute and those who just like to see it, and having 2 threads would make sense.
    120 pictures posted in 120 paragraphs (1 picture in each) and that's all.
    And a separate thread for the comments. 200 postings.
    (120 and 200 are just realistic examples, there would be no restrictions)
     
  21. You need pagination of threads, so that long threads link to a Page 2, Page 3, etc., of the thread as necessary. Presto! Problem solved.
     
  22. Another idea: Small versions of photos show up in the thread; users can click to enlarge in a separate window.
     
  23. The suggestions for parallel threads - one for photos, one for comments - brings to mind another alternative that might be more in keeping with the mission and tradition of photo.net.
    Suppose we all upload our photos to our photo.net portfolios and link them to the Wednesday Pic threads. Those who wish to comment on those photos can do so on the photographer's portfolio, which is traditionally where photo.net critiques are intended to go.
    At the moment, some folks are linking via their portfolios off-site: smugmug, zenfolio, etc. In order to receive critiques or comments as intended by photo.net's mission, they would need to instead link their photos via their portfolio space on photo.net. If their end goal is to retain full control of their photos - including the ability to delete these photos later - they would retain that option. When you delete a photo from your photo.net portfolio, smugmug, zenfolio or other accounts, the embedded linked photo on the discussion forum also disappears.
    Seems like a logical, reasonable compromise to me. It would also motivate more use of photo.net's critique system. For those of us who may have felt discouraged by the rampant mate-rating and cliques, this would provide an opportunity to cultivate your own group of like minded photographers with compatible interests in whatever genre you enjoy, whether wildlife, macro or any other genre. Whether this activity leads to more cliques and mutual backrubs isn't my concern. Everyone makes their own choices about how to use the tools provided. But it gives you all the opportunity to use the photo.net critique system as intended.
    Thoughts? I'm sincerely interested, since I'd also like to see photo.net's critiques and ratings system improve and regain some real integrity. It's a good opportunity to accomplish another goal outside the Nikon Forum.
     
  24. I think parallel threads are not an easy sell, but I don't think "no comments within the single thread" is good, where the only area for critique is within photo.net critique area. For a few reasons, for example my Weekly Photo choice might not be my choice for uploading, or later I decide to delete the photo and replace it with something else.. and then there are the limit-4 pictures free users, who would be limited. I think comments should be allowed but kept separate, and allow the users to see or not see those comments when perhaps they just want to see the pictures. Having 2 browsers open, they could scroll for picture in one, and make a comment in the other.
    Placing critique where it should be placed (in photo.net critique area) is a good idea, but giving users the option to use that area or just commenting within the weekly photo area is "user friendly", just like Adorama's checkout choice "quick one-time don't want a username, single time purchaser" versus "regular, the way it should be, create username or login". Some people won't use something if they find it time-consuming, and the Weekly Photo thread should make it easy to comment on, and have everyone enjoy.
    The idea of thumbnails or paging I find non-ideal because thumbnails would still be in linear sequence one per line, save load time but need a lot of clicking to see a lot of pictures, and the scrolling is way more convenient. Paging would require more clicks too and doing a Search would be on several pages. Sometimes I just want to skip over to someone's picture (or comments) and going across multiple pages is a hastle.
     
  25. Lex, I think your proposal would kill the spontaneity and fun of the thread. Instead of seeing a lot of photos, we would see a lot of links, each of which would have to be clicked to see each photo. The feeling of browsing through a series of photos would be destroyed.
    I also like keeping my photos on Smugmug, since the ones I post on Photo.net end up in Google image results, whereas Smugmug lets you turn off Google indexing.
     
  26. Lex -
    Suppose we all upload our photos to our photo.net portfolios and link them to the Wednesday Pic threads. Those who wish to comment on those photos can do so on the photographer's portfolio, which is traditionally where photo.net critiques are intended to go.​
    This seems like a workable solution. It kind of reminds of reading an article in a newspaper/magazine though....start out on the front page, then end up continued back in the boonies. Then go back to the front page to read the next article and start all over. Although with today's tabbed browsers I could probably get the hang of it. If I had a gallery folder for my Wednesday pic photos I might be able to identify any possible trends in my selections.
    Definitely worth discussing further.
    Mark
     
  27. Hummmmm Lex -
    only use photo.net's portfolio space..... I'm not for that idea. Presently I'm only allowed seven photos on photo.net from what I know. I would have to pay for more. Granted not a huge cost, but since I'm already paying for Zenfolio........ Also, I've dealt with the photo.net rating system & I stopped using it because I didn't like it all that much.
    Oh - my end goal is not to retain full control as doing that ends the minute we post in a thread like this..... For me the Zenfolio site allows for family, friends etc to go & see what I'm up to & they can easily comment on my photos there. Anyone can.
    Just my thoughts.....
     
  28. Is it not possible to install a function that blocks any picture larger than demanded, and above 180kb, for example? Which gives you a gentle remark to resize? That's one approach. I don't think we should kill a good thing verbally - this Wednesday thread is really a godsend, and I have so much fun every week (and I guess, from reading, I'm not alone).
     
  29. Uhmmmm! I have participated in every single WeDNeSDaY PiC thread since Jose started it last year. I really love it, I learn from it and gives me a motivation to shoot more.
    To be honest, some times at the end of the thread I wish I could see more pictures and less words but I can live with that.
    For the benefit of the thread itself I support Lex & Shun in any decision they make since they are the ones making sure the thread keeps going for all of us. It's not an easy job!
    Then again, I'm a bit confused why words would take more time to download than the shots themselves??
    I like Lexe's Idea of a link to the member's portfolio and people can write comments there. They are more accessible to find in the future.
    I know that for not paying members there is a limit on how many pictures you can have in your portfolio but also you can add a shot for WeDNeSDaY thread and then put in on the Photo Critique forum. After you've done that you can add one more picture. But in my case, I have a Mac subscription so I really don't need to have a portfolio here in Photo Net. So why did I decided to become a paid member? Well, after a few months visiting the forum I noticed that I had learned more about photography that with all the money I had expend in books over the years and I thought it would be a good idea to support Photo Net after all the benefits I was receiving.
    I really hope the thread keeps growing and a favorable solution is found! Thank you LEX, SHUN and JOSE!
     
  30. I've only joined the weekly festival a few episodes ago, and I tend to be maybe a bit too verbose. I'll cut down a little - hard, because there is much to admire each week.
    Sure a good working critique and rating system for hosted photos is a noble goal (honestly I did not dive into that part of p.net yet), but to me, the Nikon wednesday is about sharing a joy and passion for photography, while critiques should be more point-by-point and could be more blunt. So, I'm largely with the point that Justin Weiss raises: having only links in the thread would make it a significantly different affair.
    His idea on pages-as-navigation does make sense, but it would take quite some programming effort, which I realise may not be doable.
    It's a tough call... I hope the thread can continue in the spirit in which it was started, and that Jose's opinion on the matter is asked for, and considered.
    But agreed we should mind the low-bandwidth surfers and facilitate good moderation - because I think overall the p.net forums keep their high quality thanks to the efforts of the moderators. And ultimately, that quality is what got me over here :)
     
  31. The current (latest) Wednesday thread takes 3 seconds to download on my browser at home (with an empty cache); at work would be faster (and I'm on another side of the Atlantic to most of you). Three minutes sounds like there is some kind of a problem. Anyway, since it would depend on the traffic situation rather than the number of posts, imposing a limit on how long it takes to download on one computer seems arbitrary. Would it not be better to impose a limit on the number of posts? I.e. 100 posts -> thread closed, come back next week. Of course, either option runs the risk that only the quickest get to post.
    I don't think the words affect the downloading time noticeably, but I can see that they do make the threads more time consuming to moderate. Personally I would prefer a thread with no commentary but perhaps a brief description by the photographer to give the image some context.
     
  32. Regarding my proposal to link photos from our photo.net portfolios...
    ...photos would continue to be visible on the weekly Nikon WedNEsDAy PiC threads as usual. We wouldn't be seeing hot links or thumbnails. Photos would continue to be displayed, up to 700 pixels wide, exactly as they are when embedded via links from Flickr, smugmug, zenfolio, other most offsite hosts.
    From the perspective of any casual or outside viewer, the threads would continue to appear exactly as they have.
    The goals - and again, this is just a proposal at this point - would be to:
    • Encourage the active, constructive use of the critique spaces provided in our photo.net portfolios. This is the appropriate place for verbose critiques or even non-critical praise.
    • Streamline the Nikon WedNEsDAy PiC threads to maintain emphasis on the photos we create.
    • Retain the option to embed photos hosted off site (Flickr, smugmug, zenfolio, etc.)
    • Retain the option for sparing use of brief comments within the threads, to retain the unique sense of camaraderie and benefit to the community inspired by these threads.
    At present we have no way to impose a word limit on comments. Frankly, I wish we did. It would relieve moderators of having to periodically bring up these discussions. The restraint would be hard-wired into the system (rather like our filters to minimize the excessive use of exclamation marks - altho' some folks object to any restraint of any kind). I'm reluctant to even bring up this issue because it may be interpreted as intrusive and a chilling effect on the unique spirit these Nikon WedNEsDAy PiC threads have developed. That's not our intention.
    Notice how I keep repeating "Nikon WedNEsDAy PiC" exactly that way? Google... gotta love how it sees all, knows all, never forgets. Speaking of Google... I have some additional comments on the relevance of that, but I don't wish to digress too far afield at this point in the conversation.
    BTW, if I'm not mistaken, even non-subscribers may be able to increase their portfolio limits by actively participating in the existing critiques and ratings systems. It's also worth mentioning that site administrator Josh Root is committed to improving these systems to address the well known deficiencies that have irritated many folks who would like to see more integrity in the critiques and ratings systems. I keep emphasizing "systems" because critiques and ratings are entirely separate and distinct entities.
     
  33. If the links to portfolio are transparent to the reader of the Wednesday pic thread, then I don't see a problem that they're also in the portfolio. And it would be far easier to follow the comments as they're linked to the images - currently it takes some searching to link the comment to the image as it is - probably only those who are commented on, recognize the comments instead of everyone learning from them.
     
