Its been fun

I really hate that I have to write this. I have really enjoyed most of my time here at NPN and I have learned a ton from all the wonderful people and photographers here on this site. However, when, because of speaking my mind, I get banned from posting replies in a discussion forum, it is time to move on. Moreover, when I am told, in no uncertain terms, that I can no longer ask for what I need from people posting images in a critique forum to provide that person with a good critique, then it really does not make much sense to continue. Sorry, I do not agree that in a majority of cases a comprehensive critique can be made from 720px images. That is just the nature of avian photography. The fact that NPN allowed people to post 1200px images was a big reason why I joined NPN. You need that size to see the details in many of the bird images posted here. I believe I have just as much right to ask for what I need to properly critique an image as the person posting an image has in withholding information such as techs and larger versions. If, what I felt I needed was not provided I asked politely for it. Afterall, this is a critique forum. I really tried to contribute to this forum in a meaningful way, I hope I at least helped a few people improve their avian photography, in whatever small way, while I was here. You'all helped me a bunch. Take care and keep shooting. Ron B

Ron,

I really hope you reconsider not hanging around NPN anymore. I value your work and your opinion but I understand how forums can be a source of frustration. I have left a few myself because of jerks and people with thin skin looking for only back pats. I learn a ton from viewing your work and hope to see more of it in the future. Take a deep breath and please reconsider before leaving NPN.

Ron:

I will be sorry to see you leave: NPN will be less enjoyable and educational without your images and insight and I will miss both.

For what its worth I agree 100% with you about the value of seeing posted images as large as possible, and since the 1200 pixel option became available I've used it on every post I've made. I consider it part of being honest about the image, just as disclosing shooting parameters, baited or not, captive or not, setup or not, composite or not, cloned deletions or not.

NPN is and has always been a critique site, and anyone who posts here should understand that. The foundation of critique is honesty from both poster and commentator. Hiding quality issues or manipulation when posting is dishonest. Overlooking quality issues when commenting is dishonest. Saying "good image/exposure/detail/whatever" when the evidence contradicts the claim is dishonest.

Your critical comments will always be welcome on my image posts, wherever they occur in the future.

Hey Ron...

As far as being banned from posting replies, it looks like the "Posting Larger Images" thread has been locked--there is no reply box for me either. Seems like a strange way to respond to a controversial topic, by blocking further discussion... (if that is what is being done.)

I agree wholeheartedly that it's hard to do a good critique on avian images at only 720 pixels. The level of detail and sharpness is critical, and it's much easier to judge in the larger images.

Anyway, I will be extremely sorry if you leave. Your work is among the best here and I've already learned a great deal from you. I appreciate your willingness to share your techniques.

There is so, so much more to an image than detail and sharpness.... all of which can be critiqued from a smaller image. Perhaps those that do not post a larger image are looking for critiques on those other, IMO more important, aspects of an image such as composition, story, emotional impact, lighting, etc. Perhaps you can focus your critiques in those areas?

Please read my previous response in the thread in question. The thread was locked because there's really no need to discuss the following points any further:

1. The posting of the larges files is entirely optional at the sole discretion of the OP
2. Because of point #1, asking the OP to explain why they haven't posted a larger photo is a bit ridiculous
3. As we have done for the 10 years NPN has been online, critique the image based on the information presented. This also includes the size of the file.
4. No one has been "banned" from anything. There is no need for dramatics over this simple clarification of the posting guidelines.

I hope this clarifies the situation.

I hope that you reconsider, Ron. I've really enjoyed your posts and comments. I've learned much from you. For myself, I like any criticism and am quite able to defend myself if I feel it's unwarranted. I've not always agreed with your comments but I've always found them to be very valuable. I wonder what proportion of the members of NPN are supportive of this level of censorship. I can live with it because the website remains an excellent one (and I hope that you will decide to also).....even though I think it will muzzle some helpful criticism.

I wonder what proportion of the members of NPN are supportive of this level of censorship.

Can you explain what you mean by this?

Let's start from the beginning....

The avian moderators had been receiving complaints from members that they felt pressured by certain other members to post the optional larger files. The moderators responded to those voicing concern that the larger files are optional and if for what ever reason they do not wish to post them, that no other person should make them feel uncomfortable not doing so.

