Are things slow?

[savagesax]

Seems like this wedding site is really slow. No posts lately. Maybe everyone is out playing with there new holiday

cameras!

[BrianS1664879711]

<p>maybe everyone else has jobs? :)</p>

[ejder]

This forum has almost always been slower than many others I visit. However, probably slower in past 6 months. I don't post here anymore most of the time either. I've gone back to watching without interjecting.

[dave_wilson1]

Vail's smashed filter is the heaviest action we've seen this week ;-)))))

[william-porter]

<p>Bob,</p>

<p>Very good question. I've noticed for a while that things are quieter here than they used to be.</p>

<p>My first guess was that it has something to do with a slowing in the increase of new wedding photographers. But after thinking about it for a minute and a half, I suspect it's something different. Now I'm wondering if the general <em>need</em> for a forum such as this isn't dwindling. </p>

<p>In the mid-80s, when I was a professor at a major public university in Texas (<em>not</em> UT), I was one of the three faculty leaders of the university Macintosh User Group. I edited the MUG newsletter. Between 1985 (when the MUG was started) and about 1990, we had hundreds and hundreds of members. In the early 1990s, membership started to drop, and then to drop sharply, and within a year or two, the MUG folded because it seemed no longer to have a point. In the mid-1980s, computers and GUIs were brand new and folks needed help; but the early '90s, they weren't new and folks didn't need so much help any more.</p>

<p>Well, I think something like that has happened with digital photography. There are now tons of articles out there on the web about "how to become a wedding photographer" or "how to shoot your first wedding". (Modesty prevents me from offering a link but I know because I wrote one myself.) There are books. There are camera reviews. There's a ton of info and people get better every year at finding it. We've been telling new users here for years, "That is a frequently asked question: please use the search function." Well, they may finally have figured out that they can indeed do just that — and they don't any longer need us to tell 'em to!</p>

<p>On the other hand, maybe it's something else entirely! ;-)</p>

<p>Will</p>

[dave_wilson1]

Another point to consider is that there are so many really excellent videos available to watch at a click on the popular

video site.

 

Then there's the question of, is a photographer really serious about their work, or are they happy in mediocraty just

floating down the creek in a tube?

 

Do they really want to hone their skills and fine tune their craft and bring everything to a higher level of competency? Or,

is mediocre just good enough to get by and make some money on the side and "all is good".

 

When I wanted to learn serious portraiture I went to two if the best around and studied under them and got critiqued by

them, sometimes very harshly. Same thing with black and white, I had two of the best mentors anyone could ask for and I

could call them any time and work things out with them.

 

Every day we need to be willing to learn something new and not accept the status quo. I don't even shoot that much any

more but I'm always reading, studying and trying new directions and finding things to learn.

 

As is such back to here. Different people have different areas of expertise, to be able to process through some of that

knowledge with other photogs on here is so great if there is motivation to continue to learn and accept the failures that

continually mount themselves in front of us.

 

My 2 cents.

[William Michael]

<p>I tend to mostly look at this Forum and also the EOS, Sports and the Beginners' Forums.<br>

I don't think this Forum is any slower than the others I mentioned - Perhaps because this forum is a 'specialist' forum it might appear slower if many of the 'specialists' who generally read it are having a slow time in their business and or have extra time to drop by for another reason.<br>

I think that there seems to be fewer 'newbie' type questions: maybe that is because of the generally high quality of the answers those questions get here - maybe not the answers which are necessarily liked to be heard - it might be easier ofr a newbie to read a DIY web page by an "expert".<br>

Also, a few normally very active people might be on holidays or the like - I know I am - just happen to be home today and it is raining cats and dogs . . . well so I am on the internet for a couple of hours.</p>

<p>I think the Wedding and Social Event forum is still very useful at Photonet, I’d like to equate the number of posts here to a Wedding Shoot:<br>

I’d strive for 120 Cracker Photographs in a Leather Bound Album and or a Ripper DVD Production of those 120 images rather than having 2000 images “shoot and burn” quality. </p>

<p>Just a couple of my personal thoughts.</p>

<p>Happy Healthy and Prosperous New Year to All,</p>

<p>William</p>

 

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>"I don't post here anymore most of the time either. I've gone back to watching without interjecting."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why, specifically, please?</p>

<p>WW</p>

[mbkissel]

<p>Maybe folks are just tied up with holiday plans/travel. It will be Spring before you know it and things will pick back up.</p>

<p> </p>

[lauren_s.]

