Posted by Jack Garrett on October 1, 2010 at 10:25 AM
Thought I would post this in case any non members hadn't seen the new rules coming up, effective November 1st. There is a post at the top of this forum that explains new rules for posting images and comments in the forums and galleries. It contains what you can and can't do as a non member. I know there are a lot of people who come to this and other forums and I have always appreciated your comments and postings. Hopefully you would consider membership so we can continue our relationship. This site has been a tremendous help in my growth as a photographer...the critiques have made me much better than I ever thought I could be and I grow with every new post. I hope to continue seeing all of you!!
Disclaimer: I am not on the staff or membership committee, just a member who appreciates what this site has provided for me over the years.
Posted by Mark Rewald on October 1, 2010 at 12:06 PM
Jack question: So to post you need to have a valid "membership" or a valid registration to post after Nov 1st?
Posted by Jack Garrett on October 1, 2010 at 12:14 PM
That is the way I understand it Mark. To post images or add comments you will need to have a paid membership.
I posted this topic so non members would be aware of the coming changes. I would defer all questions to either the moderators or the contacts provided in the new rules page. I don't want to give out wrong information.
Posted by Bill Brennan on October 1, 2010 at 1:12 PM
Thanks Jack for the heads up. Your heartfelt comments about the value of this site are "well said".
Bill Brennan
Posted by Todd Caudle on October 1, 2010 at 4:33 PM
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Posted by John Mumaw on October 1, 2010 at 5:01 PM
" This site has been a tremendous help in my growth as a photographer...the critiques have made me much better than I ever thought I could be and I grow with every new post"
Hear, hear! This place has been worth every nickel of the price.
Posted by Jack Garrett on October 1, 2010 at 5:33 PM
Todd, get back out in the field and teach those workshop students how to shoot Mesa Arch and Deadhorse Point!!!! Oooops..you are in Ouray.
Yeah. What Jack and John said. After lurking on this board for a couple years I made the decision to divert funds from renewing my subscription for OP to membership and the return on investment in good information and inspiration has been a hundredfold.
Posted by Kurt Budde on October 1, 2010 at 6:38 PM
Judging by a few emails I've gotten I think my comments have been misinterpreted, so I've removed them. At no point was my intention to disparage NPN, on the contrary - as far as I'm concerned, NPN is worth 3x the price of admission. My only fear is that people may not have the chance to realize that with the new system in place - that's all I was trying to say.
So, if there's anyone reading this thread that isn't sure - do it!
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on October 1, 2010 at 11:32 PM
I'm a paid member and intend to renew my membership. However, I agree with Kurt. I certainly can't see the benefit of restricting even text posts to paid members only. I believe it will eliminate valuable contributions that benefit all members, especially in the regional forums.
These new rules may generate additional revenue in the short term from those who are already participating. I just wonder how it will affect long term membership growth by turning off potential new members. I doubt that I would have joined under the new rules.
Posted by Jack Garrett on October 2, 2010 at 12:37 AM
I don't know how they would respond but you could use the contact portion of the rules page and voice your opinion...I have mixed feelings on this myself. I was a lurker for several months before joining. I've always appreciated critiques from everyone, member or not. I have a couple friends who's work I feel is tops and they are non members who post occasionally and I doubt I will see them again. This is a difficult situation. Obviously there is a reason they are changing the rules...maybe there were a lot of complaints.
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on October 2, 2010 at 2:19 AM
Jack, I did also voice my opinion with Jim.
I doubt the decision will be modified at this time.
It will be interesting to see if it sticks in the long run.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on October 2, 2010 at 7:58 AM
Bill, we got your email and appreciate your input.
There was no doubt in our mind that there would be some push-back on this, especially in the regional forums where there is a significantly higher concentration of non-paying participants.
Believe or not, this decision was actually based on steady feedback from the NPN membership that we have been receiving for years. The basic message in this feedback was this - "if I can post photos, get critiques, ask questions and learn everything there is to learn on NPN without becoming a member, why should I pay?"
As you know, other than a simple affiliate account with B&H that represents less than 5% of our total income, NPN is wholly supported by paid membership. We have resisted and will continue to resist inquiries for paid advertising, which we get on a weekly basis. Without a doubt if we really wanted to drastically increase cash flow, that would be the model to use.
