Photo.net in 3rd place in Photography Forum listing

Every now and then (British understatement :)), I read a critical post/response about PN. Things don't work as we expect them to, mods don't respond as quickly or as effectively as we'd like, the 'old site' was better, etc. Yes, members who have been around a while are aware of PN's limitations and shortcomings.

 

Imagine my surprise and delight then, when I read expertphotography.com's article 12 Best Photography Forums in 2020 and found that the article ranked PN in third place. To quote the article:

What you’ll find on Photo.net are an enthusiastic group of beginner and professional photographers alike. This forum holds a huge repertoire of content, useful for guiding photographers in the right directions. Articles, courses and a huge active following – what more could you want? This is the place for answering those hard to define questions. The design is simple and much better than other photography forums on the interwebs.

 

I can't attest to the trustworthiness of the review. Maybe the reviewer just 'dipped in' to various forums. But I assume that reviewer at least took a look at the list of sub-forums. I also note that he didn't use phrases like 'clunky' or 'hopelessly outdated'.

 

I'm going to check out some of the other forums he mentions in the review. I used to be an active member of 500px but 'My (discussion) Groups' there seem to have been inactive for 2 years or more. The quality of the genres that interest me (street, people) is IMHO truly woeful at 500px. Even in the 'popular and 'editors picks' categories. So 500px doesn't really interest me much anymore. It seems to be increasingly about 'stunning landscape/travel photos'. I still have a Flickr account but I rarely visit (or upload) there.

 

I often wonder what I'm still here at PN. In a seemingly minority of people who don't shoot film, don't use classic cameras, MF or LF. But with all it's limitations and skewed membership interests w.r.t. the general photography population, PN is still a relatively small, friendly, helpful, personal and vibrant forum. After a while, you start connecting - on-line - with individual people on the the things you have in common. One thing that makes PN special to me (though I don't know how other forums operate) is that many members are (ex-)professionals who are only too happy to help beginners, amateurs and up-and-coming photographers. I've learned a lot from their balanced and supportive comments.

 

I'm an active member of a saxophone forum too. And these are exactly the qualities that make that forum unique too. It's not about quantity but about quality.

 

The moral of this story is perhaps to focus more often on what we (members, mods) are doing right.

 

Mike

 

PS: I'll send a copy of these links to the owners of PN. It just might influence them to invest a bit more in PN!

Yours is a delightful cup half full.

 

The half empty version is that this speaks to thenoverall rotten state of photography sites on the web.

Haha - quite true!

 

Mike

 

Yours is a delightful cup half full.

 

The half empty version is that this speaks to thenoverall rotten state of photography sites on the web.

Mr. Morrell,

 

There are obviously still-enthusiastic people like yourself who make quality contributions. Otherwise, you wouldn't post this for me to comment on. There used to be a lot of people I could say that about. Most of those people have moved on. I quit putting my one-and-a-half cent's worth in and quit paying years ago. But I am old, my world gets smaller every day. Maybe both my interest and abilities have downsized enough that I took another look at Photonet.

 

I have to wonder what the author of the piece that voted Photonet third was thinking. What kind of photo experiences and life experiences does he or she have? What do they have in the way of background, experience, discernment, etc., to give merit or authority to their conclusion? Did the author pen the opinion from his or her residence as a tenured fine arts full professor in a major university? Or, could it have come from somebody who was heavily medicated enough to let out of their strait jacket for the time it took to write the article?

 

If you're old enough to remember an automobile, the Yugo, remember that it did sell a few examples. The question is why? What did they see or, more relevantly, not see in a Yugo that would cause them to buy that horrible little car?

 

A.T. Burke

P.S. to my comment above. Maybe the guy is even a member of your saxophone group and voted its place in the ranking as #1, which could be taken as a sign that he doesn't know the difference between music and photography.

FWIW I've learned a lot of valuable things on this site over the last few years and have enjoyed the time I've spent on it.

Most of those people have moved on......Did the author pen the opinion from his or her residence as a tenured fine arts full professor in a major university?

 

Where did they go?

PN has lost some of it's overall vibrant quality, but it remains a friendly and engaging place to interact with fellow photographers. In short, I really do like most of you, and count you as friends. This is why I stay.

There are people here whose expertise and experience coupled with their varied personalities is appealing and appreciated by me.

