How to re-boost interest to Photo.net?

[raoul.jasselette]

<p>I see several "old PNers" like me that complain that the person they used to follow are no longer posting here.<br>

(I am in the same situation: I follow 70 and NONE of them posted recently).</p>

<p>Why don't each of us try to get their feedback ?<br>

Why not just start to add some comment on our favorite photo of them ?<br>

If they start receiving emails with interest on their work, they may just come back to have a look...<br>

And then we may have a chance to chat with them and ask why they left...</p>

<p>If we want this site to survive, we need a clear analysis, a strategy, and to try to push it.<br>

And that's not necessarily requiring big money or big effort (or if it does, I think it should be a concerted decision. After all, we all pay our contribution, so we may also decide somehow).<br>

But the first action is to discuss this.<br>

Which is what we do here, I think.</p>

<p>We'll NEVER succeed without a community of effort.<br>

And a shared -and therefore written- strategy.</p>

 

 

[raoul.jasselette]

<blockquote>

<p>"Even when Photo.net was growing rapidly, plenty of people left. Maybe the problem is inability to attract new customers as much or more than inability to control losses."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sure. But in the case of PN, we used to have a HUGE amount of users. And most of them were quite constant in their posting/time spent/investment.</p>

<p>That's why it probably makes more sense than for newer sites to have a look in the past.<br>

Just my HO.</p>

<p>But that doesn' mean, of course, that we don't need to renew the site.<br />I just would like to make sure we are all aligned on the priorities when we do that though: What are the strength we want to focus on, what are the new functionalities we want.<br>

An obvious one for me is a quote for each comment, in a "FB like/dislike" way. That could be related to a user's contributor rating, on top of his/her photo rating...</p>

 

[dhbebb]

<p>aa</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Personally, after 15 years of being on and/or contributing to photo internet sites, I no longer feel the burning desire to help someone with "what camera should I buy?" or "what lens should I buy now?" which are typical questions that a new photographer will be interested in. How many times can one answer the same question without one's head exploding? Given all the information that has accumulated over the years that is now searchable, it is no wonder that newbies no longer post to sites like this: most people can search and find the answers without having to actually ask anyone directly. All the photo sites are the same in that they are repetitive and there is, in general, only so much one can learn. I think the main things that drive people to sites like this are good, timely, and useful reviews of new stuff: something that Photonet does not do, or does in a half-hearted manner. They usually are few and far between and way too late, or indeed just too amateurish.</p>

<p> </p>

[G-P]

<p>You are correct - photo.net does not typically do "traditional" reviews and I don't see us doing them in the near future. In the infamous words of Austin Powers..."its not my (our) bag baby" - however when we do, its usually done from the perspective of in what photographic situations would this be best suited rather than a technical review. What we do see here is more of a community review concept - which has organically grown here. Where we are gaining perspectives from those that are invested in the site on what the latest and greatest release is and what it means to them and or the purpose the equipment is supposed to serve. <br>

Take this post as an example: http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00e6sv?start=0<br>

Then this one: http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00eD49<br>

To my mind our strength is in the community providing more of a perspective from a user stand point as opposed to how it performed in the lab and interpreted by editorial. <br>

Personally - I watch video reviews from the guys over at DigitalRev which were funny, informative, insightful - then I scanned multiple sources for their thoughts on a piece of equipment, then finally searched for feedback from those that have actually purchased the item and used it - which I found here within our forums. My last stop in my purchasing research journey always seems to end in user reviews and/or discussion on it and I know I'm not alone as evidenced by posts made here on equipment.<br>

What is your path to purchase - Do you normally reference multiple sources before you buy? Do you eventually seek out advice from peers? If so, how do you do it? <br>

For now, where you see weakness, I see strength. Could we employ a full staff to create traditional reviews? We could look into it - but we'd have to make a business case for it - the cost would be significant so we'd have to tie to back to how we monetize it otherwise its a losing proposition. Near term we'd likely partner with a main stream publisher that is already doing it and test the waters there before we plunged in with both feet into full staff and a lab. Beyond any of this - it has been a real challenge for us to get our hands on equipment from the manufacturers as pre-release - truth is they view us as a community based site that provides feedback from users post release, not a technical reviewer to send equipment to pre-release. Just my two cents. </p>

