Jump to content

Nikon Wednesday Pic comments


marklcooper

Recommended Posts

<p>This post is in regard to Lex's comments at the end of the just closed Wednesday Pic #40.</p>

<p>I'd like to propose an auxiliary thread to the weekly Wednesday Pic. The <strong><em>extensive</em></strong> 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.</p>

<p>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. </p>

<p><a href="../nikon-camera-forum/00TuXS?unified_p=1">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00TuXS?unified_p=1</a></p>

<p>Any comments?</p>

<p>Thanks - Mark</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>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:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><strong>Moderator's note - </strong> 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. -- <em>LJ</em></p>

<hr />

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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 <a rel="nofollow" href="00SriP"><strong>this one</strong> </a> , if it takes <em>longer than two minutes</em> 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.</p>

<p>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:</p>

<ul>

<li>A few cases of commercial spam.</li>

<li>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. </li>

<li>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.</li>

<li>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).</li>

</ul>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>it seems as though the success of the wed pic is slowly choking it to death. that's a pity.<br>

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.<br>

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.<br>

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?<br>

any other problems: i trust the moderators' judgement.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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 ?</p>

<p>( 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. )</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>John, I appreciate the offer but it wouldn't solve the other problem - accessibility for the entire community.</p>

<p>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.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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.<br>

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.<br>

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.<br>

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.<br>

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.<br>

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.<br>

Lil :-)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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. <br>

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 :-)<br>

Ken</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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.<br>

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. <br>

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.<br>

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.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.<br>

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.<br>

I do apologize if my trying to comment on all the photos is clogging the forum, as that certainly was not my intent.<br>

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 . <br>

I also post on the Now Words forum, but this allows for exchange and interaction. Since it is growing, something must be appealing . <br>

Lex and Shun, kudos to you both for what you are doing, but I do hope you still allow for the comments .</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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.<br /><br />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. <br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Here's my OCD kicking in again. I've not double-checked any of my numbers.</p>

<p>Wednesday Pic #40 had 203 posts (including Jose's) with 130 displayed pictures.</p>

<p>The total picture size is 22,046,004 bytes</p>

<p>Average JPG size is 169,585 bytes</p>

<p>Min JPG size is 25,937 bytes</p>

<p>MAX JPG size is 643,800 bytes!!!</p>

<p>Number of pics over recommended size limit is 11</p>

<p>Number of pics over 200,000 bytes and less than 300,000 bytes is 29</p>

<p>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.</p>

<div>00Uf8C-178131684.thumb.jpg.b2d8d2f1e417d6bee75a9b2d3583652e.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I submit that we do a better job of sizing our pics for <strong><em>web viewing</em></strong>. Does the data contained in a 300K JPG show any more detail than a 200K JPG, assuming they have identical dimensions?</p>

<p>I agree with Matt in that the text/comments don't take up much bandwidth...just real estate on the screen.</p>

<p>Thanks - Mark</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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.</p>

<p>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:</p>

<ul>

<li>Ensuring that spammers aren't taking over the joint (we occasionally get porn spammers on photo.net, tho' so far no actual images).</li>

<li>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).</li>

<li>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.</li>

<li>Etc.</li>

</ul>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>(good idea about starting this discussion thread today)<br /> I like the idea of starting 2 threads each week for the Wednesday Photo,<br>

----------------<br>

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<br>

-----------------<br>

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<br>

-----------------<br>

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.<br /> 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.<br /> <br /> 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.<br /> 120 pictures posted in 120 paragraphs (1 picture in each) and that's all.<br /> And a separate thread for the comments. 200 postings.<br /> (120 and 200 are just realistic examples, there would be no restrictions)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...