<p>I've been a lurker for a while and I have a few thoughts:</p>

<p>-I've seen stated before "oh it's the busy season," "oh it's the slow season..." as reasons for few postings. But it hasn't really picked up in the summer or winter. Our most active threads seem to be, sadly, unhappy brides/unhappy photogs! :-S It is not like this at other forums I frequent.<br />-I think this forum is outdated and is not user-friendly when it comes to uploading photos.<br />-It is not permitted to share your work, which is a very popular thing to do on other forums and in my opinion, promotes learning because people can ask questions/learn about techniques accomplished.<br />-Asking for critique, another popular thing on other forums, is also too restricted and makes it difficult for comments.<br />-Real names are requested for use of the forums. I know this is a fundamental part of photo.net, but is probably turning off a lot of amateurs/aspiring photographers from asking (newbie) questions for all their clients to see when they are googled. I know I am and is my #1 reason for rarely asking or posting anything here.<br />-In general, the impression I get from most users here...and I dont want this to come off wrong because I have a lot of respect for everyone here...is that most users here have been in the business a long time. As in, there is not a lot of new styles/techniques/trends/etc being discussed or achieved that you see elsewhere, and is probably why young up-and-comers go to other forums.</p>

[savagesax]

lots of great reasons

[William Michael]

<p>Thanks Lauren that is very constructive.<br />I’d like to take those points and explore them further at least a surface skim on each and I would appreciate your more detailed comments:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>“Our most active threads seem to be, sadly, unhappy brides/unhappy photogs! :-S It is not like this at other forums I frequent.”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Do you have any (other) thoughts as to why this might be?</p>

<p>***</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>“I think this forum is outdated and is not user-friendly when it comes to uploading photos.”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Do mean the technology for uploading is not friendly?<br />Or do you mean that the Photnet Wedding Forum does not have many postings like: “Here is a shot from my last Wedding – the rest are in my portfolio ‘here’ - what do you guys and girls think of them?”<br />Or do you mean something else?</p>

<p>***</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>“It is not permitted to share your work, which is a very popular thing to do on other forums and in my opinion, promotes learning because people can ask questions/learn about techniques accomplished.”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Um? - where or how is not permitted to share your work on Photnet?<br />There has been a regular “Wedding Photo of the Week” – sure over this Holiday period it has lapsed, but I expect it to return. Also there is the Critique Forum and in it there is specifically a <a href="../photo-critique-forum/?category=Wedding+and+Social&filtered_p=t">Wedding and Social Area </a>– there are not many Photos there for critique at the moment? Perhaps it is not utilized enough by Wedding Photographers?</p>

<p>***</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>“Asking for critique, another popular thing on other forums, is also too restricted and makes it difficult for comments.”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>How do you feel this is restricted?</p>

<p>***</p>

<blockquote>

<p>“-Real names are requested for use of the forums. I know this is a fundamental part of photo.net, but is probably turning off a lot of amateurs/aspiring photographers from asking (newbie) questions for all their clients to see when they are googled. I know I am and is my #1 reason for rarely asking or posting anything here.”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>OK, maybe, perhaps - but there is no ID required? . . .<br />My real name is really and truly actually “William” . . . and I have always been known as “William W” here on Photonet: I was never ever asked to provide my Family Name. - And I never needed to disclose that I lived in Sydney Australia, either - anyway there are many people named 'William' in several million.<br /><br />And my user name here has always kept enough anonymity for me (and it appears for you too).<br />My reason for anonymity was not because I was a newbie, but because when I joined Photonet I had a couple of businesses and was also in the process of divesting myself of the Photography Businesses and I didn’t want to have any comment I made connected to those businesses or the new owners.<br />Also there is a facility for any newbie (or anyone) to post anonymously – this is quite clear on the Forum’s front page:<br /><em>“</em><em>Anyone wishing to ask a question anonymously - email me. I'll post it if you wish to keep a low profile for potential Google searches.”</em></p>

<p>***</p>

<blockquote>

<p>“-In general, the impression I get from most users here...and I dont want this to come off wrong because I have a lot of respect for everyone here...is that most users here have been in the business a long time. As in, there is not a lot of new styles/techniques/trends/etc being discussed or achieved that you see elsewhere, and is probably why young up-and-comers go to other forums.”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>OK.<br />So do you think that IF a new trend or technique is discussed the subject is quashed?<br />Let’s cut to the chase – without hesitation or fear of hurting people’s feelings – it occurs that you are relatively “new” and also “young” . . . are you saying in essence that the Forum is relatively “experienced” yet “old and stodgy”?<br />If so what do you suggest can be done for the forum to be more inviting?</p>

<p>WW</p>

[lauren_s.]

