Info on thumbnail pages?

Would you prefer the IC gallery thumbnail pages without any of the info currently displayed to the right of each thumbnail?

As part of our planned 2008 site upgrades, I am thinking of using larger thumbnails, 120 pixels (up from the current 85 pixels), 6 per row. All of the info currently displayed would appear with the main photo instead of with the thumbnail.

We could also create a thumbnail page "gallery view/image critique view" toggle function to easily switch between the current "IC view" of 2 thumbnails per row with info and the proposed "gallery view" of 6 thumbnails per row with no info. Both views would use the larger, 120 pixel thumbnail. Either version of the thumbnail page would lead to the same main photo view page currently used. However, we would add a "view comments" link on that page to open the comments section under the photo.

Thoughts or comments?

I like the idea of the larger thumbnails, but could you include the title as well? Many times It's the title that catches my eye, not the thumbnail itself.

I would like the photographers name on the thumbnail. I often look for peoples work and find this very useful.
Rick T

I like the idea of being able to switch to a page with info and one without info.

Wim.

I think the title and the image are the most important things to display. Sometimes, as Tim suggests, I look at an image because of the title. I think if the thumbnails were a scosh larger, it would determine if we want to really look long and lovingly at an image. When I post, I generally critique the five or so previously posted images and then go searching for photographers with whom I'm becoming familiar. I'm torn on the name issue--I could go either way and I'm curious how other folks feel.
As far as redesigning a page, I think the most important issue to resolve is this: "Who is the audience?" Is it the folks who view the pages as outsiders or is it the members of NPN? The bottom line is meeting the needs of the most important audience. Something to think about ....

Carol

Carol, good point.

The idea is that the "gallery view" option would be for those 98,000 unique visitors who surf into the NPN site every month to look at nature photos. The "IC view" (the current layout) would be for those who wish to view info with the thumbnails and/or participate in image critique. This is not an "either/or" situation, simply an idea to add an optional thumbnail page free of clutter (and with 3 times more thumbnails visible) that the viewer could easily toggle back and forth from. All of the info currently displayed with each thumbnail would be replicated on the main photo page with the full size photo.

I'd love to see 120 pixel thumbnails along with the title and photographer's name. As for the page layout, would it be possible to have that set by the user preferences? I have a large widescreen monitor so I could easily view a four up format. Someone with a smaller monitor might prefer two up.

How about a sample of the new page layout? It doesn't have to be active or link to the full size images and comments.

I like the idea of larger thumbnails, but wouldn't want to lose the image title and photographer's name. And I hope that putting lots more images on a page wouldn't be too large of a download burden for those of us stuck on dial up.

And I hope that putting lots more images on a page wouldn't be too large of a download burden for those of us stuck on dial up.

Richard makes a good point. I've only been on broadband for a couple of months so I can still sympathize with the folks on dial up. User preferences could solve this problem too. Allow the user to set the number of thumbnails per page up to a maximum to keep server bandwidth under control. Choices are good, I like having choices.

Mark said;

Allow the user to set the number of thumbnails per page up to a maximum to keep server bandwidth under control. Choices are good, I like having choices.

This will be implemented as well. Viewer will be able to select 24, 48 or 96 thumbnails per page as their default setting.

BTW, we will also be widening the gallery page format to take full advantage of 1024 X 768 screen resolution. This will also allow us to increase maximum photo size to 800 pixels. Additionally, we will allow paid members to "archive" any photo they have uploaded to the galleries. This will prevent the photo from being automatically deleted after 35 days and enable the member to build a nice portfolio via the "view all photos by photographer" link.

Jim,

Those sound like some nice enhancements.

Forgive my ignorance, but what is "IC?"

I like Mike's idea of being able to choose the layout and I like your idea of the thumbnail-only viewing page as an Option. I would continue to use the page where the info is included with the thumbnail. I often seek out images that don't have many comments and I also sometimes don't jump on the bandwagon when theres 40 or 50 comments already. Also, it's nice to know the date posted as sometimes images get brought back from months or years ago.

Looking forward to the enhancements.

Lon

IC = "Image Critique"

Personally I believe the usual sizes in many photographer's gallery indexes or photography community web image indexes are simply too small. Here on this board, larger thumbnail sizes would provide a better indication of what an image is about, thus would reduce the obvious current bias towards more colorful and graphic images. I open up a modest number of images on the index that I immediately upon seeing at 720 pixels consider such to have been a waste of time. And part of that is the result of the thumbnails not providing an adequate presentation of the larger image. On my own website, my smallest thumbnails from old 35mm slides average about the size you are suggesting a change to while my MF 6x7 slides are about 150 pixels, and my LF 4x5's about 230 pixels.

