Why Did Photo.net Go To The Dogs?

Discussion in 'Photo.net Site Help' started by dragoslav, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. Due to illness I have not visited Photo.com since November 2016, to my great disappointment, when I logged in yesterday, I noticed that Photo.net has become Fotki.com, or photo-bucket, or Picasa; a place to dump mediocre photographs of grand kids, pets, unidentified friends, with out regard for quality. Some photographs are several iterations of the same mundane subject (something Fotki.com is known for), a few were posted sideways. If you do not have the time to 'right up' a picture you should not be on Photo.net. If you are too lazy to come up with a caption (other than unknown) you do not need to be on Photo.net. Posting 14,147 pictures for 'critique' is ridiculous, especially if they are multiple iterations of your kid on a swing. I am not saying that there is NO quality; some of the posted pictures are very good, BUT a lot more of mundane "Fotkified" crap has been posted.
    When my subscription expires I will not renew it.
    Does any one know of an alternate web-site for serious photographers who wish to improve their technique?

    Dragoslav T. "Mike" Marcovich
    beegeedee and Vlado like this.
  2. I admit to having a strong preference for the previous layout. It was simple, effective, and a reminder of the way the Web used to be. Sometimes Web sites must change. But PN should have remained true to itself. It was the most unique site for photographers, partly because all the other sites changed.
    I_Kelly and hansdans like this.
  3. James G. Dainis

    James G. Dainis Moderator

    I think the OP is complaining about the photos he sees here. I don't know where he is looking to find all those bad photos. If he would just got to the home page, page down and start clicking on the photos he sees there, he will see some great photos.
    ZT and William Michael like this.
  4. Norman 202

    Norman 202 i am the light

    Go to the dogs? Nonsense. It’s getting better every day. New features, robust platform, secure, smilies o_O
  5. Where are you looking? Yeah there is a lot of beginners here but there's some good stuff.
  6. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    To quote Will Rogers :

    'We can't all be heroes - someone has to stand by the roadside and cheer as they pass by'.
  7. Self-editing of photos is indeed a rare and valuable asset. I didn't renew my subscription either. I'm not sure the quality of photography has really changed, but as the site is now prioritizing images over text, we may notice the issues you mention more. The site is moribund, of course: no point denying it.
  8. Does any one know of an alternate web-site for serious photographers who wish to improve their technique?

    Try 1x.com. No kittens, no bull, good forums, just hard to be published.
  9. I don't think it is pnet problem, it is problem with all photo sites now, from technical view digital revolution is over. 5 years old camera can take basically the same good picture as newest and latest. So gear heads are get bored and gone.
    Lots of people who take pictures now, didn't shot film ever, they don't have that mental restriction we grow up with, like every time when you push trigger it is cost you money. They don't print , they just have rush to share it online, it is kind of mentality like , " I am already paid for camera, inet connection, so here is my "creation", enjoy".
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2017
  10. Vincent Peri

    Vincent Peri Metairie, LA

    That's a hell of a way to live LOL. Film forever.
  11. G-P

    G-P Administrator Staff Member

    Old photo.net could not be supported any longer - very old platform programmed in TCL - no programmer today wants to know TCL. Old photo.net if you didn't submit it for ratings or critiques your photo was a needle in a haystack and almost guaranteed never to be found.

    New photo.net can be supported much more easily. New photo.net all new photos get a chance at some exposure through recent uploads (for better or worse). Those that submit lazy or uninspiring photography don't gain much traction here, plus it is like anything in life - you get what you give.

    So if you come here and don't upload your photography and you don't offer critiques, you likely won't get much in return. Givers gain.

    My suggestion would be to "follow" a number photographers that you find their work interesting, easy enough to find - go to any link off Explore button on main menu - photo.net has some amazing photographers that contribute regularly. Once you have "followed" them - you will find their recent uploads as a stream within your favorites. link when logged in - Photo.net - Where Photographers Inspire Each Other

    Additionally - we are working on a new feature (still a work in progress) but it is an activity feed of those you follow on the site - so you can see who else is interacting with those you "follow". So you can see how your circles of influence can grow here. But in the end its up to you. I grant you - any new site layout that is different from old - there is a learning curve, however - I think you will find if you use the site by "following" other photographers and seeing who follows them and comments on their work - the site quickly becomes a place you can become inspired, learn from and get better at your craft.
    ZT likes this.
  12. ZT


    Yeah ,True !
    What You give is what you get !
    That makes perfect sense, and it's hard to argue about it,
    Just like We said that so many times-Everyone has to be more active ,
    At least we have a lot of activity and comments(mostly negative) on POTW :)
  13. Glenn:

    Is this "Timeline" that you speak of? If so, it's a bust at following others and comments. The best bet you have is to go ahead and fix (finalize) what you started with "My Activity". All it's lacking is the ability to sort all the applicable images with newest first; i.e. no matter which time period is selected, the same image should appear first because it is the most current. However, the absolute best way would be to review the three or so lines in V1 that reported current and past comments, no images, just a number count that you select if there are new comments. So simple and pure, surely the new programming language can do something similar?