<blockquote>

<p>“Our most active threads seem to be, sadly, unhappy brides/unhappy photogs! :-S It is not like this at other forums I frequent.</p>

<p>Do you have any (other) thoughts as to why this might be?”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nope, just an observation.</p>

<p>(btw, I have no idea if I'm using these quote tags correctly, as I dont really see anything to show me it is working, and will have to wait to preview the post--after I hit submit! with nothing telling me I can preview first. Also, why do I have to hit 'enter' twice to create paragraph breaks? Another strange outdated quirk here. Also, cut and paste is not working and my entire post was deleted upon hitting submit--thank god for back button cache? :/ I'm using Firefox).</p>

<p>The forum technology itself is outdated: you have to manually quote people--a huge pain in the behind, you cant glance at a forum section and easily figure out if there are new responses--instead you have to remember if "28 replies" is everything you read, or you only read 27 replies. Having an an option like "3 unread responses," or "a new post has been added 2 hours ago" would make this a lot easier to figure out.Posting a picture in other forums is as simple as just putting the link in the body of the post. The forum does the rest. Here, it is a lot more confusing, especially in the POW thread. How many confused double or triple posts have you seen by some users? I've seen it a lot. You have to submit the post first, with no indication that you can add a photo later, then once you hit submit, you get the option to add a photo, but it has to be a very small size, and then in POW you are supposed to add explanatory text somehow in line with the photo, which is not an obvious thing to do, and voila--you have now included a photo with your post. It's just very complex and confusing for something that could be so simple. (I am not talking about using the little tree icon image upload, because if you use that you cant have text "in line" with the photo). </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Um? - where or how is not permitted to share your work on Photnet?There has been a regular “Wedding Photo of the Week” – sure over this Holiday period it has lapsed, but I expect it to return. Also there is the Critique Forum and in it there is specifically a Wedding and Social Area – there are not many Photos there for critique at the moment? Perhaps it is not utilized enough by Wedding Photographers?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I dont see why they need to be separated. I've actually never ventured over to that section. There is a wedding photo of the week--but there are rules like "only 1 photo can be shared." That's nice and all, but what about giving a nice representative sample of your all-day wedding coverage, so that others can better judge how you performed? Say, 30 photos? (This is what is very popular to do in other places). Or, you can show off different techniques and talk about how you used them throughout the day (also popular).</p>

<p>Critique is severely restricted because you are only allowed to show 1 photo, and then people must click a link to see the rest. This is just an added level of inefficiency--you would have to click back and forth, find the number of the photo on the website (if it has one), come back to this post to write about it, then anyone else who reads your comments will have no idea what photo you are talking about because they cant see them in the post, so they will have to click the website link and find the photo and...all the extra steps works against us.</p>

<p>Real names--I know it is easy to create a fake one--that's what I've done. However, if I recall correctly when I first signed up (with a real name) the registration process very heavily pushes you to use a real name. In this day and age, I suspect many people will see that, think "nope" and move on. Finding a tiny note to the bottom right of the forum section about how you can use an anonymous name is not obvious and most people are not going to look for it or even see it. Plus, it says "contact a moderator" to create an anonymous name--another step! This is usually only done when someone posts as their real name, everyone says "you are gonna be googled!" and then a moderator fixes it for them.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>So do you think that IF a new trend or technique is discussed the subject is quashed?Let’s cut to the chase – without hesitation or fear of hurting people’s feelings – it occurs that you are relatively “new” and also “young” . . . are you saying in essence that the Forum is relatively “experienced” yet “old and stodgy”?If so what do you suggest can be done for the forum to be more inviting?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, and some would use those words, yes. From what I've read, it seems most users here follow a very strict "photo competition judging" standard. No blown out skies, no sun flare, no unique crops, etc. There is also very little I've seen when it comes to things like creative use of flash, unique posing of bridal parties, macro shots of details, diptychs, new processing techniques...this is all my (very) subjective opinion, but I'm basing this on what I've seen here vs other places. </p>

