I have been a member of this site for a good few years now, sometimes more active than others, but I see no drop in the number of postings, in fact, I would say that the average number of replies to posts has gone up from about 5 years ago.
My advice would be to just enjoy the site and the free advice offered by others.
Maybe it is just me, but I can see no reason for posts such as this current one John, as it will not lead to more posting, but just to acrimony!
Best wishes
Phil
Hi John
Does the removal of your post (whatever it was ) mean it isn't time for "honest talking"?
Phil is probably right; we should enjoy the site for what it is, not what we would like or not like it to be. As with most things, the forum changes with time - as new and old contributors come and go the trends change. Currently the majority of images posted appear to be bird shots, indeed one could be forgiven for thinging it is a bird-photographers site. IMO that makes the experience less rich despite the quality of work on show. But hey . . .
Whatever your point was, John, just try and enjoy yourself.
Damn, and I was getting quite excited by prospect of a debate from the original post too! - much better than my current office banter of whether to vote for AV or not......
All I was trying to say was that in my opinion the forum has changed.
There have been some belting shots on here lately which in my view deserved a much better response. There have been more mundane ones , but they too deserved a better response because thats what a critique forum is for isn,t it ?
I had no intention of my post leading to acrimony as Phil suggested and so I removed it. It has in fact become quite "birdy" compared to the old days.
And by the way -I do enjoy myself- very much in fact. !
Nuff said.
JohnR
I think you're right John, far too many excellent shots recieve woefully low feedback and it is a shame. But I think that's always been the case. I don't think there's high enough traffic on the site for all posts to get a good response.
Looking at the critique gallery the most viewed image has 286 views. Now I'm guessing that many people are like me and return to an image several times to read the comments posted so I figure that only about a hundred or so people have actually viewed the image. So to get even just a handful of comments is pretty good.
But the thing is, I can't understand why so few people visit the site when, if you travel to, say, the Farnes, there's hundreds and hundreds of 'wildlife photographers' knocking about! Perhaps the forum needs a publicity drive!!!
I think it is just 'the market' for computer 'time' and I think we (NPN and UKNP) are reasonable good at grabbing that market, which will be hopefully demonstrated below, especially since our intended audience is niche and aimed specifically at 'nature photographers' with little leeway given to much else at this stage. The following stats are for NPN site as a whole of which UKNP is one of the most active parts.
NPN as an Alexa site TRAFFIC ranking (an independent indicator of numbers of visits) of 71,429 (Google is no.1)
Now to put this into context generally and specifically....
Generally - but with a nature bias;
National Geographic is 980.
ephotozine (general photography and the webs biggest photography mag/forums) is 16,511
National History Museum (whole site) is 50,320
RSPB is 55,356
Naturescapes is 155,378
WWT is 236,480
The Wildlife trusts is 263,480
Now specifically some other photography sites from some other major contributors to wildlife photography;
Royal Photography Society (whole site inc forums) is 507,480
WildWonders of Europe is 516,226
Andy Rouse is 1,519,114
lighandland is 1,762,495
British Wildlife Photography awards is 2,155,889
Danny Green Photography is 3,275,582
ImagesfromtheEdge is 3,679,615
Northshots is 3,799,599
Wildphotos is 4,315,094
2020 vision is 5,175,462
In essence I think everybody generally has an unrealistic expectation of site participation, when that participation occurs and for what reason; after 10 years of doing this site the stats still surprise us - but we have a reasonable handle on it now
That said please please tell everybody you know about NPN and UKNP.
I've lost track of how long I've been a member, but one thing has remained constant, 300+ views are restricted to the preserve of the exceptional, 250+ views indicates a belter of an image from a generally well respected forum member, 200+ views is exceptional for a low contribution member with litttle following, 150+ views is a mark of a good image and under 100 views is generally because the image is non bird or specialised.......
The forum has always been heavily weighted towards bird images and the standard of image has definately improved there are few if any poor shots these days to critique, whether that is to do with ability to crop a greater proportion of an original image I don't know, but it is noticeable, certainly modern equipment technology higher iso & low noise technology results in better base image quality at least compared to Agfa 64 when I started out with bare knees and baggy shorts.........
One thing does strike me tho' - for a bunch of photographers we rarely give advice on camera function and basic photography techniques, composition and how best to use light, its nearly all angled at post capture image improvement - or cheating as my wife puts it...., surely a bit cart before the horse??