Even without posting privileges, the information contained on this site - between the monthly articles, the photos and critiques, and the information exchanged in these forums - is hugely valuable to anyone who has an interest in nature photography. Each month NPN receives on average 100,000 unique visitors, all of whom who have access to this information and learning opportunity.
NPN takes time and money to run. Donna and I spend at least 15 hours a week taking care of customer service, over seeing site activities, working with our server administrator to keep everything running smoothly and updating content. In fact, this weekend is time to place the next new edition of articles online - the 127th edition to be exact. This typically takes me a good part of the day to do.
It is mostly a labor of love. Those who support these efforts (and our cost of operations) with a $49 yearly membership make this site possible. It only seems fair that they should be the ones to reap the lion's share of the benefits.
Posted by Roger Rouch on October 2, 2010 at 12:21 PM
For what ever another opinion is worth, Jim has an excellent point that even without the ability to post, there is a huge volume of free information availible for non-members. It is much better than anything in OP or other photo publications, plus, no overwhelming ads and no waste of paper resources. That alone is worth the price of admission, IMHO. There are other web sites that offer free postings and critiques. They just aren't as excellent.
I'm far from a prolific poster, and will think twice each time my membership comes up for renewal. It is a chunk of change But for the time being, I think I get an excellent return for my membership fees, if for no other reason as a contribution to keep the NPN active and the quality high.
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on October 2, 2010 at 12:36 PM
Thanks for your response, Jim. I do appreciate the lack of advertising. Obviously, I have no idea of your cash flow needs to keep this site running and justify your time.
However, I still feel that restricting non-paid members to text posting without images would accomplish most if not all of your goals, still keep their valuable contributions, and provide a better introduction for new members. Being able to post images for critique should be more than enough to answer the "why should I pay" complaints. Just my uninformed opinion.
Posted by Kurt Budde on October 2, 2010 at 3:23 PM
For a little context, we're talking $4/month. For the ability to not only view, but interact with, be coached by, and receive personal feedback from the best amateur and professional photogs on the planet. Seriously. $4. For people who are spending $1000s on camera gear
If this drives people away, then they don't understand the value they're getting. And I don't think one has to have the ability to post images and comments to recognize the incremental value that NPN offers. For somewhat less $$, someone can get a subscription to a print magazine with garishly over-processed images, yet another article on how to shoot like Ansel Adams, and absolutely no possibility of dialogue and instruction. And peppered with more advertising than content. Here, for free, that person can still view far more images, of far greater quality and view/learn from the dialogue and critiques relating to how those images were made. And much more. With no intrusive ads.
I just realized that, after many years of not having to renew my subscription (presumably due to being a former moderator) my free ride has ended. When I think about shelling out $50, well, of course it's $50 that I'd rather hang on to. When I think about what value I'm getting for my $50... it's the least expensive investment I make in continuing to grow as a photographer.
Posted by Kurt Budde on October 2, 2010 at 7:35 PM
See my edit above*
Posted by Jack Garrett on October 2, 2010 at 8:53 PM
What do I get f.or $49.00 a year?? I've been thinkng about this for a couple days since I posted this topic. For $49/year I get to banter with Todd Caudle. I get to email other members and get directions to offbeat and unknown locations that they've posted. I get to sit down with Caz and find out how to start up my own gallery. I get to ask Erik Stensland how he processed a particular image. I get an email from John Mumaw with specific directions on how to add "pop" to my images. I get opportunities be be in art shows. I get to go to the annual shindig. Through the forum I had an opportunity to meet and be personally coached by Chip Phillips..one of the finest photographers on any of the forums. The free books I got from Bret Edge, Nat Coalsen and Grant Collier...Thanks guys! I get the satisfaction of looking back at the first image I ever posted here and see the HUGE difference in my images now. I get to be blessed by friendships I've made with the other photographers I've met through here. I could go on and on but I think I've made my point. That is a pretty small investment for such a large return.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on October 3, 2010 at 6:10 AM
Kurt, you've got mail.
Posted by Chris Whitted on October 5, 2010 at 11:50 PM
I was very surprised to learn about the new policies, and unfortunately it seems that NPN has continued to move in a different and more exclusive direction than really interests me. I certainly don't begrudge NPN management's decisions to run the site as they best see fit or membership desires, and well do I know and respect the time, effort, and expense of running a site like this. I'm not posting to argue or debate the merits and specifics of the changes, though I am disappointed that Kurt felt the need to remove his original comments - I read and quite agreed with many of them (mostly strongly with the view that Bill has reiterated), and it seems sad that all viewpoints and opinions couldn't be freely expressed.