Currently the IC indexes show the image, the title, posting date, the photographer's name, the number of views, the number of comments. With the new view of 6 larger thumbnails in a row, a lot more images would simultaneously fit on a given monitor's display. That in itself is an improvement by showing more images in one view because as one drops down the list of images, there is increasingly less awareness from the audience and that is especially so once an image has dropped down below scrolling of the first page. I also like your idea of not providing any information on that default 6 per row page because the reason some obviously open images has more to do with whose image has been posted and how popular that image is. (Well maybe a limited number of characters for a title is worthwhile.) Thus the numbers of views would tend to better represent how an image is valued by the audience. Of course someone that didn't like that format could simply switch to the current viewing mode. ...David

Jim, whichever way we go, there are a few things that I'd like to mention.

1) when the additional information that's pushed from the webserver to the client browser is gone, the client browser (i.e. surfer) will be spending that extra effort (and bandwidth and webserver hits) to find out. In a sample scenario, if you have a surfer who likes to only view images posted by a particular person, then currently this activity would generate no extra load on the server. However, with a change, the surfer will be scanning through all the images posted to find out his/her favorite poster's image. I anticipate an increase in webserver hits and webserver load to atleast triple.

2) Now assume that you give end users the option of viewing the information or not - be rest assured that the end user will exercise the option, and multiple times in the same session, just for fun. This will increase the load on the webserver even more.

A couple of other people have mention having the photographer's name on the thumbnail and some have seemed not sure. I think this is important to this site. There is no doubt that we develop respect for other photographers and we look for their work. While many contributers almost need no signature for us to recognize their work I think it is generally useful. At the risk of being repetitive I think that if the name is removed from the thumbnail it lessens the familiarity of the site which I think we all enjoy.
For the sceptics let me make it clear I look at a lot of photos that I like and comment on strangers regularly. I just don't always have time to review all the photos and want to see what my web-friends are doing.
Rick T

1. I like the idea of bigger thumbnails. Now, sometimes what you get when you open the image is pretty surprising, as subtle (especially non-saturated) images do NOT show up well on the present size thumbnails.
2. If I'm understanding this right, after I get to the page that has the big picture on it, I have to click on ANOTHER link to get the comments? If so, I'm not happy with that, as every "click" means more time I have to wait. Maybe I'm confused on this, though....
3. I definitely would like to see:
- the name of the person posting the image
- title
- how many comments have been made
I'm more interested in the number of comments than the number of views, but would I suspect that's not the case for many people. I think it's important to have the name on there because many people trade comments back and forth with others, and also, as others have said, sometimes I look for specific posters, especially if I don't have much time to spend on here.
I must admit, there are times when I wish we could just get rid of the names, as I am convinced that quite a few people view images strictly based on who posted them, and only view the images of a very few people. However, I admit that I do go through the list and look for specific people for a wide variety of reasons. Like Lon, I generally specifically look for images that have few comments, and I rarely even view those images that have 25+ comments. I remember very clearly how important it was to me when I was first starting on here to get a few comments, and frankly, it's still important to me because it really helps me learn. Therefore, for me, giving and receiving comments is VERY important, and is the primary reason I'm here, because I know I'll get honest comments, and I really appreciate that!

I like the idea of larger thumbs. Often I am surprised by the quality of an image that is just not apparent by the small thumb presentation. However, I am also glad to read that I will still have the option of viewing the title and photographer's name info.

So, all in all, it sounds like a great upgrade to our on line community.

Good discussion on these pending improvements I too am all for larger thumbs. I realise the number of times an image is viewed can mean it is attractive looking in the thumbnail. However, being one of the newer and not one of the so-called proven photographers on the site, I feel this may mean my image wasn't worth commenting on. Sort of demoralizing if you let it. I'm more interested in the comments than views. I especially appreciate it when the moderators comment on my stuff. One thing I try to do but don't always see practiced is the "if you post one image, please try and comment on ten other images". I tend to seek out the thumbs with lots of views and not many comments and make a special effort to critique those. I usually don't critique the images with lots of comments but will view them. Usually everything has been said on those but will comment if the image moves me. I don't mind the photographers name next to the thumbs. I'd rather have the views/comments count show after opening the thumb. Like many, my hope in joining this community was to get honest feedback in order to move to higher levels in my photographic endeavors. Based on reactions here, I feel my work is at a medium level of general acceptance...not great but not horrible. I will feel I am progressing when I begin to get comments other than "very nice" or "nice" from the photographers I admire. I really like that the majority of the higher eschelon photographers are very generous with sharing their knowledge and techniques.

Thanks for being aware of the need for improvement on the site to Jim and all the moderators. It shows you really care.

Pam

Thanks to all for your feedback! The updates will happen in the first half of 2008 - I will keep you posted!

Additionally, we will allow paid members to "archive" any photo they have uploaded to the galleries. This will prevent the photo from being automatically deleted after 35 days and enable the member to build a nice portfolio via the "view all photos by photographer" link.

I think this is a good idea, but I also think members should also have the option to delete images at any time. As we grow and change as artists, we may or may not want our NPN "sketches" available for viewing forever.