This is where it started - it's not about "censorship" or being "banned." It's a simple clarification of the posting guidelines and ensuring that the site ramins enjoyable for all to participate on.

BTW, if those requiring the larger file to post a critique wish to do so, they can certainly contact the OP off line and request one. Remember - the main reason some do not post the large files on an Internet forum is for the fear of unauthorized use. A 1200 pixel/500kb file certainly is much more usable for unauthorized purposes than a 720/200.

Please respect the wishes of other members and do not make a big deal over this!

Ron, I love your work and will be very let down if you leave over this . I too could not respond to the original discussion and was wondering why. When I first joined here, I had already had images stolen from other sites and found images of mine on other people"s sites. That was the reason I first was not posting the larger images. I then reconsidered and put my logo in a hard to erase place but got negative comments on that as well. I do find that the larger image is a good way to critique as we all know that the smaller the image the sharper it may apear usually. When I posted my red shoulder last week or so it was the larger image that showed the detail and sharpness better so it actually helped in getting the positive critique i believe that image deserved So.. Silly little communication problem, please can we all still be friends and continue to learn from one another here as it has helped me immensly as well as Ron personally has.

Jim, when you stop us from asking in a critique for a large version image, that's censorship in my book. I understand that you are doing it because some members are very sensitive to such "public pressure". I wonder what proportion of members are that sensitive. It seems super sensitive to me. It's worth commenting on because you are losing one valuable member and you are potentially opening the door to others with new super sensitivities. Sorry, but I think it is a big deal for these reasons and, more generally, because it begins to (in my view anyway) unreasonably constrain criticism here.
P.S.: How about opening up the "large version image topic" in this forum too! (I'm not sure I want to comment on it but I sure think that any member should be able to).

A huge thank you to Jim, Nate and Nick. They fielded the question, posted a clear response and moved on. Clearly some felt uncomfortable posting larger images. While I personally have no issue posting larger images, some people do. Let's not get dramatic here. There is no censorship going on here. That's a pretty strong word with some very negative connotations. NPN has been, and will continue to be a friendly, informative environment for learning provided people don't start throwing around assertions that are not based in facts. Thanks again to the Avian moderators and JIm. All of the facts are on the table. Time to go make some images.

Jim, when you stop us from asking in a critique for a large version image, that's censorship in my book.

Steve - I don't believe anyone is stopping you or censoring you. They are simply asking you to stop, as apparently it has gotten to the point where some feel asking for larger images is inappropriate and/or annoying. They are just setting out some manners for these forums, and asking that you please critique what's presented. No different than asking someone to refrain from being belligerent, or engaging in an off-topic argument.

As an aside, if Jim wanted to, he's welcome to actually censor whatever he wants. It's his site. I know that he takes that very seriously and is doing what's best for everyone's enjoyment and usefulness of the site. He chooses not to censor by allowing this discussion and leaving the previous one posted for information, even though it's locked from further comment. That, IMO, hardly rises to the level of what most would consider censorship.

I have to admit, the more I think about it, the more confused I get.

The way I see it, there are three types of standard requests for a larger photo:
1. "I can't critique the sharpness or detail of this post without a larger version." If I'm not mistaken, Nate or Nick said this is still ok in the previous thread.

2. Telling a new user "Hey, you can post a larger version too." I'm assuming this is acceptable, since some people don't know, and sometimes they respond by saying they tried but couldn't get it to work. In this case, they then get the help they need.

3. The congratulatory "Hey, this is great, post a larger version so we can really enjoy it!" This version seems to be the one that could be interpreted as pressuring? Seems pretty harmless to me.

Anyway, I wonder if when people don't post the techs for their shots if we should stop asking them to post those too. After all, they might be sensitive about them.

I have only been a member for a few month, and I get the feeling there might be more to this then just the question of posting larger images. However, myself I have only included one or maybe two larger images since most of what I have posted has challenged my "posting skills". As I have stated before I am not of the computer generation no matter how hard I try. To me this seems to be completely at the discretion of the photographer posting the images. I have had one or two request for a larger image, which I don't recall doing. I have seen some posting which at the smaller size raise questions which the larger image responds to, and I appreciate the effort to post larger. I have enjoyed Ron's comments and hope he will remain active with NPN. No one should feel pressured to post a larger image, but IMHO should be pleased that members are so impressed with their photo that they would like to see it larger. To me a far more important issue is the lack of technical information and the situational information (the story of how the shot was made). This data to me is more important than size in order to have an understanding of the what and how the photo was made. Let's not spoil a good thing, there is room for large and small.