I'm not a professional as many of the regulars are, nor so active a hobbyist that a paid membership really makes sense for me. I've enjoyed my time here and the interactions with all of you; it's been a fun (if off and on again) five years. It's been my pleasure until now to contribute even as a non(paid)-member at least a little bit to that 'wealth of freely available information'.
Just wanted to take the opportunity to say farewell while I still could, and maybe I'll see you out there!
Posted by Chris Rice on October 6, 2010 at 1:38 PM
Jim and Donna work hard to maintain the users, hosting, domain registration, and ongoing database cleanup, which all take time and money. In my opinion, I think they are doing the right thing by requiring members who want to actively engage in the forum to pay a yearly fee. As with any creative marketing campaign, art exhibit, or professional critique, you must 'pay-to-play', and I consider NPN to be all of the above, indirectly or implicit.
One thing I would like to remark upon is the forum's goals, which have lately appeared to be a little disjointed. I have mentioned this in a previous post, one by which I attempted to convey that critiques/advice were seriously lacking, and that people shall not feel the need to 'pat on the back'. If you see an image that could use a critique, go ahead and be honest, and take the time to really critique it! Don't simply write 'Looks Great!' or insert the characters. Why? Because it does not state why the image looks great or deserves a toast. Furthermore, the image may need some serious work, but you don't know the guy and you don't want to insult him. Well, by not giving him a proper critique, you've insulted him even more. We collectively get better if solid critiques are shared.
What I do want to say is that I have enjoyed some of the discussions and talking with most of you, who are very talented behind the lens. What I can say, from being in the business of photography, if you want to break out and use it as a source of revenue, you have to GET IT and WANT IT. The photography is not going to sell itself, unless you are the you-know-whos out there who put most of their time and effort into marketing themselves. Remember, you are selling YOU, not the artwork. Also, remember that it takes money to make it - so never skimp on materials, and that includes framing, because the presentation is half of the product. Experiment with different styles, and don't follow the leaders. For instance, the Duraplaq, while a cheap and popular method, is now everywhere. This is something to consider when doing an artshow or a gallery exhibit.
Finally, I want to mention that I hope the forum improves once the new regulations take shape. Moderators should have more control over the content, and filter off irrelevant postings and heated discussion. One thing I think we all don't realize from time to time is that the forum is public, and lord knows how many visitors we have on a daily basis. Good moderation in conjunction with on-topic subject matter makes us all appear more professional.
With that said, I will not be participating in the forum anymore, primarily due to the fact that I don't have much interest in photography right now. I have emabarked on a new business venture which is completely consuming me (a very good thing!).
I want to say thanks to Jim and Donna, and everyone who has been an inspiration. It was great to get to know alot of you at the gallery, shindigs, and in the field. I wish you all the best, and hope you all continue to capture the natural beauty of this amazing part of the country we are lucky to live in. I'm sure we'll cross paths again!
Au revoir, and safe passages everyone. - CR
Posted by Kurt Budde on October 6, 2010 at 2:47 PM
and it seems sad that all viewpoints and opinions couldn't be freely expressed.
I'd just like to clarify that at no point was I asked, in any way shape or form by anyone, to take my comments down. Jim Erhardt told me quite the opposite, saying that they appreciate seeing others viewpoints on any and all relevant issues.
Posted by Chris Rice on October 6, 2010 at 5:47 PM
Kurt, why don't you repost what you said originally? I think as a paying member of the forum, you ought to bring forth your concerns and praises so that you're not continuing to see the same stuff on here. As aformentioned, I said that one of my concerns was the lackluster critiquing (I am guilty too), and how we ought to potentially have another forum exclusively for serious critiques, and one for general RMNP discussion. Of course this would mean more action from Jim and Donna, but it's an idea that I think would work, but it may also attract more users to it, I included.
My intentions are by no means to stir stuff up, but as a photographer in a photography community, I desire solid feedback on my images if I post them. I have always rec'd decent critiques from you guys when I ask for it, but I'm always looking for more discussion. I suppose I was wrong to think I would get it all here on NPN. I would also like to mention that I am equally as guilty by NOT posting anything sometimes, because the thread has been peppered with 'atta boy' and 'way to go' and 'just what Jon said'.... I just can't follow that lead.