  34. I really enjoy the Nikon Wednesday pic thread. I wish the Canon folks would do one, but for some reason, they're not interested. I'm not meaning to start something with that comment either. Though I am tempted to buy an older MF Nikkor so I can participate in this thread with my Canon body.
    One thing that I've noticed is that the thread is usually started with some kind of statement that the photo should be from the current week of shooting. Then, usually, somewhere in the thread, I read something like, "Well, I didn't get to shoot this week so here's a picture I took back in (insert year here)." I'm wondering why people feel they have to submit a photo if they don't have a current one to submit. I'm not saying that older photos are not good nor that they don't have merit. I just get the feeling from the thread that posting from the current week's work is the idea. If you don't have a photo from this week, don't submit one and wait until next week when you have a fresh one.
    I really enjoy the Street and Documentary section of PN. I have not submitted to two recent discussions because I didn't have a photo related to the topic. So, I'm waiting for the next topic to see if I have something that I can jump in with. I'd love to contribute to every thread, but it is no big deal to sit one out.
    I'm not sure whether self-discipline in this area would significantly change the thread in relation to the topic at hand, but it is just one more idea. If the number of images is the concern and the thread gets shut down for the week, then those who post older photos might be contributing to the shut down before folks with newer shots can post them. If 10 people submit older work then 10 people with this week's work can't post it.
    If I've misunderstood the idea of the Wednesday Pic thread, please forgive me and disregard this note. However, if the intent really is for folks to post a photo from the current week's work, then by all means should that intent be honored?
    I will say this though, aside from all the great photos posted in this thread (it's like eye candy), I really enjoy seeing the inclusion of the equipment used for capture. There's no gear review better than seeing the results.
    Blessings - DS Meador
     
  35. I'm wondering why people feel they have to submit a photo if they don't have a current one to submit.
    I also wonder about this. In my opinion the point of the thread is that people don't post just any old nice image that they've made in their past days of glory but to post something very recent and to encourage people to carry on actively in photography. The currency of the photos adds substantial value and interest to the thread - it shows what people are doing and how the world looks in different parts of the world at the same time. To me at least, this is the main reason to participate.
     
  36. Ensuring wonky code doesn't bugger up the thread and lock it up.
    Lex this is a technical expression that I am not familiar with :)
    I like the thread and hope we can keep it going in its present form.
    A picture does indeed paint a thousand words.
    Graphics is the problem not text.
    Thanks to all for making it happen.
     
  37. putting the comments on the photos on the portifilos is completely different. we have the photo critique forum for that \. This is a group discussion for all to see, In the critique section no will will open every photo just to see them. Bye bye group discussion which makes this thread special.
    Wrork on the photo size issue, not the discussion - This is not the NO words Forum, we have that already.
    I enjoy interacting back and forth we these people. Its not happening the same way in other threads.
    We have something special here.
     
  38. Hummmmm Lex -
    only use photo.net's portfolio space..... I'm not for that idea. Presently I'm only allowed seven photos on photo.net from what I know. I would have to pay for more. Granted not a huge cost, but since I'm already paying for {insert anything in here, food, gas,etc}........ Also, I've dealt with the photo.net rating system & I stopped using it because I didn't like it all that much.
    Oh - my end goal is not to retain full control as doing that ends the minute we post in a thread like this.....​
    Agreed! Also I really hate the idea of the load time being the end all of the tread as it take no time for it to load on my machine. There are too many variables from machine to machine. Not fair. Also if your job is the moderator, then that is what you do. Please do not tell us how bad your job is. LEX says "it takes time for moderators."
     
  39. Regarding the issue of submitting current photos... it's not really an issue for this particular discussion. Let's concentrate on one topic at a time.
    However, while we've encouraged submitting recently taken photos, we've never mandated it and, as far as I'm concerned, never will. At least not as long as there is a roll of film existing somewhere in the world. We still have quite a few film photographers. I'm surprised to see how many of them upload film photos taken within the past week or even the past month. For those who, for example, use Kodachrome, it's likely to take longer than a week just to get the photos back and scan them.
     
  40. I can't believe that we are having this discussion - we have a thread that has 200 posts a week, is nne of the most popular threads on pnet, has people looking froward to it each week and is encouraging creative discussion and some want to tinker with is core values.
    99 percent of the people using this thread son't c are about how long it takes to load, if they did they would not be using it. I think that Matts comments hit the nail on the head about users and speed.
     
  41. I like the thread the way it is now, but understand the difficulty from Lex and Shun's viewpoint. For PNet, having a thread this popular is a good thing...as it is for the users. There is more of a "community" feel here than in any other area on PNet I've visited. I've gone back to the archives of this thread and enjoyed each one from the beginning (thank you Jose for starting it) several times. I have a strong feeling that all the comments, banter, sharing of stories, etc., plus the encouraging words from others is what has made this thread so popular.
    However, the moderation point is a valid one, and I feel the decision to change this thread should be based on what works best in terms of making things more manageable, not what is perceived by some to be the aesthetic faults of this thread (yes it gets a bit messy at the end, but so does a good party...or life in general). Whatever is decided, I sincerely hope the wonderful "community" feel that has been established is not lost. I imagine the diversity of opinions about this will rival the diversity of photos posted each week. :)
     
  42. Short of polling Nikon Forum members and, particularly, participants in these weekly threads, we don't have any data to determine what the majority actually think of the weekly photo threads. We've also seen some feedback indicating that not everyone supports the lengthy commentary that has evolved along with the popularity of these threads this year.
    That's why we're having this discussion - to get some impressions from the community. However, I am considering setting up an actual poll to get some data. But I doubt we'd make any decisions on the basis of statistics alone.
    And, to reassure everyone, we're only interested in making these weekly photo threads as enjoyable as possible for all participants. The threads have obviously been very enjoyable for many folks. Our goal is to continue that while also considering the possible complications.
     
  43. there is another way of looking at this. Yes, I'm aware that not everyone has a fast internet connection but downsizing the photos even further is preposterous. After all, this is a photo site. Joe said if it isn't kaputt, don,t try to mend it.
    I happen to have a very fast internet connection with a clean and fast PC but even I have sometimes trouble uploading PN sites or even getting 503's. Might be worth looking into that first.
     
  44. Why not include in the posting guidelines something that says "please refrain from verbose commentary" or words to that effect? Some self-policing by those uploading images could also help though I'm wondering if these kinds of threads can be hardwired to disallow uploads of greater than the desired 300kb file size. I'd hate to see the Wednesday Picture thread change much from its current form as its a fun thread to view and participate in, plus its a good tool to get me to be thinking weekly about capturing or working on an image that I feel would be worthy of posting, so it helps me think about photography. I'd be happy with it being a w/nw format with nominal information about the equipment involved, and perhaps some of the out-of-camera processing (film or digital) involved if something special was done.
     
  45. I don't have dial-up, but if is did, I would still take the time to enjoy Nikon WedNEsDAy. I concur with Jeannean, re the comments, banter, sharing of stories are a big part of what makes the thread so popular. If the concern is solely loading time, I don't understand why that shouldn't be the concern of the person doing the viewing. If there are other concerns that are causing a problem that is affecting the site, I could understand. I hope the moderators will "measure twice" before "cutting" with this issue. Joe
     
  46. The Wednesday thread is a wonderful platform for everyone to show what is going on in their part of the world. I as a person who does not contribute because I just can't learn how to use a computer, even after many lessons, would like to say, I really enjoy the Wednesday Thread but there are far too many critiques, that go on for as many contributers there are sending in their pictures. I think the comments should be made in other threads, the ones where critiques are called for and let us just use the Wednesday Thread as an appetizer.
     
  47. I finally got around to really looking at Mark's stats. 22mb! Of course the thing's a dog on any machine/pipe that isn't pretty brisk. But if just the over-the-limit 300+kb folks would reign it in, that would make a tangible difference, right there. I'll confess to reflexively just making sure I'm under the 300kb threshold, without really considering whether a particular image could stand more compression without looking worse for the wear. Some images can tolerate that far more than others, and we all learn something about workflow when we make ourselves consider that as we create the JPGs for these threads.

    There are folks who post to these threads images that I would hate to see butchered by even a hint more of compression - because it's the details and tone gradients that are so inspiring. But I've also seen some high contrast, non-complex, non-sharp images that wouldn't look meaningfully different at a tenth the file size (I'm sure I've been guilty of at least a couple of those).
     
  48. I am with Jeannean's response. I have been a member here for 9-10 months (a beginner in photography world), usually I do not post a questions ore repl, but I do read many threads in Beginner and Nikon's forum every day and for hours :eek:) . And I make a point to post a picture on WedNEsDAy's thread.
    I hope Lex and Shun's decision will be better for the WedNEsDAy's thread and entire PNetters.
     
  49. The Wednesday feature is a highlight to my week. As an amateur that is steadly learning I get a chance to look at stuff all over the world. It is especially great when someone does post what they used and if there were any situations that would be helpful to know about. There are not many forums that allow anyone to post like this and play with the Pro's so to speak.
    Because of who I am I also like it if I get any kind of a mention, Thanks to Lil Judd and a couple others us little guys always get a mention and I am of the opinion that we need it. Just a little one or two words makes out day, we are recoginized with the heavy hitters all over the world. So THANK YOU Lil Judd !!
    What my suggestion would be is to have our Wednesday Shoot like it is, monitor the sizes a little better not letting them get any bigger than stated and make another thread called Wednesday Comments. Run that parallel and it won't take up any space from the photos. For some us us that have a good DSL we could bring up Photo.net twice and look at the comments as we are actually looking at the photo using split screen.
    phil b
    benton, ky
     
  50. We've also seen some feedback indicating that not everyone supports the lengthy commentary that has evolved along with the popularity of these threads this year.​
    Since I'm one of the guilty ones in this regard, I feel compelled to offer a possible solution. We could limit the "all inclusive" commentaries to one post per thread. The commentary could be rotated weekly from a list of people who have the time, energy, and desire to do so. This way, everyone will get some type of feedback and it will lessen the scroll/load time that some are having issues with. Just an idea...
     
  51. How about setting basic guidelines and requesting users to exercise self control. That seemed to work with the 300 kb image rule.
    Maybe something like restricting users to one post for text and image with a max word count of 300 words?
    I enjoy the thread. I like the notion of "if it's not broke, don't fix it". I understand the growing pains as the popularity of the thread increases. Try to keep guidelines voluntary and as unobtrusive as possible.
     
  52. Hi!
    It has been an interesting discussion so far. I observe that the bulk of the pictures are uploaded in the first 36 hours of the start of the thread ,allowing for posters in the various time zones .I would suggest a 36 hour deadline for posting pictures and let interested people comment on them thereafter.However criptic comments on individual pictures could still be allowed to express ones appreciation for a particular picture.
     