  14. APUG? I guess it depends on what you mean by improving your technique. That covers a lot of ground. Photography is like any other other art medium, and some people are just naturally gifted at it, while a lot of us have to work overtime to get good results. Like other mediums, that four letter word "work" seems to make all the difference. Just go out and shoot more, go to galleries and see other people's stuff, maybe attend a workshop or three. There is no one way to go about it, but in the end it takes dedication and a good eye. It surely doesn't require expensive gear. I'm looking at a 12x18 print right now that's hanging above my computer which was made ages ago using desaturated cheap colour Kodak film. It was scanned, and printed on an ancient Epson 1280 printer using one ink only (Eboni Black). The "pro" lab was Walgreens, and the gear was a humble Nikon N6006 w/ a cheap 35 80 plastic zoom that I bought in a hock shop in Hilo, Hi. I love it, and most everyone who sees it likes it too. Is it as sharp or professional as the work that I later printed in the darkroom w/ a Leica camera and Tri-X on MCC 110? Maybe, maybe not. Who's to say? It is for sure one of my favorites.

    The one thing that is different about photography though is that a lot of the focus seems to be about.....online stuff. When I go to other forums in different mediums to ask questions (just started pottery and ceramic classes at the young age of 65, and have been getting my feet wet again after many years away from watercolour painting and lithography), the focus on the forums is always on the work itself, not about how anything looks online.
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
  15. G-P

    G-P Administrator Staff Member

    "online stuff" for photography is different for everyone - some people seek feedback, some seek friendships and photography is the subject that brings them together as a shared interest. The subject of gear seems to be viewed differently by almost everyone - some buy latest and greatest once it comes out because they can, because they think it will help them produce better photos, because they are interested in the technology behind what Nikon, Canon or insert next popular mfr here - I'm sure we could come up with a number of reasons people get gear fever. Very true - taking photos you love with an old trusted film camera is very cool. But in the end - I think you are right - "improving technique" comes in many forms, but what is constant for those that wish to improve is getting and being inspired to shoot more, seeking feedback of their work. It takes guts to put your work out there for feedback - here or anywhere - so people that post their work for critique are brave souls - they know they must get feedback and ideally from people that know what they're doing - which is why (in large part) they are here.
  16. G-P

    G-P Administrator Staff Member

    Agreed Mike!
  17. Because at times, I really don't care about a title, I shouldn't be here? Which p.net police will decide who can stay, and who needs to go? And anyone really believes that such elitarist policies will create a site that can last? The idea of stating who should, and should not, be on photo.net is completely counter-productive to building a site with a healthy amount of contributors, and frankly it's pretty arrogant.

    We all probably want to get better, but we're not all at the same point of the learning curve. People who want to get better at photography have to start somewhere - and that might be all the way at the beginning. Not everyone starts by shooting interesting, good photos from the start, or by being able to identify which photo in a series is the best and most worthwhile. You need to learn that.... and that's where a site like this one adds value. It would only be better in my view to have more novices here, so that the shared experience on this site really can help people grow and get better. You don't get them in if you make the hurdles they need to jump over too high. Does that mean the gallery may contain more mediocre photos? Yes. But there will also be those little pearls of people discovering their talents. If one puts "minimum requirements" to be allowed to post here, there will be no new talents on this site. No new interesting voices who may have something worthwhile to say. No new members, basically.

    So, if all you can do is look down on novices because they're not like you, then you might care to remember you were a novice too, and somebody helped you learn what does and what does not work.
  18. 1x.com appears to require that each picture have a "gimmick" to get published. Oversaturated color, intense stares, etc.
  19. For the most part 1x.com looks like a site for graphic artist. The majority of the images are cooked, well done. Sad to see a fine tool like Photoshop being misused :(... Mike
  20. Sandy Vongries

    Sandy Vongries Administrator Staff Member

    In regard to titles -- Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Generally I would prefer that the photo stand on its own. I do enjoy views and "likes" but in my opinion sometimes the title detracts. I may try "Fine Effing mountain # 21 in monochrome with clouds" or similar. :D
    stuart_templeton likes this.

Share This Page