Of course, the other side of the equation is, maybe some folks don't know how to critique, and that's fine too. It's not easy, and you have to be able to think outside of the rule box and consider all options. If you are eager to say 'Ditto', don't bother posting at all. Bring a serious critique to the table, and then ask why, how, when, where... That is the beauty of this art; its perception, abstractness, and discourse that can be had by it. Embrace this good stuff, don't dismiss it off because Jack Dykinga or Rodney Lough do it in some fashion. Forget about those guys and focus on YOUR work. only YOU are the individual that can create a vision far beyond the capabilities of those two men.
Oh, I wanted to say to Jack Garrett - thanks for starting some good discussion on this topic, and I hope it helps the forum be sustatinable and worthy. I did want to mention something I noticed that you posted in a reply though, that needs merit. And that is, you sat down with Neil Corman & CAZ to discuss the nuances of gallery ownership; just thought it was appropriate to point this out as Neil is a member of NPN and has been successful at running a very nice gallery alone. Furthermore he has done lots of good things for the Denver photographic community at large. Thank you.
Take care everyone.....
Posted by Chris Whitted on October 6, 2010 at 7:45 PM
Didn't mean to imply you had been asked to do so Kurt, so sorry if I did. It was more that you had gotten feedback from others that made you feel that you needed to make the edit.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on October 6, 2010 at 8:01 PM
Chris said;
As aformentioned, I said that one of my concerns was the lackluster critiquing (I am guilty too), and how we ought to potentially have another forum exclusively for serious critiques, and one for general RMNP discussion.
There's a lot of things in the works here. FWIW, one of the things I personally struggle with is an awfully demanding full time job as a product manager for a publicly-owned manufacturing company here in the northeast, which sucks up 55 hours of my life every week. By the time I get home, I'm pretty well shot and it takes a lot to muster the time and energy to work on NPN during my "off" time - but I do.
Not to digress, but we could certainly do just as you suggested, and in fact I think it's a good idea. We would keep this forum for discussion and then create a RMNP IC gallery - just like the main IC galleries - for that purpose. Photos posted in it would appear (of course) in the RMNP gallery and also in the All Photos Gallery, so there would be exposure outside of the regional forum.
If this is something the RMNP members would like, we can do.
Kurt: By your act of pulling comments and pointed out that you had several emails about your comments you were effectively saying that pressure was applied. I think it would have been better to have left the comments than to introduce doubt. Who drops comments when they obtain a positive response? I did not find them to be offensive, but rather I thought it was good to hear a different point of view.
Chris said, "One thing I would like to remark upon is the forum's goals, which have lately appeared to be a little disjointed. I have mentioned this in a previous post, one by which I attempted to convey that critiques/advice were seriously lacking, and that people shall not feel the need to 'pat on the back'."
Thanks for sharing this Chris and best wishes on your future endeavors. I am mostly in agreement with your statement and have been quiet here for some time in part due to the lack of good (ie., tough) critiques coming in on my images and going out on my part. For what other reason should we be posting images if not to be critiqued? (To have others cull & crop shots for your photo business web page? To say how nice it is, but now it could have been even better? I hope not!) It was my impression that the signal-to-noise ratio on this forum was not where it once was, or where it should be. I figured a lot of the SNR problem on my posts was due to my own actions (or lack there of) and have pulled-back my participation to contemplate my photography path and direction of growth. If one is not signal, what else could one be?
Not sure how the forum changes will impact the critiques and what I will do in the future, but it will be interesting to watch the change take place.
Posted by Neil Corman on October 6, 2010 at 10:03 PM
I have thought this over and will let my membership lapse when it expires soon. While I have not posted much as of late due to a change of focus on my photography I still enjoy photographing nature as time permits.
Here it October 6th and nothing has been changed in this area for the new month. This is not the first time it has happened, it is happening every month.
If you pay for something you expect to receive something in return, and in this forum (RMNP) it is quite obvious this lack of leadership is impacting the quality of communication we are having. If this is due to a issue with time and other commitments then those individuals need to figure out how this can change so they can handle the responsibilities. Now that it will be pay to play then it is even more important to have solid leadership in doing and not just in title to continue the quality discussion.