  53. I may sound like a broken record... I am relatively a new member and I know that what I say doesn't have much weight. There can be a few "ideal" solutions such as deviding to multiple pages as Justin pointed out or adding a "comment" button beside each submited photo so that people who wants to comment on the phot are welcome or encouraged to do so that way. Technically, the "comment" buton takes you to the parallel thread which is created automatically when this Wednesday Pic starts. BUT, maybe these "ideal" options are not viable as it requires special architecture for this forum only for this particular thread. Not worth it.
    So, the practical solution may be - - limit the submission to one post per person on this thread - self-governing rule so that there requires no additional web coding work. Poster can write about, perhaps, last weeks outstanding photos or memorable photos. The self-governing rule can also include that people are ASKED to limit the comment ONLY FOR 10 photos of the previous week or current week photos if the post is late of the period. There are close to 200 photos every week and may need some tweak or spantaneity to diverse the comments, hopefully....
    Having said all that, I am happy with what we have now. As some pointed out, this thread is really unique and its free (not-too harsh or critical) interaction among beginner, semi-pro or professional is really priceless that cannot be easily found somewhere else. Like I said before, some lazy learner like me needs "pat on the back" once in a while to pursue more serious photography. Thanks to this thread, lazy me changed his weekend life from sleeping all the way to waking up early and take a long walk around the city with heavy camera bag. It certainly made me healthier and I enjoy photography much, much more. If I were to post every week one photo, and no one says anything at all, then it will end up being just self-satisfaction and no learning experience and I would stop doing it soon..... I am not a pro and not intend to become one - I assume just like many of them here, so learning easily, enjoying it, and knowing and working on other people's similar challenge here is really priceless and this wednesday pic thread is really IT.
    Sorry for lengthy post (again)
    Ken
     
  54. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    The main reason those Wednesday thread download is so slow is due to the images. Typically I reduce my images to about 100K-bytes when I post to photonet (unless it is a composit of several images). For image appreciation over the web, I think 100K bytes is plenty.
    When the download is too slow, sometimes I simply open another browser to read other pages and while the original thread is getting downloaded. In that sense it doesn't really matter if the download takes a couple of minutes. I think that should solve most problems. Dividing photo.net threads into multiple pages requires software changes, and it won't reduce the download time. Moreover, people tend to ignore the subsequent pages because they require additional clicks and additional wait.
    Another small problem in the Wesneday threads are the long comments. While I know it takes a long time to write a brief comment on each image, I am not sure how many people will have time to read those comments. Some may do a search on their own name to see whether their image is mentioned. But in any case, currently text is not the reason download is so slow.
    The best solution to this type of issues is self regulation, at least up to a point. If that does not work, of course we can change the size limit to, e.g., 200K bytes (which again IMO is a lot) and we can identify those images that are over 200K and start deleting them. But it'll require time to identify those images and any type of moderating will make some people unhappy. I wouldn't hesitate to go down that route if we have no better choices, but I would rather give self regulation a try.
     
  55. Hi everyone!
    First, another BIG thank you to Jose, who started the Wed Pic threads. However, it is sad to see that we have reached a point where we have to discuss some form of limitation or another to this thread, which in my opinion is the most successful I have ever seen in photo.net's history.
    I have been a member on different web photoforums, but I have never met such a "family" until I started participation more exensively here some months ago. I have also been a member of different physical photo/camera clubs, but often these start the Nikon vs. Canon (or some other "vs." debate - take your pick) debate, and then the club often dies. Actually, the Wed. Pic thread is the one that made me seriously think of becoming a paying member. Here , at photo.net (at least the Nikon branch) I find a genuine interest in the images, in making the best out of your equipment, and in helping a fellow photo.netter. In the Wed.Pic thread, I get comments from all over the world, and your pictures give me a small glimpse of what is happening throughout the world. To be honest, the Wed.Pic treads is the only place where my photo self confidence has gotten a boost.
    No wonder that this thread has become so very popular with so many, then.
    I can see that the Wed. Pic thread is divided in two different phases: the posting phase, and the commenting phase, and then there are some latecomers, who have been out travelling or has forgotten the day of the week or whatever. On my behalf, I look forward to Wednesday every week, and can't wait until Jose has started the thread before uploading. For me, this thread has made me think more of photos throughout the week, something I never did before. My photo interest has certainly escalated. Actually, I feel kind of stressed, if Monday comes, and I have not shot any pictures that I find "good enough" to post. Much part of the fun has been to see whether anyone has made a comment on my picture, has anybody liked it. All comments in these threads have been positive, and that's what I think has made this so special. In my head, it is also good manners to thank somebody for making positive and constructive remarks, which means that the commenting phase is just as important as the posting phase.
    The W/NW forums are nice to look at, but nothing more than that. Too few words there. Just posting and forgetting is not "my cup of tea".
    I have also tried to upload some of my pictures for CC and rating at the critique forums. Not many take their time to rate or comment. This thread is special.
    Kudos also to those who have tried to give positive remarks to everyone. You all know who they are. Thank you. I really don't think you should ask for forgiveness for writing too many words. On the contrary, we (especially me) who do not have written so many comments, should apologize for writing too little.
    So, what can we do keep up the very good spirit on this forum, without having to impose too many restrictions?
    I know that I, coming from Europe, is somewhat spoilt, being connected to the net on a 3Mb line at home and many times faster at work. However, even when connected by a slow 0,7 line some time ago, I had the patience to wait until the images were fully downloaded. I just went to pour myself another cup of coffee when waiting.
    As for the moderation. I fully understand the need for moderation on the forum, but if this is such a time consuming task, why cannot more people moderate the Wed.Pic threads. The workload on Lex and Shun could then be somewhat lighter.
    I think that instead of limiting the activity in these threads, we have to look at the size of the pictures. The thread rules say that photos should be less than 300kb in size. On a monitor, and for most of us, who can clearly see the difference between a 150kb and a 300 kb photo? And if you do, does it really care in the WedPic threads? If a photographer wants kudos for some technical issue in highrez pictures, maybe these pictures should be directed to the photo critique forums? And we are not downloading the pictures to print and hang on our walls, are we?
    Maybe we should be stricter in enforcing the size rules in order to lessen the downloading time. Max size 150 KB, and the picture will not load if it is larger than that. Or maybe we could, if it is technically possible, exclude the possibility of uploading images after 24Hrs Friday. Only text allowed after that.
    But to alter a bit what Joseph L says: Do not change a winning team (too much).

    Sorry for writing what I find an unstructured post myself. I am sitting offline on my commuter train, and I am tired and not thinking clearly. But I think you understand what I mean.....
     
  56. Have never understood why folks post even 150 KB photos. I format a photo at 72dpi and 700 pixels wide, then "save for web" in PS, it's going to be 70 KB or less. I can view that on my 24-inch LCD, color corrected monitor and really can't see an appreciable difference between it and a 300 kb image. Those larger images take a lot longer to down load, even on a 1.5 DSL line.
    I'm in the Mountain Time Zone in the U.S. and if I don't post until after 8 a.m. Wednesday there can already be nearly 100 images posted. Has there been any thought of locking a thread when it gets to say 80 images and starting a new one for the same day? Obviously that requires more work from moderators but I cannot imaging anyone on dial up even opening the recent threads.
     
  57. I think a 700 pixel wide image is unlikely to be over 300kB in size unless saved with maximum quality; I typically use CS4's save for web with a quality setting of 90 and get around 200kB images, depending on the content. I do think that in most cases a 100kB image is too small and typically riddled with halos and other artifacts that make the image annoying to look at. Just increasing the file size a little goes a long way. 300kB is very liberal but if the limit were set below 200kB I would stop posting in the thread.
     
  58. As a relative new comer to photo.net, I have to say that w/out a doubt the Nikon Wed. thread has captured my interest each and every week and keeps me coming back for more. I have to agree w/ many others that the appeal is not just in seeing each and everyones unique photos from around the world, but to also interact w/ them if even in a small way. For me, it is always interesting to read comments others make about some (or all) of the photos and perhaps gain some insight into what makes a more appealing or compelling image. This truly embodies the idea of a global community. I applaud the efforts of Jose in starting the thread and Lex and Shun for maintaining order. It is my hope that by simply better self enforcement of picture file size, we can improve (as opposed to fixing something that ain't broke) one of the best photo discussion threads on the net.
     
  59. I think the Wednesday Pic is the best thing ever happened to Photo.net ! Please don't destroy our magical playground !
     
  60. How about Wednesday pic thread with a "twitter like" limit on text so we can still say a few words, list gear, settings etc. as well as a separate "Wed. Pic Comments" thread? In an ideal world (for me anyway) I could look though the pictures and be less interupted by the large posts that comment on each individual photo. I still like reading the comments, but I think it distracts from the point of the thread, which sharing fantastic pictures. I'm also for a strick limit on file size so the huge "mistakes" can be deleted from the thread by the moderators. Oh yeah, Marc Cooper: Get help soon, you have a problem :)
     
  61. Haven't much to add to this discussion and can only second PerChristians contribution. I look forward to this thread every week and it is the main reason why I became a member of Photo.net. I can't see any reason for not set a limit for size to 200 Kb and an upload time to 48 hours so there will be plenty of time, and space, to comment on the pictures. We all like to be noticed an gets inspiration just looking at all the participants photos.
    Thanks for starting the WeDNeSday thread Jose
     
  62. Lex, I disagree with your position.....
    "Regarding the issue of submitting current photos... it's not really an issue for this particular discussion. Let's concentrate on one topic at a time."
    My original understanding of the "Nikon WedNEsDAy PiC" was that posts were to be of recently taken photos. The forum was to inspire us to get out and shoot with our Nikon equipment; exploring new perspectives that we may have learned from the thread the week before.
    There have been many weeks when for any number of reasons, I wasn't able to get out and shoot or if I did, didn't capture anything worthy of posting. That didn't deter me from reading the entire thread all the way through to the last posts over the weekend. I enjoyed and benefited from the thread but didn't take up a single KB of bandwidth.
    Obviously the amount of comments has flourished. Whether they be made on a select few photos or on the entire batch, those comments are what have made this thread so wildly popular. Everyone likes a pat on the back and (in my case) may need it more than others. To restrict the commenting would be detrimental to the positive and friendly atmosphere found at his unique thread.
    As a wise one once told me, "everything in moderation" . If we limit our posts to recent digital shots or recently developed film, bandwidth will be reduced. If we make several thoughtful comments on several photos Lex and Shun may have some time to actually enjoy the thread instead of policing it......and the thread goes on without any revisions or restrictions.
    From my own perspective, as a totally amateur photographer hobbyist, I would much rather receive an occasional favorable comment on a photo because it somehow struck a viewer in a positive way rather than t receive a comment simply because I posted a photo. If I don't get a reaction on a given post, then my motivation is to work on my technique until I am capable of generating one.
    Believe me, this is in no way meant to take anything away from those who have taken considerable time and effort to write comments on each photo, each week. You are to be applauded for the positive reinforcement that you have provided and I thank you for your efforts.
    We all know when someone new arrives at the "Nikon WedNEsDAy PiC". Perhaps that would be the best time to shower the poster with positive reinforcement and also encourage them to keep shooting and posting so that maybe in the future when another post of theirs receives a comment the reward will be greater.
    Thanks for listening.
    John
     
  63. Before reducing anything we should know what are we really talking about here:
    • how slow is slow, let's have some figures
    • how many people does that affect
    All those stats are nice but don't tell me anything, they are merely suggestive and don't adress the real problem.
    Reducing upload size to 200 or even 100k is really a terrific move on a photo dedicated site. Why not switch to thumbnails directly?
     
  64. i must say, i'm surprised that <1kb text consumes more bandwidth than >300kb of image​
    Welcome to the wonderful world of MySQL and PHP.