Hi Brian,
You are mistaken on point 1. What I said was "If a person posts a small version of a regular photo (let's say 500 pixels - or anything less than the 720 pixel maximum) I think it's fine to say "I'd like to see it posted larger - at the 720 pixel maximum." I make this comment on a regular basis. I agree with you that it makes sense to say "at this size, I don't think IQ can be judged adequately" for such small images."

I'll have to say I did not see this coming. I ask for a larger images all the time for two reasons. One, I'm old and my eyes are not what they used to be so I need a larger file to make an good comment on all aspects of the image. Two, 1200 px @ 72 dpi is really not that large. Someone said it could be lifted off the site and used? Used for what? Its not a large enough file to publish in print so who cares? I've worked for newspapers for the past 25 years and I am employed right now as the photo editor at the CQ/Roll Call political new services for the past 10 years and if a photo came into my desk for newsprint use that size it would be turned down. It might make the grade for web use but it is not large enough for newsprint. I know of no agency, paper or magazine that would except that size and I have sold images to all of the major news publcations in the US.You post the larger file so people can really see the image and make a solid critique of the image. If you are concerned about your image being stolen then the internet is the wrong place to put it! I come here for the criticism not the pat on the back. I want to become a better avain photographer and you do that by having thick skin and removing your ego from the process.

I guess I'm wondering how many members have been offended by the polite suggestion that they post larger images in the future versus the number who have been offended by these new "guidelines"...

Actually, 1200 pixels will reproduce nicely at quarter to half page size (4-5 inches on the longest side). It is a size I have sold a fair number of images at. Personally, I would be a bit hesitant to post a file at that size, partly because some of my income depends on control of my images.

Image critique and nature photography has been what this site has always been about. You judge what is in front of you, not what you want to be in front of you. Would it be nice at times to have a larger image? Sure, and that is what the 1200 pixel option is for. But I don't consider it to be part of why I comment on an image and since I won't post at that size, I won't ask someone else to do so.

I've been involved in some form on this website since nearly day 1 (actually, about day 14) and censorship is definitely a wrongly applied word. Jim has made an effort to let threads go as they may, even when it gets a bit heated. The very few times he has stepped in has been because it was needed.

I do think this has really blown out of control. My initial post was just to inform new members , or whoever wanted to read it, that NOT posting larger files is just as acceptable as posting them.
Anyone on the gallery can see the option that says "Upload an optional Larger .jpg Photo (1200 pixels/500kb maximum) " .
No rule on this site says this is mandatory.
Like I have said earlier, I love seeing larger images, and for the longest time now , I include a bigger image with my own photos, as does Nate and many others.
I hope we can all get on with enjoying the many wonderful photos posted in Avian and the rest of NPN and get over this little hurdle.
When people start generalizing and accusing others of disclosing or not disclosing cloning ( which incidentally has nothing to do with the topic presented here ) then things end up resorting to schoolyard behavior.
If someone feels that strongly about it, then please address that concern in another seperate topic.
And Ron, I'm sorry you feel that you have to leave because of all this . We have conversed many times in private and I thought I had convinced you to stay.

As a note, it is NEVER our (NPN staff) intention to make someone feel that they are no longer welcome - quite the opposite, matter of fact. The same applies in this case.

I do not believe that anyone has acted in bad form or should be made to feel that way. As my inbox is the final destination for all NPN inquiries, occassionally guidelines have to be addressed. Such was the case here - nothing out of the ordinary.

Ultimately, our goal is to make NPN enjoyable for all of our members, regardless of their skill level or experience. Without a doubt, they benefit from those who post excellent photography and who take the time to comment on the work of others. Ron and all of the other talented photographers who post here should be thanked for their participation - both in posting photos and commenting on them.

I hope our explanation of this issue has answered the questions raised. Again, our sincere thanks to all for your participation.

I hesitate to jump in here as the "log in my eye" has not kept me from seeing "the mote" in someone else's. I have been guilty of not seeing things I might have picked up in a larger version. I have been guilty of asking for a larger version. I have let some obvious things I see slide by when everyone else is shouting "bravo! bravo!"