<p>As to how to fix it? Well, a lack of seeing these things could be due to the restricted photo sharing that is allowed on here. Or, a more acknowledging tone could be used "I dont prefer blown out skies, but what you did with the posing is great, you could have adjusted the angle slightly more to see the bride's face," instead of "blown out sky=awful." That is a poor example, but it's the general tone I get here. Most trendy/new things are shot down immediately. (Please dont shoot me if youre not like that!) And I know there is a general impression here that "our images are timeless, that new ____ will be so embarrassing and outdated in a few years," and that can be argued with, but new things create discussion--old things have been talked about before, hence not a lot of discussion. All of this could lead to younger generations not engaging here, and finding other forums that fit more to the current wedding style that you see in blogs and magazines.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Thank you.<br>

Personally your post has been most enlightening: and I believe it is very valuable, generally.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>Apropos looking at any Photo.net forum’s main page and trying to remember how many posts have been made to any particular thread: for all the posts in which I am interested, I add an email alert.<br>

I add an email alert to ALL post in which I am interested in reading, whether I contribute to them or not.<br>

Unlike some other forums, Photo.net sends the whole text of the response in that email alert.<br>

Unlike many other forums Photo.net <strong><em>continues</em></strong> to send those email alerts WITHOUT one having to return to the forum to retrigger the email alert.<br>

I find this very useful to keep up to date with conversations WITHOUT having to revisit the forum.<br>

This function might be helpful to you also.</p>

<p>Also, one can use the ‘Unified Forum’ and select ‘New Responses’.</p>

<p>WW</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>(Please dont shoot me if youre not like that!)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I did not ask you the questions, to set you up as a target.<br>

No one should be taking pot shots at your responses to my questions.<br>

And in the unlikely event that anyone does: then they are already noted in advance, as very silly and most immature people who would do that.</p>

<p>WW</p>

[joshroot]

<p>Lauren,</p>

<p>Thanks for that feedback. I've been thinking about some of those issues myself as far as photo.net is concerned. There are good arguments to be made for why we have done things on PN the way we have. But times change and so must the rest of us.</p>

<p>I will think on what you have said.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Good to see you are giving it some thought Josh.</p>

<p>Lauren, compared to what other wedding sites?</p>

<p>I've been coming to this site for a very long time now ... sadly, it has been slowing down to almost a whisper for quite a while.</p>

<p>I do not agree that it is because of the industry itself. To be specific for example, the Digital Wedding Forum (DWF) is very active on a number of subject fronts. Those subjects are current, relevant, and wide-ranging in their scope. While the DWF is a closed site which promotes more candid discussions, even if you subtract those sorts of more sensitive subject threads (which are usually confined to a separate business section anyway), the site is still rich with valuable information, and lots of inspirational images illustrating that information. </p>

<p>One thread on the DWF titled <em>"Available Magic: Lighting on location" </em>is 195 pages long and features 3500 entries most with multiple images and explanations of the techniques used.</p>

<p>However, I do understand that Photo.net is a different sort of site, and may not be able to support certain features for ban-width reason and such. Yet, it is quite a bit behind the times. 700 pixels on the long side images is one of the smallest on the web now. The uploading is antiquated. The interface is clunky. I can't even just hit a "thanks" icon for useful posts so the writer at least knows someone was listening.</p>

<p>More importantly IMO, is that this site has increasingly catered to the basics in an overtly democratic manner. The subject matter is simplistic, repetitive and redundant ... which is a model that cannot be sustained. News worthy, or instructional posts are not forthcoming like they once were here.</p>

<p>If someone like myself, or any other experienced wedding photographer, takes the time to discuss more advanced techniques, it takes a good deal of time and energy to do so. Such threads disappear fairly fast, and those less experienced do not seem to ask questions or participate.</p>

<p> </p>

[savagesax]

I was surprised this year about unhappy brides asking questions of what to do on this site.

 

Josh, I don't know if this would help at all. Most likely there won't be enough posts. A link to help brides and worn brides about horror stories and the help wedding photographers can do to create a 100 percent success rate. I'm not sure how you could find these future brides and inform them.

 

We all know that the brides should go to small claims court and or hire an attorney. Also the photographer taking months for the bride to get her images. It's pretty easy to lead them to past posts. Can we get them ahead of time before disaster hits?

 

I've only posted one image for Photo of the Week, that was when it first started, just to get things going.

 

There could be discussions about pricing, what to give to the couple, ideas on advertising, why they need to report their taxes, enlargements, parent books grand parent photos, the dying art of enlagements and wedding books, pros and cons regarding giving out DVD's, copyrights, just some topics that aren't talked about very often.

 

Nothing has really been said about what photographers will do with the onset of video and stills.

 

Maybe something related to taking cold calls and turning it into a sale when there are 40 photographers in the neighborhood.