    Each post is an entry in the database that must be looked up. Lag times aren't just for loading content into your browser, but also for the server to look up each entry in the database. To it, an wordy text entry is actually longer than an image tag. Yes, the images themselves show up after the text on your screen; but that is once the page is "generated".
     
  65. Jonathan - can I claim I have a legitimate excuse because I'm a graduate electrical engineer? What came first, OCD or the engineer? :)
    Really though, before we can even consider changing things we have to evaluate facts. Is the system being used within it's design parameters? In this case, no in two areas.
    First, the Wednesday Pic thread is pushing the photo.net system beyond it's original intended use. The folks that set up photo.net probably never thought they'd see a thread that contained 130+ photos. As Lex has stated, this has put a strain on the moderator system.
    Second, are the users of the system following recommended guidelines. In this case 8 1/2% are not to varying degrees, from a little over the size limit to wildly over the limit. Depending on pipe size and computer horsepower, 8+ % can make a noticeable impact.
    I stand by my last recommendation, lets keep below the recommended file size limit. Those of us that feel that our pictures can withstand some extra compression can go ahead and do that. Keep the system as-is for now, but monitor and enforce. Sorry Lex and Shun;) As if you aren't already doing enough as unpaid volunteers.
    Just one last thought. We post most all the technical specs on the equipment used to take the picture. How about if we add one more piece of information: the size of the file before it's uploaded to photo.net? It was a real eye-opener when I was compiling my statistics. The file size was not a direct correlation to the perceived image quality shown on my monitor.
    Keep up the great work Lex and Shun!
     
  66. My two cents, I enjoy the thread as is, I dont mind the load times or the comments. I learned to compress my picture to the proper size, I have enjoyed the comments on my pictures. I have also found that I take a different look at other pictures based on comments left by others on the thread, It makes me return to a photo that I may have overlooked and look at it from a new perspective. It helps me learn what makes a good image. I find myself coming back on Thursday to see the comments after all the pictures have been posted. I appreciate those that comment on every photo; those are the comments that send me back through the thread looking again, and I strive to produce a photo that would be mentioned by those who choose to comment only on those that impressed them. and I love the fact that some take the time to comment on all and make everyone feel welcome. This is why I became a paid member of P.N and why I try to make Wednesday a part of my week, because of all the threads and forums I have contributed to this one has made me feel welcome and part of a community.
     
  67. My sentiments are like Per Christian's.
    But since the essence of this discussion is not (only) about sentiments, but about keeping good things good, Tom Mestrom's point should not be overlooked: are we going to fix something for 5% of the visitors, or for 80%? Plain business logic should apply here too: 20% of the activity to satisfy 80% of the customers, and be very mindfull whether you want/need to do more. Well, something along those lines.
    By the way, this thread is close to more scrolling than wednesday's threads! A great display on how much people like it and how alive it is.
     
  68. The file size was not a direct correlation to the perceived image quality shown on my monitor.

    Right; but if the subject contains a lot of fine detail, the file size has to be big or the faithful reproduction of detail will be sacrificed. There are many subjects that compress well with the JPG algorithm but then there are others which need big enough files.
     
  69. By the way, this thread is close to more scrolling than wednesday's threads! A great display on how much people like it and how alive it is.​
    Yes, and maybe the Wed.Pic thread is the quintessence of what we all have missed in other forums (and this) for so many years?
     
  70. I opened my "free" account a couple of weeks ago and have only posted one photo to date. But I have followed this forum for a few months now and look forward to it every week. I know it takes awhile to review the posts, but I feel it is well worth the time I take to view them. Some restraint on long comments would probably give the forum a cleaner look and help us to view the photos in a more timely manner.
    I haven't travelled much in my life, but every Wednesday I am able to take a trip around the world as I enjoy the landscapes, cultures and beautys of countries and continents shared by their photographers.
     
  71. Well, I`ve had an extremely busy day... thanks God I`m at home and my family on bed. I`m so sorry I`m late here. I`d like to add some thoughts:
    I try to remember that when the thread started to become wordy, some people found it to be a nuissance. Others liked this tendency. Many of this comments are dued to the kindness and politeness of thread contributors, I think this is good. I can understand this because many times I feel the need of congratulate some photogs for their work, and I`m also grateful with those who have taken their time commenting my pics...
    Perhaps it`s time to concentrate on photography and limit that wordy posts. I see most people feel annoyed because they don`t have time to write an answer to this comments... all this could be cut out.
    About the size of the pics, I have found optimal a file size near 120-130Kb even for my biggest squared pics (that`s pretty subjective, I know). It is "high quality" compression (60 out of 100 in "Save for Web" option) in my version of Ps. I think compression artifacts start to be noticeable at this size. Some times I post pics that are 100Kb and looks acceptable, thought.
    Regularly I receive private emails asking about the WeD PIC rules and some processing issues... linkages, portfolios, etc. are added complexity. IMHO the thread should be as simple as possible. Perhaps we could add a "basics page" to explain how a defined file size can be achieved.
    I`m always worried about the work this thread add to our moderators. Needless to say that I`ll second their decissions. I know they are involved and look for our convenience.
    Thank you all for your enthusiasm and support. It`s not my thread, I`m only the one who start the thread each week. I`m pleased doing so.
    My suggestion is to drastically reduce the size of the pics to 150Kb (or to 200Kb if needed) and to limit the "responding" posts to a maximum of five lines... in five lines we can briefly ask any question or transmit our thoughts to a few favourites. I think the spirit of the thread will remain intact. The "Guidelines" box could contain this new rules. I`d remark not to answer a congratulation post if there isn`t an explicit question.
    (BTW, I use to read the threads in different tabs. The WeD PiC threads are of course the longer to be downloaded, but sincerely I never care about it. The latest one (#40) looks to be really slow, around 30 seconds in my 1Mb ADSL connection.)
     
  72. Just to get my voice in -- even though the same has already been said -- I think significant changes that have been proposed will detract from what draws both submission and comment. I really appreciate this community space, and the insights from everyone. My "vote" would be to only make minor changes unless absolutely necessary. Limiting file size to 150kb seems reasonable. Limiting comments might help, but won't really have an impact on download time I suspect. My connection is slow enough that it does take a couple of minutes to load, but I'm willing to wait for the value I know is there at the end. I'm glad to see that so many are passionate about this. Cheers!
     
  73. No new ideas from me either. Just to put in my 2 cents. I definitely don't like the idea of the links or the image thread and word thread. I love going through the images and seeing the variety and similarities and just...everything...eye candy...wonderful. The comments are terrific. It really feels like what PN is about ...A COMMUNITY OF PHOTOGRAPHERS. I agree that limiting file size might help. I hope that this can be resolved gracefully and win/win. It is such a wonderful and constructive part of PN. Thank you Lex for working on this problem. Thank you Jose for starting the thread and thank you to everyone who contributes.
     
  74. In all this, just wanted to thank those who commented on my photo last week. I don't really think the words add a lot of extra loading time. It's just the amount of images. Maybe one way is just Weds. Pic 1 and section 2 when the first one gets too balky.
     
  75. Now I've only read about 3/4 of this entire thread so forgive me if I'm repeating someone else. Also this is also a little off track but still relevant.
    I very much like the setup of the Nikon Wednesday forum except for one thing that can be greatly improved.
    Rather than having to scroll through the photos and text, it would be nice to see the comments on the side of the photos that they are toward. So when one sees a photo and wishes to comment s/he can place their comment to the right of the photo in a comments section. This would solve the problem of scrolling through and makes it easier to comment and to see if ones photo has been commented on.
    As for the comment of loading I think most people have high speed internet and if they do not then they are willing to wait for the images to load. As for myself, I look and comment on the photos during my paid ten minute breaks in my companies break room and on lunch in the break room. Additionally, it wouldn’t be so bad to have a limit on the file size – and not just a gentle reminder but a rejection of one’s post if it exceeds the limit.
    Hopes this help with things,
    Dan
    00Ufha-178331684.jpg
     
  76. Me again;)
    Just did another quick perusal of top rated pics by # of ratings, by # of comments. Checked this week's P.O.W. Listed top rated photos of all categories of all time sorted by # of comments. It's a Street photo, no title, picture of a guy holding a "Hungry..." sign by Aldo De Filippi. 2,119,151 views, 333 comments, 146 ratings, was a P.O.W., 74,877 Kb and 512 x 768 pixels.
    I checked a bunch of photos. The biggest (Kb-wise) was Crater Lake by Marc Adamus at 268,712 bytes and 600 x 363 pixels. Most were under 100K. A very few were over 200K.
    From travelphoto.net
    Most pictures can be brought down to 30-50 kb (from 7-40 megabyte!) for 600*400 pixels without any problem. Photos containing very intricate textures may need more, but 100 kb should be the absolute maximum on the web!​
    From Bob Atkins on http://www.photo.net/learn/resize/
    Ideally images should be under 100Kbytes in size and you can adjust this with the JPEG settings in the "Save for Web" dialog box​
    I don't see that we gain any benefit, for web display only with a max of 700 pixels on the long side, by having JPG's any larger than 150K.
    What I'm getting from this thread is that the majority of people posting on Wednesday Pic think the system is not broken and shouldn't be messed with. I'll go along with that. I also like that I can post my pics on Friday or Saturday because of limited Internet access. We do have to realize that happy moderators are our friends. Lex and Shun do their work for us on their own time and without compensation. I suspect they get more joy out of participating than they do from moderating and all that it entails. I really would not like to see them close the thread because it is really starting to eat into their free time. A maximum of 2 minutes (give or take) to load the thread seems reasonable when you HAVE to do it. Whoever is moderator HAS to do this. I see Lex moderates 3 forums. It would be interesting to know how many threads a day he deals with....I don't mean to put you on the spot here Lex. I suspect Nikon is one of the higher volume forums.
    To close, can we try to come to a consensus to all do our best to keep our JPG's at 100K or less, with an occasional splurge to 150K for that absolutely perfect 1 in a 1000 shot?
    I'm done. I think.
    Mark
     
  77. Please check the difference between 300Kb and 100Kb on the same pic. I have used my WeD PiC #23 master, TIFF uncompressed file (700x524, 1.34Mb). I cropped the images, then "Save for web" option in Ps Elements at the desired compression ("maximum" -98 out of 100 for an aprox. 300Kb image and "high quality" -60 out of 100- for an aprox. 100Kb) image).

    Displayed at left 300Kb crop, right 100Kb crop.
    [​IMG][​IMG]

    Do we really need to post over 200Kb images? (Please keep in mind that some screens are very sensitive to viewing angle variations).
     
  78. About the commenting stage, as some have mentioned, if brief, better.
    Looks like current WeD PiC threads shape could be somewhat of a nuisance for some, even with the possibility of scrolling down or not reading them... to those of us who like to comment perhaps we should try to mention just a very few favourites. Personally I feel special affection for those who are extremely kind commenting many pics, I use to read them all and love it, but I can understand the thread becomes phisically too long for some users (in fact complaints about long downloading times and thread extension has been originally concerned to this issue) and probably moderators will not have an extra load.
     