 

[Robin Smith]

<p>Glenn: I not actually criticizing Photonet. I don't really need reviews for the reasons I cite above, I'm just saying that I think news and review sites by their very nature attract more hits than community sites.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>This is about the tenth <em>"Photo.net is going down hill, what do we do about."</em> discussion in the past ten years I've been a member, so why hasn't this place shut down within that time period?</p>

<p>I mean I've worked for about ten start up brick & mortar advertising support service businesses during the '80's oil boom and bust in Texas and all of them went belly up within 5 years. Of course when I worked at these places I could see this was going to happen noting the amount we were charging on the work orders.</p>

<p>Now the internet has a ton of businesses online, some selling or making goods and others like Photo.net providing information and community support for a saturated photography market, so I'm just stumped as to not only how Photo.net survived this long but also how they make payroll. You guys don't even have a brick & mortar presence or customers you have to provide CSR exchanges.</p>

<p>I'ld say consider yourself lucky Photo.net survived this long. I don't see how it helps to speculate on a business that appears to be doing just fine.</p>

<p> </p>

[G-P]

<p>No problem Robin - I was just addressing your comments about reviews. Tim its hard work - many times, thankless and often times criticized - but we love it, so here we are. I am an eternal optimist wish might be one of my flaws, but I see if differently...see there I go again. We're working hard to make photo.net better every day - does working hard always align with working smart - no, but we will keep trying. Photo.net has over 10M PV and 2.5M visitors - many read, seemingly less write - our goal is to get more engagement (writing), more content - both editorial and user and a better overall presentation with an (IMHO) improved look and feel. "You can't beat someone that never gives up." and "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"...words we live by here - so buckle up because we're taking a shot and we won't give up. </p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>Ok, Glenn, Photo.net is not going out of business, so I'm not going to worry about whether some long standing dude or dudes jumped ship and never returned. I don't miss them because I never got to know them if that's even possible to do online.</p>

<p>I didn't come to this site to check out personalities that know a thing or two about cameras. I came here to offer some help with what I know and post my images and read up on anything that might interest me. Though I have to admit I do miss Lex Jenkin's writings. Still don't know what happened to him.</p>

<p>I still don't get why any PN member would "Follow" other members in this forum. What do they expect to learn from that regarding making better photographs? You either know you're good or not and if you're not, good grief! there's plenty of information to remedy that without having to "Follow" someone.</p>

<p>I know from my ten years here there are those that aren't here to make better photos and to improve their craft. I actually think they are incapable through no fault of their own. They're here for the gear. But that gets old REAL FAST!</p>

[G-P]

<p>I miss Lex too - he is missed by many I'm sure. Moderating the Off Topic forum pushed him over the edge - it was like the wild west in there and it got out of control to the point where he had enough. In terms of business...Revenue...Canon, Nikon, Tamron, Sigma to name a few are the supporters of this site via advertising in addition to the subscription revenue we generate from power users. Expenses: Staff, content, servers, tech professionals are all expensive. Keep the ideas coming though - this is your site. </p>

[GerrySiegel]

Lex has a Facebook page. A smart fellow who had the ability to do some sweeping away of ill tempered folk. Or at least ill tempered speech. Which is easy to happen on the net. Get it off your chest, but erase it before posting has been my own technique. I look for the value in a web site. When it completely goes, then I will bid aloha. It has been a good ride for a long time.

[Landrum Kelly]

<blockquote>

<p>It has been a good ride for a long time.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>It really has, hasn't it, Gerry? Not only is it because there are some very good and/or interesting people here, but because the original conception (by Phil Greenspun) of what the site ought to be was very insightful. It cannot be all things to all people, but it can continue being what it was and still is--and perhaps more besides.</p>

<p>It is the "more" that drives Glenn, without losing what we already have.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>