One other thing to remember is that many people now only go as far as the thumbnail and if they are not interested in what they see they don't open the thread/post hence are not counted in the view tally; this is different to the previous way were you had to open the post to see anything. Horses for courses but it does save bandwidth.
As a newish member can I add a few cents worth of wisdom? Well, anyway. The internet is full of forums and most do not have to be paid for, perhaps this has some influence? i do not think a lack of comment is a bad thing here, the standard is damn high and some of these guys are producing amazing stuff. On other forums one recieves alot of the oooohs and aaaahs, but they are not heloing one improve. So if I get 3 comments here and they are good then I know they mean it. I too only look at the thumbnails that attract me, I have little time at work and home to really view everything.
Discussion
9 repliesJohnR
My advice would be to just enjoy the site and the free advice offered by others.
Maybe it is just me, but I can see no reason for posts such as this current one John, as it will not lead to more posting, but just to acrimony!
Best wishes
Phil
Does the removal of your post (whatever it was
Phil is probably right; we should enjoy the site for what it is, not what we would like or not like it to be. As with most things, the forum changes with time - as new and old contributors come and go the trends change. Currently the majority of images posted appear to be bird shots, indeed one could be forgiven for thinging it is a bird-photographers site. IMO that makes the experience less rich despite the quality of work on show. But hey . . .
Whatever your point was, John, just try and enjoy yourself.
Cheers,
Chris
There have been some belting shots on here lately which in my view deserved a much better response. There have been more mundane ones , but they too deserved a better response because thats what a critique forum is for isn,t it ?
I had no intention of my post leading to acrimony as Phil suggested and so I removed it. It has in fact become quite "birdy" compared to the old days.
And by the way -I do enjoy myself- very much in fact. !
Nuff said.
JohnR
Looking at the critique gallery the most viewed image has 286 views. Now I'm guessing that many people are like me and return to an image several times to read the comments posted so I figure that only about a hundred or so people have actually viewed the image. So to get even just a handful of comments is pretty good.
But the thing is, I can't understand why so few people visit the site when, if you travel to, say, the Farnes, there's hundreds and hundreds of 'wildlife photographers' knocking about!
Simon
I think it is just 'the market' for computer 'time' and I think we (NPN and UKNP) are reasonable good at grabbing that market, which will be hopefully demonstrated below, especially since our intended audience is niche and aimed specifically at 'nature photographers' with little leeway given to much else at this stage. The following stats are for NPN site as a whole of which UKNP is one of the most active parts.
NPN as an Alexa site TRAFFIC ranking (an independent indicator of numbers of visits) of 71,429 (Google is no.1)
Now to put this into context generally and specifically....
Generally - but with a nature bias;
National Geographic is 980.
ephotozine (general photography and the webs biggest photography mag/forums) is 16,511
National History Museum (whole site) is 50,320
RSPB is 55,356
Naturescapes is 155,378
WWT is 236,480
The Wildlife trusts is 263,480
Now specifically some other photography sites from some other major contributors to wildlife photography;
Royal Photography Society (whole site inc forums) is 507,480
WildWonders of Europe is 516,226
Andy Rouse is 1,519,114
lighandland is 1,762,495
British Wildlife Photography awards is 2,155,889
Danny Green Photography is 3,275,582
ImagesfromtheEdge is 3,679,615
Northshots is 3,799,599
Wildphotos is 4,315,094
2020 vision is 5,175,462
In essence I think everybody generally has an unrealistic expectation of site participation, when that participation occurs and for what reason; after 10 years of doing this site the stats still surprise us - but we have a reasonable handle on it now
That said please please tell everybody you know about NPN and UKNP.
Cheers
T
The forum has always been heavily weighted towards bird images and the standard of image has definately improved there are few if any poor shots these days to critique, whether that is to do with ability to crop a greater proportion of an original image I don't know, but it is noticeable, certainly modern equipment technology higher iso & low noise technology results in better base image quality at least compared to Agfa 64 when I started out with bare knees and baggy shorts.........
One thing does strike me tho' - for a bunch of photographers we rarely give advice on camera function and basic photography techniques, composition and how best to use light, its nearly all angled at post capture image improvement - or cheating as my wife puts it...., surely a bit cart before the horse??
T