Posted by Jack Garrett on October 7, 2010 at 12:12 AM
Neil, are we talking about image of the month and things like that? The stuff we normally see way up top? I did notice this summer that sometimes it was 2 months before changes were made and yeah, that needs to change. I would agree also that we need to be honest with critiques...I'm not saying we should blow people out of the water and tie em to a tree. But we shouldn't also say an image is great if it isn't. I've been guilty of just not saying anything if I don't like something when maybe a polite and honest critique might be in order....that's how we learn to be better photographers.
Also, it would be helpful when we post an image that we try to explain why we processed something a certain way, especially if it's an "on the edge" photo!
And a great big ooops.....I sat with CAZ, NEIL and CHRISTOPHER. They took time out of a busy Saturday to show me their operations and gave me some great advice...thanks so much guys!!!!
While I don't want to speak for Neil, I would suggest that his comments go beyond the few posts at the top of the RMNP forum. The "shot of the month", or "current challenge" threads are just part of it. The other issue is look at the threads that have been posted over the past couple of months that might be considered to be a off topic, or should be moved/condensed. Issues like "When/Where/Why are the fall colors?", "Do you know the way to (San Jose)?", "workshop on this, or that", classified ads, etc. are posted on multiple occasions. And (finally) when images are posted there are 6 to 10 images per thread. As Chris pointed out as a real issue to him (and by default others), how can one expect any person to critique all of those images? To answer that question, I would say that you can't expect any critique to occur with so many shots. It is a show-and-tell, or a "Help me cull my images", or (fill in the blank) thread. So in response to all of those images you get "attaboy" responses which is counter to the purpose of the forum (or is it?). I think this was the frustration that Neil and Chris were trying to express about the forum activities.
So in response to all of those images you get "attaboy" responses which is counter to the purpose of the forum (or is it?).
The regional forums don't have one specific purpose. Certainly "critique" is one valuable purpose, but so is education, exploration, and trip planning, as well as general discussion. There are image critique forums at NPN focused on that purpose, and if region-specific critique forums are introduced, great. But there is tremendous value in the 6-10 image threads - they're a great way to get a sense of a place, or to share the bigger storyline.
The forums are (thankfully) a melting pot of information. If you're seeking a specific type of information - critique, for example - you can state that in your post. I think it's understood in the NPN IC forums, but in the regional forums, it never hurts to be specific.
Discussion
30 repliesDisclaimer: I am not on the staff or membership committee, just a member who appreciates what this site has provided for me over the years.
Here is the link to the new rules:
http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/bbs.cgi?a=vm&mr=60188
I posted this topic so non members would be aware of the coming changes. I would defer all questions to either the moderators or the contacts provided in the new rules page. I don't want to give out wrong information.
Bill Brennan
So, if there's anyone reading this thread that isn't sure - do it!
These new rules may generate additional revenue in the short term from those who are already participating. I just wonder how it will affect long term membership growth by turning off potential new members. I doubt that I would have joined under the new rules.
I doubt the decision will be modified at this time.
It will be interesting to see if it sticks in the long run.
There was no doubt in our mind that there would be some push-back on this, especially in the regional forums where there is a significantly higher concentration of non-paying participants.
Believe or not, this decision was actually based on steady feedback from the NPN membership that we have been receiving for years. The basic message in this feedback was this - "if I can post photos, get critiques, ask questions and learn everything there is to learn on NPN without becoming a member, why should I pay?"
As you know, other than a simple affiliate account with B&H that represents less than 5% of our total income, NPN is wholly supported by paid membership. We have resisted and will continue to resist inquiries for paid advertising, which we get on a weekly basis. Without a doubt if we really wanted to drastically increase cash flow, that would be the model to use.
Even without posting privileges, the information contained on this site - between the monthly articles, the photos and critiques, and the information exchanged in these forums - is hugely valuable to anyone who has an interest in nature photography. Each month NPN receives on average 100,000 unique visitors, all of whom who have access to this information and learning opportunity.
NPN takes time and money to run. Donna and I spend at least 15 hours a week taking care of customer service, over seeing site activities, working with our server administrator to keep everything running smoothly and updating content. In fact, this weekend is time to place the next new edition of articles online - the 127th edition to be exact. This typically takes me a good part of the day to do.
It is mostly a labor of love. Those who support these efforts (and our cost of operations) with a $49 yearly membership make this site possible. It only seems fair that they should be the ones to reap the lion's share of the benefits.