  79. Jose,
    thank you for the examples. In my opinion, if we all do our homework and "save for web", there is no reason for posting larger that 150Kb pictures.
    As for the texts. I find I learn a lot from the comments as well, so I hope that the size of the thread is manageable to most of us if we reduce the images size, to start with.
     
  80. My to cents here: I basicaly agree with Jose Angel. I admire the work of those that have some words for everybody, but I understand the problem of overloading for some people. From my part, I like to comment about 10 pictures or so. This doesn't mean I comment the 10 better ones (I have never been a good judge for photography, and I'm specially a disaster judging my own pictures!) but only the ones that have catched my eye. Anyway, I'm already eager for tomorrow pics.
     
  81. This is copied from the last standard upload page here at photo.net, when the text is uploaded, and you are asked whether you have any pictures to attach:
    If you wish your image to show up as an image and not a link, the maximum file size is 100 KBytes (full-size images from digital cameras won't work).​
    If size is such a problem, why should our Wed.Pic. threads be allowed 300 KBytes? Tomorrow is a new Wed.Pic thread. If we promise each other to post max 120Kb, maybe we will stay clear of the problems in the future...
     
  82. If you comment on only 10 or a few pictures there will be a lot of folks who get no comments. Some of our great artist will get multipliable comments (well deserved).
    This will kill the feel good and learning experience for some. This is what makes this thread special. Folks work hard to get a special photo to post on Nikon Wednesday. The Public comment in the thread is the "pat on the back" as other have put it that makes it all worth it.
    The encouragement that newer photographers get is priceless. Much different from that the critique and rattlings forum. Its out in the open where a large number of people see it, not attached to a photo buried in a portfolio.
    And even better yet, all the banter back and forth is bringing people closer and together as friends. Its not happening elsewhere on photo.net like this.
    work on the photo size to save a little bandwidth. but otherwise I don't think anyone really minds that the thread may take a little longer to load. I have not seen any complaints till this discussion started.
     
  83. Would it be more reasonable to simply lock the thread (no new posting) after 11:59 PM on Wednesday. I wonder what the statistics would show for postings not on Wednesday? Your thoughts?
     
  84. I'm getting the impression that some folks are a bit too anxious about making sows ears from a silk purse here. We're not going to suck all the fun out of the Wednesday Pic threads merely by discussing these issues. I enjoy these threads as much as anyone here. They're an asset to the forum, something I've affirmed publicly and privately many times this year.
    I'll try to summarize and address a few concerns that have been raised here. Then we'll move on to the next Wednesday Pic thread. I trust you folks to use your best judgment in consideration of these concerns.
    File sizes
    We're not suggesting that it's necessary to decrease file sizes to lower limits that would degrade quality. We're only asking folks to stick to the 300 kb upper limit. As Mark's stats indicate, and my own spot checking shows, a significant number of participants are continuing to exceed the 300 kb file size.
    Sure, make them smaller if possible. But use your own best judgment in deciding on file sizes up to the 300 kb limit. 75 kb or smaller may be plenty for some photos but would create unsightly posterization in a blue sky or sunset. Personally, I consider it an interesting challenge to use the smallest possible file size that doesn't degrade quality in normal viewing online.
    Format
    The photo.net format is what it is. Moderators don't have the ability to change that. The site isn't built on shake-and-bake software like some newer sites you may be accustomed to. We can't modify the threads to create a transparent interface between photo-laden threads and commentary. What you see is pretty much what you get. The discussion forums weren't designed to gracefully accommodate dozens of high resolution photos and thousands of words of commentary. So we make compromises.
    Why should we accept those compromises? Easy. Google your name and the word "photo". Or my name. Or almost any photo.net member's name. You couldn't buy that kind of Google prominence if you built your own business website or personal blog from scratch. If you're a pro or serious amateur who wants an opportunity to build a reputation, this is that place and that opportunity.
    Recent photos
    I'll exercise the moderator's prerogative here. The issue of recent photos is not up for discussion and won't change. We're discussing and cussing one core issue here: Accessibility. The policy on recent photos is clearly explained in the guidelines and has been reiterated here - recent activity is encouraged but not mandated. These conditions were discussed months ago and we got consensus on them. When you participate in the Wednesday Pic threads you've given tacit agreement to those conditions, same as any participation on photo.net.
    Accessibility
    This is the key issue, the one that I'm primarily concerned about: Ensuring the Wednesday Pic threads are as accessible as possible to the entire Nikon Forum community.
    This is why we haven't imposed a specific time window deadline for submissions. Some folks simply are too busy until the weekend. So we've tried to keep the submission window open, at least until Sunday.
    Not everyone has a fast computer or fast internet connection. My goal is to keep the forums, including the Wednesday Pic threads, accessible to all. That means we'll all make compromises to achieve that goal. That includes the very generous file size limit and our request to exercise some restraint in comments.
    Regarding complaints, you don't see many of them here for a couple of reasons. For one thing, I've deleted some non-constructive or misplaced complaints about the threads so most participants never saw them. Moderators are available via e-mail to resolve problems that are better handled privately. Most of the concerns and complaints I've seen regarding accessibility of these threads have been handled privately. This enables you folks to enjoy these threads while we deal with the hassles behind the scenes.
    Finally, I'm going to plug the photo.net critique system again. You folks have developed a rapport that proves the critique system can work. Why not build on the networking already established here? Use it to connect with each other on your portfolios to offer constructive critiques, using the tools photo.net has already provided.
    Some folks have said they're discouraged by the way photo.net's critiques and ratings systems have run (I emphasize "systems" because they're distinctly different entities). I can understand why. There are a few cliques that essentially dominate the TRP. Well, how do you think they accomplished that? Exactly the same way many of you have connected here, in the Wednesday Pic threads. Same way camera clubs and other arts groups have formed for generations. Use the social networking skills you've shown here. But use them beyond just these threads. You can help make the provided critique system work better if you choose.
    Photo.net has provided the resources. You folks have developed the rest on your own through enthusiastic and constructive participation. It's up to you to develop it beyond these weekly threads.
     
  85. Because it is popular and the format works the Canon guys might like the same. The Leica guys will want to show off their new American powered, assembled in Germany M9's. The problem seems to be bandwidth and speed of connection to our beloved Lex. Is it a question of money to put this right and keep everyone happy? It could be made subsciber only but that would preclude a lot of good people who don't have the money right now. Anyone any idea as to the cost of technically making this right? Or is there another problem. Maybe some of us would be able to help out even though it's tough times.
    Not because I seek thanks or friends ( I am a happy little grumpy miserable troll) I'll put up 10 subscriptions (Tax deductable!) and sort out with Lex how we do it - Maybe others could do the same - come on Nikon, B+H and others put a bit back in the pot.
     
  86. Joseph, I agree. However...
    Mark L Cooper wrote:
    WedNEsDAy Pic (no offense to Jose...he had a wonderful idea and I fully support his intent) has evolved to a mutual admiration society. Let's quit with the "thank you for commenting on my post' stuff and get back to giving a more detailed treatise on what works or doesn't work for those pics that grab our attention for whatever reason.
    <>
    I really appreciate real, constructive comments on anything posted to the various forums I follow. I long ago gave up on the photo critique forum where folks 'supported' each other. I'd like real, constructive critiques.​
    While I don't think the Wednesday thread is the place for "real, constructive critiques" (from what I can tell, it never was), it appears from what I've been reading, others also feel there are too many praise comments, thank yous, etc, so maybe we all could refrain from making comments about how much or why a certain photo caught our eye, and keep the words to technical details, stories, questions about a particular aspect of a photo, etc. If someone would like "real, constructive critique", they could ask for it along with their photo post. This could be done by those who choose to do it in the requester's personal portfolio (also helping the critique system as Lex suggested). Rarely is there a solution that will make everyone happy, so compromise is be the best we can do. I'll try my best to do my part.
     
  87. Maybe I'm very stubborn, but I keep going back to If it not broke don't fix it. Why do we need to compromise on something that was working perfectly?
    Every pot that is cooking could be stirred up, but does it need it. You know that too many cooks spoil the pot
    I think that I've already said too much on this subject.. Sorry about carrying on.
    Now let me go go get something ready for this Wednesday thread. Somehow some of the joy is missing already. I bet that this weeks thread is going to be different. I'm sure that there will be less comments.
     
  88. If you wish your image to show up as an image and not a link, the maximum file size is 100 KBytes (full-size images from digital cameras won't work).
    That's only for photos uploaded via photo.net's software. Many of the photos posted come from off-site, and so can be of any size. I'm sure egregious abuses get moderated.
     
  89. Joseph, if everyone shared the perception that it's working perfectly, we wouldn't be having this discussion. There are perceptions that some problems need to be addressed, which have been specified in this thread. But a constructive discussion with the goal of problem resolution shouldn't diminish the enjoyment. Our goal is to make it work as well as possible for everyone.
     
  90. Regarding file sizes... it's tricky because photo.net doesn't actually screen out certain things automatically. It's very labor intensive for the moderators.
    It doesn't matter whether photos are hosted off-site or attached directly to photo.net, they still take time to load. It's not a matter of server load for photo.net, it's a matter of how long it takes for photos to load on our personal systems.
    On most forums there is no built in filter that automatically screens out oversized photos (file size, not dimensions), whether attached directly to the thread or embedded from an off-site host. That notice regarding 100 kb maximum file sizes is obsolete and hasn't been functional on this forum for a long time.
    The only filter that works automatically is to limit photos displayed inline with the threads to 700 pixels wide. Larger dimension photos attached directly to the threads will appear as links. But a photo can be 700 pixels or less in width and still be grossly oversized in file size. I've seen some small JPEGs that were 1 MB or larger in file size.
    Also, photos embedded from off-site hosts are often not resized to fit photo.net's 700 pixel width limit. You can usually spot those photos immediately. Photo.net resizes the dimensions rather gracelessly, producing harsh jaggies and posterization. And those are the photos that often exceed the 300 kb file size as well.
    Earlier this year I e-mailed around a dozen folks to remind them about file sizes. After that I simply deleted oversized photos with e-mailed explanations. Naturally, those folks were unhappy. I invited each to resubmit resized photos but only a few did so. I haven't done that for a few months but may need to consider it again.
    But I'm hoping folks will check their own work so we don't have to. Because this is a community space - rather like a public park - we each must take responsibility for how we use that community space so that all may enjoy it. There are fewer such constraints on our photo.net portfolio spaces, which can accommodate much larger photos, with each page containing only one large photo rather than dozens. That's a more workable solution for lengthy dialogs and critiques.
     
  91. Just a few comments about this interesting thread:
    I agree with joseph and some others that it IS working great for a lot of people.

