Posted by Varina Patel on March 14, 2009 at 12:15 PM
Just a little reminder to everyone - we're missing you in the Anonymous Gallery. The idea got a lot of support in the beginning - and we had some really nice posts and comments. But lately, things have been pretty slow.
Come over and post a photo - or ten. :) And leave a few comments!
Thanks everyone!
Varina
Posted by Jim Erhardt on March 14, 2009 at 12:35 PM
I had some reservations about the gallery when it first was suggested, and im not surprised by the drop off in interest. I think theres some merit to the idea, just not sure how to make it work. I tried posting a couple shots, both got 1/4 the comments i would have got in an 'open' gallery (which is somewhat of a detterent) but more importantly, i dont think the comments i received were any different than what i would have got if i had posted "non-anonymously". And, posting 'openly' offers a lot of advantages: i can engage in open discussion with the commentors without "worrying" about giving my identity away. Personally, I dont see how having one's name attatched to an image should make the slightest difference in how one critiques a shot, but i realize that is being somewhat idealistic and doesnt always reflect the realities. Well, ill try to participate a bit more--good luck!
I think the problem is that you still have to pick an 'open' gallery when posting to the anonymous gallery. If I can only post one landscape photo, will I post in ESS or in anonymous? Probably ESS as I get more feedback right now. If we could select 'Anonymous' itself as a category, I think we would see more posts (then people could put up two images of the same category at a time).
When it comes to posting on online galleries for me it is all about getting exposure for your work as much as getting feedback. I suspect most forum activity is related to increasing your exposure...more then getting feedback. If this was true, then the combination of low exposure and low feedback does not help the gallery.
I agree that Sam's suggestion may increase the posting to the gallery, but will it solve the problem of getting more exposure? I am unclear on that.
My suggestion is to put the photos marked "anonymous" in the same gallery as they were meant to be. This would create same exposure and perhaps the same critiques as the rest of the gallery is getting. Perhaps an easier way to implement (from coding perspective) may be to make all post on the first page of all galleries anonymous. Only when they go to the second page would they have their owners displayed.
Thanks.
-Jay
Posted by Jim Erhardt on March 15, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Just as an FYI in regards to some functionality you may not be aware of...
To post a photo in the Anonymous gallery, you check the Anonymous Gallery box. At any time after you post the photo, you can use the Edit link and uncheck the box, which will move it to the standard gallery with your identity listed. You may want to try leaving it in the Anonymous gallery for a day or two, then uncheck the box and move it into the standard gallery. This way, you get the best of both worlds.
Would it be possible to have photos posted in the main galleries and have the anonymous option simply remove details about who posted it? That would seem to make more sense than a separate gallery.If they then wanted to show who they were, they could just un-check the button.
When it comes to posting on online galleries for me it is all about getting exposure for your work as much as getting feedback.
What a refreshingly honest statement, which may well encapsulate what's behind the problem of the Anonymous Gallery's evident low rate of participation. If the prime motivation of the majority of image posters--or even a very large minority of image posters--on this site is exposure, or the showcasing of images, rather than (presumably) more frank, "single blind" (not double blind because the critiques themselves do have names attached) the last thing one would expect to see is a large number of anonymous image uploads. In that respect, the whole concept of the gallery might be engaged in a perpetual uphill battle with human nature.
On the other hand, Jim's instructions sound like an antidote in the event that there really is an interest in blind postings--even temporary ones--by a significant number of users of this site.
Posted by David Chauvin on March 16, 2009 at 7:41 AM
One way to get more views for the anonymous postings would be to have them show when "All Photos" is selected. As it now stands, the only way to get to the posts is from the pulldown. It's not even listed in the main list section of gallery headings.
My preference would be to have the post in the main topic gallery (ES&S, Avian, etc) but have the option to be anonymous.
Posted by Pam Colander on March 16, 2009 at 1:54 PM
I think it's important to keep this gallery in whatever format works best because it gives everyone a fighting chance at some feedback. Personally, I have received much better critiques there than in any other gallery. I have always felt that an image in any gallery should get a response from the moderator(s) at the very least. Most are very good about this but a few are not.