I'm far from a prolific poster, and will think twice each time my membership comes up for renewal. It is a chunk of change But for the time being, I think I get an excellent return for my membership fees, if for no other reason as a contribution to keep the NPN active and the quality high.
However, I still feel that restricting non-paid members to text posting without images would accomplish most if not all of your goals, still keep their valuable contributions, and provide a better introduction for new members. Being able to post images for critique should be more than enough to answer the "why should I pay" complaints. Just my uninformed opinion.
If this drives people away, then they don't understand the value they're getting. And I don't think one has to have the ability to post images and comments to recognize the incremental value that NPN offers. For somewhat less $$, someone can get a subscription to a print magazine with garishly over-processed images, yet another article on how to shoot like Ansel Adams, and absolutely no possibility of dialogue and instruction. And peppered with more advertising than content. Here, for free, that person can still view far more images, of far greater quality and view/learn from the dialogue and critiques relating to how those images were made. And much more. With no intrusive ads.
I just realized that, after many years of not having to renew my subscription (presumably due to being a former moderator) my free ride has ended. When I think about shelling out $50, well, of course it's $50 that I'd rather hang on to. When I think about what value I'm getting for my $50... it's the least expensive investment I make in continuing to grow as a photographer.
I'm not a professional as many of the regulars are, nor so active a hobbyist that a paid membership really makes sense for me. I've enjoyed my time here and the interactions with all of you; it's been a fun (if off and on again) five years. It's been my pleasure until now to contribute even as a non(paid)-member at least a little bit to that 'wealth of freely available information'.
Just wanted to take the opportunity to say farewell while I still could, and maybe I'll see you out there!
One thing I would like to remark upon is the forum's goals, which have lately appeared to be a little disjointed. I have mentioned this in a previous post, one by which I attempted to convey that critiques/advice were seriously lacking, and that people shall not feel the need to 'pat on the back'. If you see an image that could use a critique, go ahead and be honest, and take the time to really critique it! Don't simply write 'Looks Great!' or insert the
What I do want to say is that I have enjoyed some of the discussions and talking with most of you, who are very talented behind the lens. What I can say, from being in the business of photography, if you want to break out and use it as a source of revenue, you have to GET IT and WANT IT. The photography is not going to sell itself, unless you are the you-know-whos out there who put most of their time and effort into marketing themselves. Remember, you are selling YOU, not the artwork. Also, remember that it takes money to make it - so never skimp on materials, and that includes framing, because the presentation is half of the product. Experiment with different styles, and don't follow the leaders. For instance, the Duraplaq, while a cheap and popular method, is now everywhere. This is something to consider when doing an artshow or a gallery exhibit.
Finally, I want to mention that I hope the forum improves once the new regulations take shape. Moderators should have more control over the content, and filter off irrelevant postings and heated discussion. One thing I think we all don't realize from time to time is that the forum is public, and lord knows how many visitors we have on a daily basis. Good moderation in conjunction with on-topic subject matter makes us all appear more professional.
With that said, I will not be participating in the forum anymore, primarily due to the fact that I don't have much interest in photography right now. I have emabarked on a new business venture which is completely consuming me (a very good thing!).
I want to say thanks to Jim and Donna, and everyone who has been an inspiration. It was great to get to know alot of you at the gallery, shindigs, and in the field. I wish you all the best, and hope you all continue to capture the natural beauty of this amazing part of the country we are lucky to live in. I'm sure we'll cross paths again!
Au revoir, and safe passages everyone. - CR
I'd just like to clarify that at no point was I asked, in any way shape or form by anyone, to take my comments down. Jim Erhardt told me quite the opposite, saying that they appreciate seeing others viewpoints on any and all relevant issues.
My intentions are by no means to stir stuff up, but as a photographer in a photography community, I desire solid feedback on my images if I post them. I have always rec'd decent critiques from you guys when I ask for it, but I'm always looking for more discussion. I suppose I was wrong to think I would get it all here on NPN. I would also like to mention that I am equally as guilty by NOT posting anything sometimes, because the thread has been peppered with 'atta boy' and 'way to go' and 'just what Jon said'.... I just can't follow that lead.