    I also think the main problem is with the size of some of the images. 200Kb should suffice. And I can imagine that in a database it doesn't matter whether it is a picture or text, but then it also shouldn't matter how much text it is. I do understand this puts an ever bigger burden on our great commenters. But I think that not many trolls will post 20+ lines of comments and maybe we can share the load by not replying to a troll-post or unappropriate post but to send a mail to one of the moderators. In that way we all contribute to the moderation a bit.
    If I had a slow connection I would wait a bit longer or get a faster account. It is worth it.
    I do agree that the thanking the thanking gets a bit out of hand sometimes and I'm sure everybody knows how much comments are appreciated. Especially from the bulk commenters.
    Although sometimes I get frustrated when I 'only' get comments from them. But that just means I need better pictures. I think nobody will dislike constructive comments at all. I would like to see more of that only when the picture really needs it.
    Maybe a bit rough, but I think that people that don't want to see the comments in the way it was, they should a) post and look in NW threads or b) just scroll. But that is just my view. Many people have already (automatically) adapted the commenting to the friday or so and this means all the 'big' comments are at the bottom and there won't be many pictures there. So people not enjoying long comments can stay clear from that part of this fantastic forum.
    I think a separate thread for the comments could work. Provided a direct link is available. But I think it is not needed because of the smaller filesizes and a bit longer wait. For the moderator this shouldn't matter, since (I imagine) he checks the comments thread as well. Commenting on each photo individually won't work I think, because it is a lot more work and clicking, and the rest cannot learn from the comments on other pictures. I think this would largely kill the thread as it is. An extra page after the first fills up could work, but won't help lex's work and everybody will still be waiting the same time in the end. With a single page the pictures that you have seen before are already in the cache anyway.
    Maybe everybody can add a text line to it's next post, showing how long last weeks thread (after clearing cache) took to load, picture size and a small line about how many/what kind of comments they would like. I'm sure Mark Cooper can make a list of the results. and I do believe he needs help!!!
    I'm glad Jonathan Matter has volunteered to help him with the statistics.
    About the 'freshness' of the pictures: I think the idea is good but many times it is hard to always have a fresh picture. As long as the spirit of sharing and learning/improving is there.
    Did I say 'a few'? hmm, well, just my one cent. And to everybody reading the whole thread, we are already well over 16000 words.
     
  92. It seems that what we need most is more self regulation, mainly with file sizes but with other thread rules as well. I think Jose has done a great job in his opening posts trying to encourage participants to compress their photos to a smaller size (and even greater job for starting these threads and keeping them going on). 300 kb is good limit, 200 kb would still be OK, but I agree with Ilkka that lower than that would not be good for some of the photos posted here.
    While I'm not that worried of the downloading times of these threads (or have we as people grown so impatient that we can't wait a minute or two), I'm more concerned of the workload these threads create to the moderators (Big thanks to Lex and Shun for the work they do). I wonder if we indeed could have a deputy Wednesday Pic moderators , like someone already suggested, who would take some of the workload off the shoulders of Lex and Shun (and who would report any problems directly to Lex and Shun when they appear in case the system dos not allow thread limited moderator rights)? I promise to volunteer at the second I get my life and work sorted out in a way that can find time for that. :)
    Other than that I would imagine that a separate thread for comments might be worth of trying. It would be a bit easier to have the photo-thread and comment-thread side by side in different tabs/windows if those two would be separate entities. While this would not help with the workload, it would help with the download times. And putting the images to personal portfolios (WedNEsDAy PiC gallery folder?) is an idea I will follow and see how that works.
    While everything I might have to say on this subject has probably been said (read it through in a hurry while working), I still had the need to add my 2 cents to the discussion. Why? I blame the the sense of camaraderie and feeling of belonging in to this PN-Nikon-community we have here, and those Wednesday Pic-threads have been a big part in creating those feelings. I, like many others here, feel that in personal level this matter has some importance. Before I joined to Photo.net I never ever had published my photos before, and only handful of people had seen my photos. While these threads have been blamed for being somewhat "mutual admiration"-threads (with what I agree to some point), I believe we (at least those of us who are not confident pros) need this kind of threads/forums. Like I said in a Wednesday Pic-thread few weeks ago, through these threads some of us get at least some kind of feedback on what is positive in our photos, and for some of us this might be the only place they get any feedback from peers. While I agree that true critique is more valuable in general than a "pat on the back", a pat every now and then can give some of us a real boost and make dive deeper to the world of photography. I say let's keeps these threads as "mutual admiration"-threads, since there is a need for those too, and keep in mind that there are other places here in PN for "true critique". I for one would like to get the best of both worlds and what Lex suggests here is something worth looking into, how to combine these two things. And it would be great if we could extend this mutual appreciation and feeling of community to other parts of PN too and get the critique forum working for us too. I think that the ball is at our court now. I too promise to try my best to do my part to get the Wednesday Pic-threads to evolve to the next stage.
    P.S. And thanks to those who commented my photo, your kind words are highly appreciated. The thread was full of great shots again, sorry that I could not comment them before the thread was closed. :)
     
  93. Referring to Jannes post, I'd like to help.
    If Lex & Shun would like to create such "Deputy Wednesday Pic Moderators" I'd be happy to be considered for such a position, for a period to come. I guess that there are many others who want to spend some of their time to take this lovely forum even further.
     
  94. OK forum - to start with - My Oh My Oh My - if I'd only known what I'd start..... But lets start by accepting the simple fact - - our Wednesday thread is super popular & is a very positive influence on the forum & a lot of us. I learn a lot from it personally & love traveling the globe each week with the rest of the forum. Always brings to mind that I wonder where we're all located..... I always wonder that....
    Anyhow - in regards to sizing.....
    I have this morning taken time out to test one IR photo I took last week in anticipation of this week's thread to see what the result would be for me. So this is the result I got.
    First up - I had to do another test earlier in the year with the help of Lex to ensure I got the correct size for the thread. I find that for me to get an acceptable presentation size I need to save my shots in between 800-850 pixels. This due to Zenfolio's resizing of shots. I save that size & I have a reasonable size presented in the thread. Too small & the shots simply don't carry the message. Please think of this those of you who present tiny photos.
    Secondly - I today created three versions of the same shot. One under 300Kb, one under 200Kb & one under 100Kb - please remember that I need the shots to be 800-850 pixels on the widest side. The under 300Kb shot looks fine. The under 200Kb size looks very much the same. But - the just under 100Kb looks distorted already on Zenfolio. There is simply no way I'd ever present a shot looking the way that one does.
    If anyone wants to see the result - Here's the gallery
    http://lilknytt.zenfolio.com/p858490508
    Mind you - this is an IR shot, not even color. Something to keep in mind.
    So - I will be glad to attempt smaller comments. And if people want to comment on my page instead - I will be glad to leave the link to the shot. No problem for me.
    But - if we have to reduce our sizing to below 100Kb - - count me out. :-( I will not ever present something I'm not happy to present. End of story.
    Thirdly - someone brought up the suggestion to have someone help out to moderate the thread to lessen the burden on Lex & Shun. I would imagine most of us know that we can at any time contact Shun or Lex in regards to any "problems" with any thread. If not - I'm sure they will be glad to have us report any problem should they have missed it.
    We all make mistakes. I certainly started off with a bang. ;-) I do believe I fast got an e-mail from Shun about something I'd done wrong. Something about a lens I was planning to sell if I'm not wrong. Many of us have probably stuck a foot in our mouth at some point or another. ;-) As the expression goes. Things happen. I do every now & then & sure wish I could take things back.
    So if Lex & Shun feel they need help to moderate the thread - I'm sure there are people to help.
    So many good comments have come out of this thread - but I see a trend that most like the thread as it is. Now we have to see what Shun & Lex want to do.
     
  95. I think Lex has told us what he wants to do, see Lex's post on this thread at 9:28am. I hope there will be no moderator posse.
    We do not need more moderators.
    We do not need more rules.
    For myself, in future contributions I will exercise common sense in the application of the guidelines set out by Lex in his 9:28 post.
     
  96. However, I am considering setting up an actual poll to get some data.​
    best idea yet. Striking that so many people suggest solutions without knowing what the real problem is and even if there is a problem. The problem isn't that a few people post photo's above 300k other than that they neglect a guideline (most likely unwillingly). There might be a problem for some people as far as connection speed is concerned but while Lex hinted at having received some complaints about that none of us has any idea about the extent, if any, of such a potential problem.
    That's not a sound basis for a meaningfull let alone a informed discussion. So what are we discussing here? Frankly I don't know. So either both mods set some new guidelines in place for whatever reason they see fit or that poll is done so that we actually know what we are discussing about and if actually something needs to be fixed.
    On the other hand Lex is right that such a forum is not the best place for feedback and the best solution would indeed be if those photos would be accesible through peoples portfolios. It's actually great that so many people take the time and effort to adress every photo(grapher) but, and Matt already hinted at that, is that it soon becomes a trap because people start expecting that.
     
  97. Just my 2 cents:
    • The 300 kB limit needs to be a hard limit. There all kinds of limitations to the thread (needs to be SFW, pics need to be max 700 px wide, posting occurs on Wednesday) and the size limitation is just something we have to live with. Refer people to a helpful tutorial on file sizes. Ask admins to make a very simple script that shows you if some image was over the limit.
    • Restrict postings to the Wednesday when it's active. This shouldn't have a significant impact, but should take care of further moderation.
    • As for verbose comments, there needs to be some self moderation. And sometimes it's a bit awkward, like I may see something that I like but I don't want to add a new comment when I already have a pic in the thread. Or someone comments on my post and I may want to comment back but my schedule dictates only one or two visits to the thread (Wednesdays are busy for me due to work). It would be nice to have some sort of agreed on etiquette in order to not step on people's toes.
     
  98. I firmly believe all websites should be mindful there are a lot of people out there that because of location and/or cost are still on dial up. Given the time it takes this thread to load now, when I'm using 1.5 Gig DSL, if I was trying to access it at 56 kps I would give up. It's not just a matter of a "couple of minutes" in a case like that.
    As to worrying about picture quality being compromised by files under 300 or 200 kb. Come on folks. This is the internet. A lot of folks, even on p.net, are using low end graphics cards and monitors and don't even calibrate their screens. If an image is properly processed, I seriously doubt that one in 100 viewers can tell the difference between a 60 kb and a 300 kb file. I think that once in a blue moon I have a really good image to display but have never thought that it would look that much better on the average computer screen if the file was four or five times larger. That's the sort of problem you should worry about if you want to make a 16x20 print to hang on the wall.
     