They well compensate for the shortcomings of the .......... “decor”

I think I have been on PN longer than just about anyone. I am a photo junkie, pay my dues every year no matter what, disappear for weeks at a time but always come back, post in the no words forum to keep my brain working, occasionally learn something from various forums, avoid most talk of photo gear, like other photo junkies here but think some of their ideas on photography are a little whacky. I have to admit that I do miss some of the early PN controversies about ratings and the shenanigans and drama that were involved. I will never surrender and will stubbornly stick around no matter what!

There are people here whose expertise and experience coupled with their varied personalities is appealing and appreciated by me.

They well compensate for the shortcomings of the .......... “decor”

 

Ditto

 

PN is a gold mine for me, I've always considered myself to be a beginner and PN has everything I need to keep my moral up when I'm struggling. There's great folk on here I highly respect for all the various skills and knowledge they possess. It would be remiss of me to complain

PN has everything I need to keep my moral

I'm not sure we're all that qualified to help your "moral" condition, but we're always eager to help with "morale"!:);):p:D

I'm not sure we're all that qualified to help your "moral" condition, but we're always eager to help with "morale"!:);):p:D

 

oops, my bad, thanks.

 

That's what I mean, everyone helps in here in one way or another, it's always appreciated.

I've been here awhile and I've seen it go up and down. There was a period of really brilliant, even cutting edge photography and many but not all of some of those people have gone elsewhere. It seems on an upswing of interest these days and I like many of the conversations more now. My main beef here is that the technical support staff seem to be somewhat non-existent and certain problems don't get solved. But I still find it a worthwhile place to come to.

Here's a for instance. My old account stopped working. I could see my photos, comment on others' photos, upload pics, but the forums wouldn't work kept giving me a server error. I sent numerous emails to support with no reply. I contacted moderators to see if they could intercede and they told me they had put in a contact to tech support, but weren't getting any responses. This had gone for it seems the last couple of months to the point where I had to start a new account. Now I just paid my dues for this new account and decided to check my other account, Yikes its working now :) So I have two accounts. Go figure.

So I have two accounts. Go figure.

Hey, Barry, just think. You can now LIKE yourself. You could win! :)

Nothing is ever what it used to be, but I have searched (especially during a sabbatical from here) for an alternative to P.net.

 

again, from W C Fields's Bank DIck:

Og Oggilby: Oh... I knew this would happen! I was a perfect idiot to ever listen to you!

 

Egbert Sousé: You listen to me, Og! There's nothing in this world that is perfect.

Just to be clear, no-one "voted" on the ranking. The article lists 12 forums and has something good to say about all of them. The only indication of a personal 'ranking' is that the list is ordered from 12 down to 1. And that the author mentions nr. 12 as being "once the goto place ... but ..." and nr. 1 as the "go-to website for all photography related questions". In each entry he mentions things like nr. of members, posts, etc.

 

From the length and tone of the article, it's clear that this is not an in-depth review based on explicit criteria. It's just an overview for beginners. Like most of the other articles on the website. The author's CV on LinkedIn includes:

- a BA in Photography (2006)

- almost 15 years as a freelance photographer, videographer, publicist and educator

- has been 'Head Photography Writer' at expertphotography.com since 2018

- on the website, he's written 350+ articles for beginners on 'types of lenses', tips for <type of> photography> to 'best bags' and everything in between

 

So no, he's not a tenured fine arts professor (who would hardly write 'popular' articles about photo websites). Neither is he just a journalist who knows little about photography. He's just giving as personal opinions about relevant photo websites for beginners to ask questions and learn.

 

I'd never heard of the Yugo but - having looked it up - it's interesting story!

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

Mr. Morrell,

 

There are obviously still-enthusiastic people like yourself who make quality contributions. Otherwise, you wouldn't post this for me to comment on. There used to be a lot of people I could say that about. Most of those people have moved on. I quit putting my one-and-a-half cent's worth in and quit paying years ago. But I am old, my world gets smaller every day. Maybe both my interest and abilities have downsized enough that I took another look at Photonet.

 

I have to wonder what the author of the piece that voted Photonet third was thinking. What kind of photo experiences and life experiences does he or she have? What do they have in the way of background, experience, discernment, etc., to give merit or authority to their conclusion? Did the author pen the opinion from his or her residence as a tenured fine arts full professor in a major university? Or, could it have come from somebody who was heavily medicated enough to let out of their strait jacket for the time it took to write the article?

 

If you're old enough to remember an automobile, the Yugo, remember that it did sell a few examples. The question is why? What did they see or, more relevantly, not see in a Yugo that would cause them to buy that horrible little car?