Of course, the other side of the equation is, maybe some folks don't know how to critique, and that's fine too. It's not easy, and you have to be able to think outside of the rule box and consider all options. If you are eager to say 'Ditto', don't bother posting at all. Bring a serious critique to the table, and then ask why, how, when, where... That is the beauty of this art; its perception, abstractness, and discourse that can be had by it. Embrace this good stuff, don't dismiss it off because Jack Dykinga or Rodney Lough do it in some fashion. Forget about those guys and focus on YOUR work. only YOU are the individual that can create a vision far beyond the capabilities of those two men.
Oh, I wanted to say to Jack Garrett - thanks for starting some good discussion on this topic, and I hope it helps the forum be sustatinable and worthy. I did want to mention something I noticed that you posted in a reply though, that needs merit. And that is, you sat down with Neil Corman & CAZ to discuss the nuances of gallery ownership; just thought it was appropriate to point this out as Neil is a member of NPN and has been successful at running a very nice gallery alone. Furthermore he has done lots of good things for the Denver photographic community at large. Thank you.
Take care everyone.....
Not to digress, but we could certainly do just as you suggested, and in fact I think it's a good idea. We would keep this forum for discussion and then create a RMNP IC gallery - just like the main IC galleries - for that purpose. Photos posted in it would appear (of course) in the RMNP gallery and also in the All Photos Gallery, so there would be exposure outside of the regional forum.
If this is something the RMNP members would like, we can do.
Chris said, "One thing I would like to remark upon is the forum's goals, which have lately appeared to be a little disjointed. I have mentioned this in a previous post, one by which I attempted to convey that critiques/advice were seriously lacking, and that people shall not feel the need to 'pat on the back'."
Thanks for sharing this Chris and best wishes on your future endeavors. I am mostly in agreement with your statement and have been quiet here for some time in part due to the lack of good (ie., tough) critiques coming in on my images and going out on my part. For what other reason should we be posting images if not to be critiqued? (To have others cull & crop shots for your photo business web page? To say how nice it is, but now it could have been even better? I hope not!) It was my impression that the signal-to-noise ratio on this forum was not where it once was, or where it should be. I figured a lot of the SNR problem on my posts was due to my own actions (or lack there of) and have pulled-back my participation to contemplate my photography path and direction of growth. If one is not signal, what else could one be?
Not sure how the forum changes will impact the critiques and what I will do in the future, but it will be interesting to watch the change take place.
Here it October 6th and nothing has been changed in this area for the new month. This is not the first time it has happened, it is happening every month.
If you pay for something you expect to receive something in return, and in this forum (RMNP) it is quite obvious this lack of leadership is impacting the quality of communication we are having. If this is due to a issue with time and other commitments then those individuals need to figure out how this can change so they can handle the responsibilities. Now that it will be pay to play then it is even more important to have solid leadership in doing and not just in title to continue the quality discussion.
Also, it would be helpful when we post an image that we try to explain why we processed something a certain way, especially if it's an "on the edge" photo!
And a great big ooops.....I sat with CAZ, NEIL and CHRISTOPHER. They took time out of a busy Saturday to show me their operations and gave me some great advice...thanks so much guys!!!!
While I don't want to speak for Neil, I would suggest that his comments go beyond the few posts at the top of the RMNP forum. The "shot of the month", or "current challenge" threads are just part of it. The other issue is look at the threads that have been posted over the past couple of months that might be considered to be a off topic, or should be moved/condensed. Issues like "When/Where/Why are the fall colors?", "Do you know the way to (San Jose)?", "workshop on this, or that", classified ads, etc. are posted on multiple occasions. And (finally) when images are posted there are 6 to 10 images per thread. As Chris pointed out as a real issue to him (and by default others), how can one expect any person to critique all of those images? To answer that question, I would say that you can't expect any critique to occur with so many shots. It is a show-and-tell, or a "Help me cull my images", or (fill in the blank) thread. So in response to all of those images you get "attaboy" responses which is counter to the purpose of the forum (or is it?). I think this was the frustration that Neil and Chris were trying to express about the forum activities.
The regional forums don't have one specific purpose. Certainly "critique" is one valuable purpose, but so is education, exploration, and trip planning, as well as general discussion. There are image critique forums at NPN focused on that purpose, and if region-specific critique forums are introduced, great. But there is tremendous value in the 6-10 image threads - they're a great way to get a sense of a place, or to share the bigger storyline.
The forums are (thankfully) a melting pot of information. If you're seeking a specific type of information - critique, for example - you can state that in your post. I think it's understood in the NPN IC forums, but in the regional forums, it never hurts to be specific.