Since I started participating regularly, there are several things I've noticed about comments. There are people on here who seem to get more comments than anyone else, regardless of what they post. This comes down to name recognition. The more people know you, the more likely they are to click on your post in the first place, thus equaling more comments. For the most part, this makes sense. You've posted a lot, or a lot of great images, or a lot of critiques, whatever - people expect they will enjoy your photo based solely on your name as opposed to the thumbnail (or a combination thereof).
In the Anonymous gallery, without a recognizable style in the tiny thumbnail this name advantage is lost. Take it as you will, but this tells us two things. One; traffic is lower there. This accounts for some lack of comments. Two; without your name, people are less interested in who, and more interested in the thumbnail / # of current comments. It's possible this could lead to 'better' critiques, as the 'atta boy', 'great shot' mentality of friends and participants is diminished.
Having to rely entirely on the merits of a small thumbnail is obviously going to lead to less comments being posted. Sad in a way, but true. I'm "guilty" of this, though I don't think it's wrong, just normal expectation fulfillment.
Hope this all makes sense and isn't too redundant, it was hard to put in to words.
Discussion
11 repliesAnonymous Gallery. The idea got a lot of support in the beginning - and we had some really nice posts and comments. But lately, things have been pretty slow.
Come over and post a photo - or ten. :) And leave a few comments!
Thanks everyone!
Varina
I agree that Sam's suggestion may increase the posting to the gallery, but will it solve the problem of getting more exposure? I am unclear on that.
My suggestion is to put the photos marked "anonymous" in the same gallery as they were meant to be. This would create same exposure and perhaps the same critiques as the rest of the gallery is getting. Perhaps an easier way to implement (from coding perspective) may be to make all post on the first page of all galleries anonymous. Only when they go to the second page would they have their owners displayed.
Thanks.
-Jay
To post a photo in the Anonymous gallery, you check the Anonymous Gallery box. At any time after you post the photo, you can use the Edit link and uncheck the box, which will move it to the standard gallery with your identity listed. You may want to try leaving it in the Anonymous gallery for a day or two, then uncheck the box and move it into the standard gallery. This way, you get the best of both worlds.
What a refreshingly honest statement, which may well encapsulate what's behind the problem of the Anonymous Gallery's evident low rate of participation. If the prime motivation of the majority of image posters--or even a very large minority of image posters--on this site is exposure, or the showcasing of images, rather than (presumably) more frank, "single blind" (not double blind because the critiques themselves do have names attached) the last thing one would expect to see is a large number of anonymous image uploads. In that respect, the whole concept of the gallery might be engaged in a perpetual uphill battle with human nature.
On the other hand, Jim's instructions sound like an antidote in the event that there really is an interest in blind postings--even temporary ones--by a significant number of users of this site.
My preference would be to have the post in the main topic gallery (ES&S, Avian, etc) but have the option to be anonymous.
Since I started participating regularly, there are several things I've noticed about comments. There are people on here who seem to get more comments than anyone else, regardless of what they post. This comes down to name recognition. The more people know you, the more likely they are to click on your post in the first place, thus equaling more comments. For the most part, this makes sense. You've posted a lot, or a lot of great images, or a lot of critiques, whatever - people expect they will enjoy your photo based solely on your name as opposed to the thumbnail (or a combination thereof).
In the Anonymous gallery, without a recognizable style in the tiny thumbnail this name advantage is lost. Take it as you will, but this tells us two things. One; traffic is lower there. This accounts for some lack of comments. Two; without your name, people are less interested in who, and more interested in the thumbnail / # of current comments. It's possible this could lead to 'better' critiques, as the 'atta boy', 'great shot' mentality of friends and participants is diminished.
Having to rely entirely on the merits of a small thumbnail is obviously going to lead to less comments being posted. Sad in a way, but true. I'm "guilty" of this, though I don't think it's wrong, just normal expectation fulfillment.
Hope this all makes sense and isn't too redundant, it was hard to put in to words.