Member wish to get more even consideration of their images.

There is another thread going at present with a member that has a wish to have their posted images seen and commented upon more than is happening. I too have had this feeling, that some do not get equal benefit of an NPN membership as far as having their images considered. The vastness of NPN and it's galleries must be a difficult thing to manage and total equality I'm sure is not possible.

Along the line of thought of getting more members viewing more members images I wonder what others think of this idea?

Instead of listing *separately* under the "Galleries" heading each and every gallery, every image submitted would *only* be listed as in "all photos". This alone would bring images to the attention of all members and would help to deminish the tendency of the "us and them" huddling togeather of members of like interest.

Only a thought, and I AM NOT an unhappy camper. If this is not an idea worth considering I'll live, even happily, with what Jim and his moderators decide.

You're late to the party, Charlie--this idea gets brought up and shot down at least once a year. I like the goal behind it certainly, but I think the current system is better--i like classifying things, must be the scientist in me... I know quite a few members comment/critique photos by using the 'All Photos' gallery--so the option is there, but you can't force people to do things a certain way. But it's a good reminder--keep thinking of new ideas, Charlie--this community thrives because of members like you who want to see it get better.

I also like the different gallery system. But, I would ask consideration of changing The Wildlife gallery into Mammals and All others. Just an idea.

Incidentally--im a bit late to the party too, cause i just read through the entire (grueling) discussion on a similar topic back in June in the Flora forum. I think that discussion shows the problem in subdividing the galleries--the eternal debate about what type of shot fits where. In the end, as Jim and Bill i think point out in that thread, its mainly about managing a lot of images and trying to make it managebale for those of us who have specific interests (i post 90% of the time in Landscape, but i also try to keep my feet wet in as many of the other galleries as possible). If it aint broke, don't fix it, and at least at this point i don't think it's broken.

I don't think it is broken either, Stan. I'm also not totally sold that what I proposed is the best way. I'm not surprised that this has gone around before and it going around again may just remind folks that there are images, other than in their particular gallery, that might be worth looking at and commenting upon.

Call me a "pragmatist," but I see some life lessons in the whole question of views and comments.

Basically, if you have ambitions for sales or shooting contracts, get used to it. Viewers/buyers/clients have their own interests and tastes, and some will like your work and some won't. Watch people in a photo gallery. Some stop and devote time to an image, and might even talk to the photographer. Some small number will even deliver the ultimate comment and slap plastic. But the vast majority just wander through. I don't expect any different human behavior in online galleries. Rearrange the galleries as you might, the majority of folks are just going to be wandering through.

By the way I wasn't suggesting that we eliminate galleries. I wouldn't like that either. My thought was to keep the galleries but arrange it, some way, that every member views, at least briefly, all posted images as they look for the photos they want to view.

The guidelines as now written would classify images into the separate subjects (galleries) and the weekly pics be awarded as now done. My thought was just that when entering NPN we would all see the "all photos" view of posted images. Then we would go our chosen way.

Now that I think it in more depth this is not well thought out. Maybe other thoughts will come forth.

charlie

I agree with others that the current format works and provides the option of looking at all photos or a specific gallery. Also I think Hank hits the nail on the head regarding how people view/respond to photos. One thing I have learned from these forums is that how I view my own work has little to do with how it is viewed by others. One feature I really like is the way that the site counts views and comments on posted images. It allows me to break the quality of my images(as perceived by others) into three general categories. 1) 1/10-15 comment/view ratio = really well received image even if comments are critical 2)1/20-30 comment ratio = interesting enough for people to click on the thumbnail but doesn't pass closer inspection 3)40-50 total hits and one or two comments by the forum moderators = not a very good photo. Typically I posted the ones in the third catagory because I personally liked the image but it is either technically flawed or simply isn't compelling to unbiased viewers.The moderators, presumabely taking their jobs seriously, are kind enough to provide feedback when others don't bother.

On another note, these forums are no different than society as a whole. People develop relationships, favorites, etc.and comment accordingly. That's just life....

Now that you've clarified your idea, Charlie, I think it actually has quite a bit of merit and is worth considering. In fact, I used exactly that approach for my own website - when you click 'galleries' you immediately get to see image thumbnails from all the categories I have listed. Then, if you like, you can further select a gallery of your choice. The single biggest pet peeve I have with photographer's websites is that it usually takes several clicks to just get to see some images, and I also have to commit to a gallery.. I prefer to start seeing images immediately.

I like that approach because it doesn't force you right off the bat to choose a particular subsection, and in the process of entering the galleries, you would immediately be exposed to a wide variety of images, and who knows, one might just catch your interest. Now, I think implementing something like that would require a relatively significant overhaul of the site design and navigation, and I doubt Jim is ready for that.

Floris you have clarified my thought even better. This is a complex web site and I doubt anyone other than Jim has a grasp of the complexity of what a change like this would entail. Oh well, I was able to throw it out there and for that I am grateful.

Charlie

This excellent forum, like many others, is still 'information overload'. With dozens of subforums, members galleries, discussions, etc, etc, it is impossible to keep track of it all. Some members may be able to hang out here for 5 to 10 or more hours a day, racking up post numbers and seeing a lot of images. Even though I participate here (and moderate another large online photo forum), I am usually burned out with the volume of stuff trying to get into my head in a day. As a successful landscape (and other types) photographer, I get bored with most of what I see as a result of sheer exposure. I don't really like viewing and trying to enjoy art in this fashion. Heck, I'd be happy being exposed to one or two excellent art pieces a day that I can contemplate and really look at. But, the world is the way it is, with it's digital dumpsters and, of course, quality places like this. So, I need to make the best use of my time, and going to a particular subject forum that is of more interest to me makes sense, rather than having to sort through hundreds every day.

Valid reason for wanting things as they are, Jeffrey. As the topic head says this was a thought I had to address a few who would like, very much, to be able to get more critiques of their work than they are getting now. I guess by seeing the "all photos" view immediately it would slow you down getting to the landscape gallery, however if that is the only thing you are interested in viewing, I wouldn't say your wrong in your wish.

Charlie

Charlie, no, the landscape forum is not the only thing of interest to me, it is sometimes the only thing I have time for.