  99. Just a vote for continuing this weekly joy. It is the one thing on Photo.net that I actually look forward to. What an inspiration some of these shots are. The talent varies, but that is part of the joy. Anyone can submit. My only downer is that on the East coast of the United States, that I do not get to see the thread until I am home from work in the evening. It is often too late to even think about contributing.
    For what it is worth, I have a Time Warner cable hookup. Faster than some DSL, slower than those with a fraction of a T1. It seems a shame to keep the column at the limit of some lowest common denominator. Reductio ad absurdum would tell us that a dial up hookup would mean essentially not to look at photos at all. Does a slow DSL line act as the sphincter determining what all can see? If folks are posting images with too much content, would it not be possible to put a filter on the posting page that would gently reject such postings with some instruction to the poster as to what to correct?
    As to over the top text, I really dislike having to cruise by those posts where someone feels that a kudo is due virtually everyone who has posted an image. Scores and scores of meaningless comments in a single post? There is no way that I am going to read a never ending laundry list. Pointed comments? Sure. Then there are the greetings. Helpful? Harder to say. They are public comments but they really are intended for just one or a couple of recipients.
    The images are at the heart of what is inspiring, along with the photographer's comments on what inspired the shot, the location, and some of the technical details. Critical comments, very much yes. Other egotistic chit chat, banality and just joyful noise? Not so much so.
    It does require some kind of consensus to accomplish some restraint.
    Thanks for listening. Dave Ralph
     
  100. Wayne C - You've nailed it. Like your web site. Interesting how you linked your gallery back to your photos stored on photo.net.
    Lil - I looked at your 3-photo example in your gallery. I bet I scrolled back and forth 10 times between the 3 photos before I could detect the difference. I finally noticed the difference...mostly on the front of the structure in the lower left corner. I looked at them at their largest size. I could see a very subtle difference between the <100 and the <200. Not so between the <200 and the <300. I'm using my fairly modern laptop with it's built-in screen. I was running Vista on it til last week when I installed Windows 7 Pro, so it's not a slouch video wise. But still, nothing special. I realize you keep your pics on Zenfolio so friends/family can see them and comment on them without registering.
    I view the pictures on Wednesday Pic to expend my way of seeing. I like seeing what equipment is used. I love seeing the photos from all over the world. It's great.
    I have dial-up at home. No broadband available except for satellite, which is not an option for technical reasons (read VPN). So unless I have a true customer emergency that can be solved via dial-up I don't even take my laptop out of it's case while at home. I live 1 hour SE of Columbus Ohio, home of Battelle, OCLC, Nationwide Insurance, Limited Brands, CompuServ (since bought by AOL), Cardinal Health, and many more. You would think broadband would be available so close to such a huge corporate/IT center.
    I've been in the computer consulting business since 1978, the same year I purchased my first Nikon. I've seen how the same photo renders differently on different monitors. Is your calibrated colorspace going to be the same as mine? Will the same online photo render identically on Safari, Opera, Chrome, IE 7 & 8, Mozilla, Epiphany, and others? The answer is no.
    You can have the absolute best focussed, sharpened, color-corrected photo possible, but it will be limited by the hardware and software used to view that photo on the receiving end. Why send a bunch of extra info down the pipe when it really won't make much of a difference viewing-wise, but will have a cumulative affect to those of us without a fast connection?
    I'm posting this now at one of my clients' office. We have a T1. With no one else using the connection we're lucky to get 1.4 Mb/sec down link. But, we have approximately 20+ users and 5 or 6 servers sharing this connection. This is in addition to the 4 or 5 road warriors who connect in to our network from remote locations...all over the same connection.
    To the folks commenting that others said I needed help compiling my statistics, the original comments were suggesting I needed psychiatric assistance;). Not technical assistance.
    Keep Wednesday Pic as is. Try to keep your JPG's under 100K unless the content dictates otherwise. Enjoy. Don't fret about us folks that can't post on Wednesday (and which side of the Dateline are we considering Wednesday?). Don't worry that all monitors are not created equal or are not calibrated the same. Speak up in the thread if a pic really trips your trigger/floats your boat/whatever. If you have something regarding Wednesday Pic that you really have to get off your chest and you think it will generate a fair amount of discussion, start a new thread. Lex and Shun run a pretty benevolent co-dictatorship.
    I had a temporary moment of insanity a month or so ago regarding the different Nikon camera models represented in the Wednesday Pic thread and rather that insert it into the Wednesday Pic thread I started a new thread. I think it worked well. I don't think the separate thread caused any undue pain and agony for anyone.
    I apologize in advance to the folks that use English as a second language for all the slang I used in this post.
    I'm really, really, really done with this topic. I think Lex has pretty much put it to bed now also.
    Mark
     
  101. Mark,
    I think you have way too much time on your hands and should let one of the most popular things on PN just rest a bit and let people have some fun.
     
  102. Tim - it's not that I have so much time on my hands. It's more that I only have Internet access for several days at a time, then I'm off to the boonies for several days. So I have lot's to catch up on when I can. If folks aren't happy with this thread or don't want to participate, they don't have to stop in. My 9:02 post took close to 3 hours ( a few minutes here, a few there, between tasks at work) to compose. As a computer consultant/network analyst/network administrator I spend a fair amount of my working time asking people to empty their email trash, their in and out boxes, etc. Plus I'm always looking for the most efficient PDF creator...a lot of Word and Excel documents are saved as PDF for posterity. All this takes disk space. Disk space is cheap. Tape drives are expensive. Bandwidth is expensive. Tonight's backup and verify has to finish before we start changing the data again tomorrow morning. No one big (document/picture) file is a killer. It's when you start adding them up that it starts to make a significant difference.
    Thanks - Mark
     
  103. If folks aren't happy with this thread or don't want to participate, they don't have to stop in.​
    And the fat lady sang.
     
  104. bmm

    bmm

    I'm only just off a plane and reading this for the first time. Just a couple of my own thoughts:
    1. Wednesday Pic is an absolute delight and something I look forward to each week, whether I'm participating or not. 2 or 3 minutes waiting for this gem of a thread to download is no hassle compared to the enjoyment it gives.
    2. I don't like the thought that those people who give comments to everyone would be limited in words or in number of pics that can be commented on. I think these people like Lil and Jeananne are some of the real heros of this thread actually, especially for the newer posters whose work they so diligently and encouragingly comment on.
    3. The issue of recent work - I tend to agree that some of the work has to be recent, but not all. For example I have frequently posted images where the original capture might be up to 24 months old but where its only in the relevant week that I've done post on it etc.
    Bottom line for me is please don't change a thing. The Wednesday thread is an absolute treasure and an inspiration.
     
  105. I agree with several of the comments...
    It ain't broke... Don't fix it!
    As for time to load... Words don't take much bandwidth. I think any delay is the images.
     
  106. Mark - I spend a fair amount of my working time asking people to empty their email trash, their in and out boxes, etc. Plus I'm always looking for the most efficient PDF creator...a lot of Word and Excel documents are saved as PDF for posterity. All this takes disk space. Disk space is cheap. Tape drives are expensive.​
    Mark , I have all of that and more at work, This is not work, I do this for Fun. I don't want a lot of rules when I'm having fun. Fun is a break from work. Don't make this work make this fun .
    BTW - at my company, we save both the word or excel and a PDF of it. We only send out PDF so that they are unchangeable We save the PDF sent out.as a exact rcord of what was sent.
     
  107. Today is Wednesday. Let us in today's thread show that we are capable of showing good photos (as we always do) but at a conciderable less file size.
    Happy Wednesday everybody!
     
  108. I have to agree with Richard: "Words don't take much bandwidth. I think any delay is the images." Comments (text) part of the thread 40 are 229 KB while pictures are 22 MB. So comments are about 1 percent of all load. We shouldn't spare the words, we should put lower size limit for images and somehow force that limit.

    There is one option for people who frequently refreshing thread only for reading the comments. They can disable automatic loading of images in web browser. That way thread loads in seconds. Maybe this is the solution for Lex also.


    Where's 41, I'm ready with picture only about 100 KB big! :)
     
  109. Hi,
    I've been following the Nikon Wednesday thread for sometime, only recently having the courage to post to it. Perhaps I'm fortunate to have a reasonable connection, load up time for the full (#40 thread) was perhaps a minute?. The Moderators having load time issues is a big problem, especially as they do this on their own time, unpaid. Is there anything Photo.net can do to assist, I assume they moderate other threads also?
    On the workings of the thread. By limiting submissions to photo.net content, a smaller image could be posted to the thread at a max size (100- 200kb) would appear to offer the best compromise of image quality over file size. This image linked back to the photographers portfolio where comments can be made. A counter under the image on the thread recording the number of comments made would give viewers a heads up to what was tickling the general masses fancy or at least stimulating discussion, it's down to personal choice or curiosity to follow up the comments. This does give a moderation issue in that each page cannot be easily scanned on a regular basis for malicious content, though from what I have seen on this site it is not an issue to be overly concerned about, self policing and reporting of this kind of activity would have to fall to the individual participants of the thread. There is also the question of amending the web coding to accommodate this method, which as has been pointed out is not really feasible for just one thread, it would need to be a global solution within the community...in my opinion not easily implimented not desirable.
    As we have seen self regulation of posted content can fall over. The Thread is hosted under the No Words banner, perhaps we could try following this ethos for a while, jumping out to our favourite images of the week and making any wordy comments directly to the photgrapher, this does not aid the community in seeing comment made and advice given, save for our own images should they attract attention.
    Personnally I'm happy to follow the second option but only as a fall back to the current regime which I like, have no issue with save my slightly misplaced comment at the foot of Thread #40. Participants undertanding and following a flow would aid moderation if there was the ability to lock out photo postings say after Saturday to allow those who have connection availability issues or just not able to post until weekends to participate. This opens the thread to crit only from Sunday through Tuesday. Most people will have the photos in thier cache so reloading of the thread should not be so painful.
    Just thoughts...I'm in the "it's not broken...don't try fixing it" camp. Beyond some user education, perhaps in this case a few (but please not too many) extra rules, would help nurse the thread through it's growning popularity.
    Nikon Wednesday is the best thread I have see on any photo site. Many thanks to Jose for starting it and to Shun & Lex for thier time keeping it on the straight & narrow.
    Regards
    Finlay
     
  110. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    As I said earlier, it doesn't bother me too much that it takes some time to download those Wednesday threads. Just download them on one browser window while you do something else on the computer (on another window) or off the computer.
    I udnerstand the fun people get from the Wednesday threads. To be blunt, I think most of the images are good but not great, and I post some very mediocre images there myself. But I can see why people enjoy getting praised on their (mediocre) images, and I won't spoil the party. I won't dish out undesrved praises; I simply restrain from commenting on the images there. If you wonder why I don't comment much; that is why.
    I firmly believe that 100K-byte images are more than sufficient for the purpose of Wednesday threads; by far the majority of my images posted to photo.net are around 100K or a little less. However, I wouldn't use them to judge lens sharpness. If you think you need 150K or 200K, I don't think that is an issue either. It is those 500K, 1M and over image that cause most of the problem. Let's see whether self regulating can work. As I said just now, I'll try not to spoil the party, but if that doesn't work, Lex and I will figure out something else.
    Incidentally, Josh Root informed us that dividing long threads into pages will soon be an option on photo.net, although I personally prefer one long thread, which remains as one of the options. Of course, dividing these threads into pages will not actually shorten the download time. That is why I prefer one long thead that gets downloaded when I am working on something else.
     