 

A.T. Burke

So no, he's not a tenured fine arts professor (who would hardly write 'popular' articles about photo websites).

lol. I bet there are more people masquerading on the web than we might generally think. I’m sure plenty of tenured professors do “pop” quite well and it might be very relaxing after a long day of Homer and Cicero! I have no reason to think that’s what’s going on with the author in this case.

 

I think a reason for many of the light-hearted reactions here is that such reviews don’t have much influence over those who visit the site regularly. What “credentials” could compete with that?

Someone who actually did something.....

Someone who actually did something.....

Are you suggesting you don’t do anything? I was saying that your point of view and others here are valuable because your being a regular user seems like a good credential when it comes to ranking or having an opinion of the site.

 

I asked what credentials could compare with our first-hand experience and you respond with “someone who actually did something”? I must be missing something.

Haha, I'm sure you're right. Writing short, web-sized articles in a style that can be digested within an attention span of 2- 5 minutes might be an enjoyable way of relaxing after a day of whatever tenured professors do during their 'day job'. I'm sure Wikipedia provides this kind of opportunity.

 

But if a tenured professor (or anyone else with above-average knowledge) was writing a 'popular article' (or giving a 'popular talk') about her/his own field IMHO it would take real talent to condense and 'dumb down' any topic down to something that the general public could quickly digest. And deliberately ignore important interconnections, historical perspectives, nuances, etc. The 'knowledge gap' would be much greater than talking to 1st year undergraduates.

 

Two things spring to my mind:

One is one is my current voluntary work, not just as a photographer but as an interviewer/writer for weekly articles in a local rag; we deliberately try to make our articles accessible to people with low literacy skills, by using short, simple sentences, everyday words, etc. We also have the restriction of a fixed number of characters. So condensing articles in terms of content, length and style is hard work.

 

The second is Joseph Campbell, some of whose books I've read and some of whose recordings I've listened to. His main claim to fame was as a public speaker. Not to academics but to the general public. He had the gift of just telling interesting stories to his audience. Onstage, he wasn't an academic, a professor or a researcher. He was just a storyteller who kept his audiences enthralled.

 

I guess that there are academics who enjoy 'dumbing down' (either anonymously or otherwise) and others who don't.

 

Mike

 

 

lol. I bet there are more people masquerading on the web than we might generally think. I’m sure plenty of tenured professors do “pop” quite well and it might be very relaxing after a long day of Homer and Cicero! I have no reason to think that’s what’s going on with the author in this case.

 

I think a reason for many of the light-hearted reactions here is that such reviews don’t have much influence over those who visit the site regularly. What “credentials” could compete with that?

I guess that there are academics who enjoy 'dumbing down' (either anonymously or otherwise) and others who don't.

Not to get too serious, but I don’t think most academics who can also write for a mass audience would think of it as dumbing down. Think of folks like Leonard Bernstein, a maestro who offered weekly tv shows for young people which also drew a wide adult audience. He was made for that. I think a lot of smart academics can and have condensed and simplified their thought for more popular consumption. It’s relatively easy to skip certain details and connections and communicate to a less expert audience with facility. F. Scott Fitzgerald, now known as much for his bigger novels which were less popular at the time, was beloved for his shorter magazine features.

My wife is a nuclear physicist who happens to teach, among other things, freshman-level physics classes to a mass audience of 400+ students per class. No, it's not about dumbing-down. It IS about making a potentially complex and impenetrable subject both accessible and interesting to a group of young students who don't want to be there in the first place. She has become something of an urban legend at the university for her ability to do this successfully. There are many members on PN who accomplish the same results sharing knowledge here.

 

I believe one of the things that makes PN successful is the highly diverse membership, from rank beginners through practicing professionals, competent amateurs, and retired experts, many of whom are willing to share their knowledge in ways that meet the specific needs of individuals. I find that many of the most technical discussions far outstrip my own knowledge and vocabulary. Yet, even these serve to open windows into components of this art of which I would otherwise be ignorant. Though it sometimes happens, it is rare to have anyone belittle the efforts of others to improve. I like to think my little contributions are worthwhile as well...(wistful expression here).

Are you suggesting you don’t do anything? I was saying that your point of view and others here are valuable because your being a regular user seems like a good credential when it comes to ranking or having an opinion of the site.

 

I asked what credentials could compare with our first-hand experience and you respond with “someone who actually did something”? I must be missing something.

My bad.

I misconstrued.

I was commenting on the suggestion that the lack of a resident tenured doctorate endorsement disqualified the review.