 

I made a pile of money in December doing company parties. It's fun walking home with $3000 per event. The new, very fast growing, unmanned photo kiosk booths, other ways of staying alive in this ever changing world. Where to buy these, and how to build them, of course selling them.

 

Josh, I don't give out the DVD's for a year. I often make more on reorders, simply by telling the couples the truth. They need me for the reprints and enlargements using a pro lab. If they take the DVD to Walgreens, Costco, where ever, the photos won't look like a pro lab. This can really backfire; the photographer may get a bad name simply because the Costco prints weren't adjusted. The prints could look green, too brown, what have you.

 

I guess what I'm looking for as a photographer in the biz since 1988 or 1987, can't really remember, but

how to make $100,000 a year in this crazy business. How to sell 24X30 enlargements with a frame, sprayed, mounted and textured. Heck, just that alone I can charge from $60 to $150, depending on the quality of the frame.

 

Using photoshop the correct way. For example, making images look like the film days. I won't ever give a client a photo that looks like it is digital. For example I always change the contrast, make other adjustments to give that "Softer," look as it was in the film days. Not that sort of laser look.

 

I'm not at all saying to void this wedding forum, just adding to it. I know there is a forum for some of these idea's, not recommendations; because this is your forum. Just "Stuff," that popped into my head.

 

I think it is sort of sinful, for the lack of words, to give couples the DVD and say bye to them. This should be the start of a long relationship. The relationship continues for the holidays, when the kids are born, portraits of huge family get togethers. This actually stings when I hear photographers say they give out the DVD's. So much is lost. Not just money. But how friendships are made, often for life.

 

Maybe add some sort of topic every week, every month, whatever. I know that giving out the DVD subject alone will generate about 30 to 100 hits!

 

Happy New Year and let it be a wonderful one.

[bruce_rubenstein]

<p>FWIW, I'm 59 and have been shooting weddings and B'nai Mitzvahs as a principal, second and assistant for 9 years. I've been on P.net since the mid 90's.</p>

<p>P.net is a gear centric, public, male geek hobbyist site. To a first order approximation, professional wedding photographers do not, and will not, participate here. The average wedding photographer these days is female and around 40. This forum is the last bastion of Monty Zucker true believers. When someone new shows up here they get a patronizing lecture from am old, pompous uncle. P.net just isn't the sort of place that is conducive to having any type of professional photography sub-forum. </p>

<p> </p>

[fotografz]

<p>Where do you get your hard statistics from Bruce?</p>

<p> </p>

[dave_wilson1]

Bruce that's hysterical, made my morning ;-)))))

[bruce_rubenstein]

<blockquote>

<p>Where do you get your hard statistics from Bruce?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>From a non-public wedding board I'm on. Probably a pass along from DWF. Of the couple of closed boards I've been on in the past years, I think there's been about 4x as many women as men. FWIW, the other thing I've noticed in the past few years is that almost no one is making any real money shooting weddings. </p>

[johny_deep]

<p>hi i am jony deep , i am thinking like you all , it is good forum for wedding and event photography may be you all can right but i am not satisfy with you.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>I haven't been on for the last 2 weeks due to holiday (no internet for 10 days! and yes - I survived) -</p>

<p>My thoughts:<br>

1) the sports forum is way slower than the wedding / social forum.<br>

2) Names don't matter - I use my real one - if it costs me business - so be it. In some cases it has earned me business.<br>

3) I've seen (noticed) some duplication in posts here and DWF. I'm not a DWF member, but get their annoying emails every so often and have noticed in their headlines posts that are identical in title, topic and summary. Personally I prefer P-net.<br>

4) I'm also an active member in 2 - 3 fb pages - all are very active and have a great mix of newbies and pros. - Haven't noticed a great slow down in them...</p>

<p>My biggest rant against any forum, chat, discussion, etc... is that people need to realize that there is more than one way to skin a cat. Photography is partially technical, part art and part business. The tech is fairly black and white (pun intended) - the art and business are grey. Recently I've seen more of the "you have to do it this way or you're wrong" debates (not pointing fingers or specifics) but I do wish that we'd all keep in mind that there often isn't a right answer to questions posed here. Even the legal ones.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[StuartMoxham]

<p>It's not just this forum that is slow the portraits and fashion forum seems even slower. For me the biggest issue I have with this forum is that it does not really welcome posting of images. Photographers should be able to start a thread and post some their "favorites from last weeks wedding". Others could join in discussing the photos or by posting photos of their own.</p>