Personally, I post larger and smaller. I am a hobbyist and I do not intend to make money (although I have been pleased to sell photos in the past). The point is, while it angers me when someone uses my image without asking, I can live with it, and the opportunity to learn or impart knowledge outweighs that consideration. I can completely understand anyone in the photography business taking precautions (such as not posting larger), and I am on their side. I hope I have been sensitive to the issue for various individuals who have said they feel uncomfortable posting large.

I do not think any censorship is being applied. My feeling is we are all under a pretty big tent, with different motivations, bents and intents for taking pictures. To me, this has come to mean some restraint and good manners in critiquing and commenting, I admit it hasn't always been that way, as it has always been easier for me to be thin-skinned than to keep a stiff upper lip. But what I have come to realize is that not all critiques and comments are good or valid, and not all of them are fair. But they all have been asked for by me. So, in conclusion, as long as restraint is practiced on one side or the other of the fence, I am determined to be a happy camper.

I agree with Jim that it would be unfortunate if anyone decided to quit over this issue.

Ron,

On occasion I have suggested that members post a larger version in the future and explained the benefits of doing so which is for better evaluation of critical sharpness and details.

I have also said I would have enjoyed seeing a larger version to savor the details. Fortunately some of those people have posted larger versions later like Cheryl where I could see, savor and enjoy the impact of seeing the details & critical sharpness.

There have been times I have suggested to a new member that they could post a larger version if they wanted to.

I will make no apologies for any of those suggestions.

Making a suggestion to another member about posting a larger image is no different than suggesting I would like to see a version that is cropped different. I have never felt pressured to provide an image that is cropped different and I have only done that when I wanted to.

I have not seen anyone make a suggestion about posting a larger version in an insulting, demeaning or demanding way, the requests and/or suggestions that I have seen about posting a larger version have always been done with respect & politeness.

The ability to post a larger version is not recent, it started on October 27th of 2008, some 15 months ago.

Since that time I believe I have posted one Osprey in the Weekly Challenge gallery where I did not provide the larger version. I had previously worked the image up for my web site, I was extremely busy at the time and I posted it without a larger version. A few people said they would have liked to have seen it larger, and because I had left my ego at the door as suggested on this site's guidelines, I never felt like I was under any pressure or obligation to provide the larger version what so ever.

I joined NPN to get feedback on my images, positive, negative or indifferent to improve my photographic skills. I also joined to help others when I can with by sharing any knowledge or technical expertise I might have to offer. I believe I have accomplished both those goals.

Everyone who makes a comment or gives a critique here is giving the person posting an image a gift. They have used their valuable time, they have made an effort to be of help and have done that freely.

Ron, I will be very sorry to see you go both for the valuable information on bird species, your technical skills & knowledge that you have shared freely with everyone here and because I will miss seeing your images here on this site.

But I believe I understand how you feel.

Ron B. -

I hope you will reconsider. I've learned a great deal from your photos posted here, and even more from your comments on my posts and others' posts. I value your contributions a great deal, and would miss them very much.

All helpful virtual communities have rules, and the application of the rules always generates friction. I've chafed under NPN's rules from time to time. Part of the friction arises because there's only a single channel of communication here; all of the non-verbal elements are lost. That's 60-90% of the total information. It's particularly important because non-verbal elements are the cues we use to adjust our messages in mid-communication. Another reason friction arises is that we are all of us emotionally invested in our work, we're passionate about it. And that's both good - it drives us to better work - and bad - we are criticizing each other's babies.

I can offer two suggestions: (1) all of us can do better if we communicate - politely - to someone who has caused us offense, via email, before going to a moderator; and (2) cultivate a thick skin, operate from the assumption no member of this community intentionally gives offense.

I have been continually amazed by the politeness, courtesy and appropriateness of messages at NPN. I hate to see anything disrupt what's a pretty amazing virtual community.

I just looked at this thread and the other, and don't see an issue. Why NPN is the only forum that I regularly follow is because there is little public cat fighting, ego and all those other things that plague most other sites. The moderators generally do a great job.

Ron, I hope you don't go. We would miss your excellent images very very much. I have learned a lot from your posts.