  111. Of course, dividing these threads into pages will not actually shorten the download time.
    If only one of the sub-threads is open to postings and the earlier ones are closed, then moderators can just monitor the active thread for abusive postings, right? And this will download faster. I thought the problem was that in order to react to inappropriate text quickly, the thread has to be downloaded frequently by the moderators. The rest of us don't need quick download times as we can just download the developing thread once, make an image post, and then review the images the next day.
    My impressions on Lil's example images: the 100kB image is considerably worse than the 200kB image even on a casual glance (the detail looks mushy and not crisp), whereas the difference between the 200kB and 300kB image is more subtle but still noticeable. To me the 100kB image would not be acceptable whereas the 200kB image is. However, many subjects contain less fine detail than Lil's example and those would work fine as e.g. 150kB images, but landscape photography would clearly suffer from a hard limit at 100-150kB. My this week's image (water polo) actually compresses quite poorly (the irregularity of the water surface with all the reflections etc. probably causes this) and the 200kB post I made (with save for web quality=80) is noticeably less crisp than the 350kB (save for web quality=90) original image I was going to post until I noticed that it is quite big. To me the crispness of detail (the water drops) is important to capture the spirit of the activity and the "feel" of the water.
    But I can see why people enjoy getting praised on their (mediocre) images, and I won't spoil the party.
    People have day jobs and still manage to go through their most recent images, choose one, and make a post of an image in just a few days time of its capture. There are many who post consistently very good images. This I see as the value of the thread; it is a temporally (fairly) coherent window into the world and shows how diverse things people see and photograph. Sure, many of the images are not masterpieces but that doesn't mean that the whole thread should be judged by the worst images (or that all images should be made look bad by excessive compression); by contrast I look and enjoy the best and scroll through the rest. To me (and I am sure to many people who post images) it is important that the presentation of the images is of good quality and I think 700 pixel wide and <=300kB are fair limits. I can't imagine it would be hard to program the limits into the photo.net software since it already recognizes the difference between 700 pixel wide and larger images.
     
  112. Just make it a limit of one pic per registered member and a max size of 200k Jpeg. Thats plenty for web viewing.
    The less work for moderators the better. This is a community after all.
     
  113. The 300 kb upper limit isn't a problem. We just need folks to stick to it, preferably smaller.
    A vertically oriented uncropped photo reduced to 700 pixels wide will be around 1050 pixels tall. A little large for my taste for this type of web display, but it isn't practical to limit photos to 700 pixels tall on these forums. So a vertically oriented 700x1050 JPEG of a sunset might need all of 300 kb to render the fine gradations without posterizing. Personally, I'd reduce my vertically oriented photos to 700 pixels high, but we don't have any such requirement and I don't see any need to impose another rule. I'd rather let folks make their own choices based on what best serves the community.
    Only after this discussion started did I find out that photo.net will offer page views as an option for browsing discussion threads. That will be a big help. Even folks on dialup should be able to skip to the last page and attach their own contributions without having to wait for 20+ MB of photos to load.
    Anything that helps maintain accessibility for everyone who wishes to participate is okay by me.
    And we don't need any additional rules. The existing guidelines are plenty. Not everyone reads those, so adding more won't reduce problems.
     
  114. Lex wrote "Only after this discussion started did I find out that photo.net will offer page views as an option for browsing discussion threads"

    Thats great!! And the only way IMHO to solve the problem, specially thinking in the near future.

    A year ago the thread had around 20 to 25 pictures, now around 130. A this rate of grow,
    we will have 250 or 300 pictures very soon and more perhaps.
    The idea to close the thread when it takes to long to load would result, then, in a almost only european thread. Strange early birds in Bronx or Buenos Aires, late ones in LA may have the chance to post a shot but for the rest of the american continent people will be imposible to post something.

    I thanks Lex & Shun for their great work and for trying to ensure the thread as accessible as possible to all but on the other hand Photo.net is not 911. Its a Image based website and will always be slower to somebody (how many?). Try to get nba.com in a dial-up! it takes ages!
    thanks Alejandro
     
  115. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Here are direct links to Lil's two image versions:
    100K Bytes http://lilknytt.zenfolio.com/p858490508/h2e69cd78#h2e69cd78
    300K Bytes http://lilknytt.zenfolio.com/p858490508/h2ce1889d#h2ce1889d

    I placed each on a separate browser window and compared them side by side. At least I don't see any noticable differences since they are small JPEG images. As Mark L. Cooper points out above, you have to look around very carefully for a long time to find any minute difference, and that is not what people tend to do when the objective is to appreciate an image.
    What I am not interested in doing is to keep checking image sizes all day long in these threads. I think I have more important and more interesting things to do. Hopefully people will learn to self regulate and cooperate.
    At the bottom is the 200K-byte version of the image I posted to this week's Wednesday thread. Do you notice any difference from the 82k-byte version?
    Top: 82K-byte version
    [​IMG]
    00UgTF-178663684.jpg
     
  116. Thank you Ilkka for noticing . How anyone who's involved in photography can not notice the mushiness & loss of detail in the under 100Kb version is surprising to me. I was personally chocked when I saw the difference.
    I showed my husband the three shots last night fast telling him what I had done but not pointing out any problems or anything. The minute I loaded the under 100Kb picture my husband jumped. He saw it immediately. Granted he's a Camera Operator/Steadicam Operator in Film & TV. But I did not point out a single thing & that shot changes drastically.
    Maybe it's because I have a 24" screen - who knows. I will do my best to stay under 300Kb as I did this week. There are shots where this can be done easier. But I will not present a mushy with no detail photo in the thread. If I can get away with something around 200-250Kb I will do so. But that third example would not ever make it into any thread as a representation of something I wish to present.
     
  117. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I should point out that photo.net does not want to add a size limit such as 300K bytes to attached images because sometimes there is a need to post larger images. Josh Root discussed that with us before and bandwidth is not a major concern at this time. For most threads, an occasional 500K-byte image is not an issue because very few threads have so many images attached. Our Wednesday threads is a major exception.
    Additionally, frequently people hot link in outside images that are not hosted by photo.net. Those images will take time to download also but photo.net has no control over them.
     
  118. ok - I don't know anything at all. I am doing something wrong. When I resize my pictures they physically get smaller. How do you keep a photo the same but yet reduce the file size?
     
  119. Hi,
    Don't wanna make this a contest of who can compress the worst picture, but I think Shun's picture is not the best example. The smaller version has extra shadow and text and still the difference is hard to see. I will include a picture with some high detail and high contrast side by side (left is 198kB originally right is 96kB originally). Saved as a HQ jpg afterwards I know.
    I think the difference is easy to see (when you know the original), but the impact is also lower. A test with compression twice at different resolutions Full res->intermediate->700 wide made things a lot worse. So how you prepare the jpg and which program you use also counts for a lot. I think most (99%) of the pictures (especially horizontal 700 wide) never need more than 200kB.
    just my second cent
    00UgUs-178675584.jpg
     
  120. Joseph - I'm not great at this but I'm willing to help - - send me an e-mail & I'll explain it to you as explained to me. Well - I can help if you have photoshop that is....
     
  121. When I resize my pictures they physically get smaller. How do you keep a photo the same but yet reduce the file size?​
    Perhaps others could have the same question: Roughly speaking, a JPEG image implies compression. The level of compression result on a bigger or smaller filesize (Kb). You can change the filesize by compressing the image, whatever the physical dimensions it has (pixels). These are two independent parameters.
    If you have a NEF file, you need to convert it to JPEG for posting, e.g., here in phot.net. After resizing (pixel size) you will save it as JPEG (.jpg), and then, you must choose the resulting desired quality... maximum, high, medium, low... the lowest compression the higher filesize, and the less noticeable compression artifacts. A higher compression will result on a smaller filesize but on noticeable JPEG artifacts.
    This is what we`re discussing here. The optimal filesize to image quality ratio.
     
  122. I have only one final thing to say on this subject & I feel very strongly that I need to.
    Part of all this has caused one thing with me - for the first time since joining this forum I feel unhappy & unwelcome on this forum.
    Sad day for me indeed. :-( I know I'm overly sensitive to many, but this is not a day I envisioned. Especially not on a subject where so many find enjoyment.
    Sad day ........
     
  123. BW images take JPEG compression more poorly than color images, since the eye is more sensitive to luminosity variation rather than absolute color variation.
    A typical screen is only about 2 lpmm when the eye can resolve 3-8 lpmm at a typical viewing distance, so mushiness will easily look bad, particularly since the eye is quite sensitive to acutance in edges.
    Solution: limit the sizes of images (I mean this as self moderation). Granted, posting these small images provides a subject matter challenge, as I don't usually take my photos with the intention of having them small, but that makes the selection process more challenging. It's all an intellectual challenge anyway, my goal is always to have a photo taken in the last 6 days.
     
  124. Part of all this has caused one thing with me - for the first time since joining this forum I feel unhappy & unwelcome on this forum.
    Sad day for me indeed. :-(​
    Good job to all who stirred the pot up. Hope your thread loads quickly. If it not broke don't fix it.
    It wasn't broke because some people have slow internet. At home I have a cable modem which is great, up in Vermont I only have dial-up. Know what - I enjoy the threads equally in both places. Good things are worth waiting for.
    Looks like it broke now. I also have very funny feeling about this weeks thread.
    Over in the thread one person even asked where the comments are? He asked if they were in a different thread. The comments are down tremendously.
     
  125. Part of all this has caused one thing with me - for the first time since joining this forum I feel unhappy & unwelcome on this forum.
    Sad day for me indeed. :-(
    I, too, may be sensitive, but the above sums up my sentiments.
     
  126. "But I can see why people enjoy getting praised on their (mediocre) images, and I won't spoil the party."
    This is at best tactless and and at worst arrogant. I think you may indeed have spoiled the party!
     
  127. The constructive part of this discussion appears to have run its course so I'm closing this thread. If anyone has any objections or further concerns please feel free to e-mail me.
    If anyone has any doubts about the actual intentions for the Wednesday Pic threads, please re-read carefully what has actually been said. If you read carefully and without bias you will see that nothing substantial has been changed:
    • We haven't added any rules.
    • We've asked only that participants adhere to the existing guidelines established earlier this year, especially the file size guidelines.
    • We ask that the emphasis be kept on the photos rather than the words about the photos.
    All we've asked is to remember that the Nikon Forum is a large, diverse community and we must make compromises to maintain accessibility for the entire community. Discussing the issues that affect this very popular facet of the community should be considered a good thing for the health of the community.
    I invite you all to go back to the beginning of the Wednesday Pic threads, starting last year, and review each. I have. Notice how it has developed. It has been a good thing, it remains a good thing and will continue to be a very good thing.
     

Share This Page

1111