Recently we have been informed by Jim & Donna Erhardt that due to popular request, the waiting time between posting photos in the image critique galleries was reduced from 48 hours to 24 hours.
May be a good idea, but IMO the quantity shall not replace the quality.
I don't mind to see more excellent photographs displayed in NPN galleries, but I believe we will get less comments & critiques, so the quality can suffer.
I personally like to send my comments & suggestions to as many posts as I cab, but now I'm in great dilemma. How to continue commenting this larger amount of posted photographs? In the past when I was free for commneting I tried (at least in Flora gallery) to comment each image posted, but now with increased number of photos I've to be selective. But on the other side I don't like to upset other members without commenting their great work.
May be the best way is to stop commenting (not good idea but at least I will treat everybody equally). IMO 48 hours waiting time was very reasonable. What is yours opinion to this subjet? How many of you are pro 24 hours and how many for 48 hour witing time?
Sorry I overlooked the same topic posted by Jim earlier this month. Since there was not a great response I'd still ask other NPN members to give opinion to this subject. Thank you. I'd also like to have a honest answer from Jim what was the input for this change.I just can't understand it. NPN has 11 galleries, i.e. 11 photos NPN member and day are accepted. This is in my eyes a great inflation. There are other photo (I call it) CLUBS which accept 1 photo per day (for example Trekearth, but Trekearth doesn't have galleries i.e. only one photo per day; not 11!).
Miro, we often get suggestions from NPN members on how we can improve their experience on the site.
In this case a member suggested that we change the posting limit in the galleries from 48 hours to 24 hours. Due to the emergence of mega-photo sites like 500px.com and declining participation on NPN, I thought the suggestion warranted further discussion so I then asked the gallery moderators for their thoughts. After some discussion, they were all in agreement that it would be worth a try.
So far, I'm not seeing any marked increase in the number of photos being posted, nor am I seeing any fall off in the quantity or quality of the comments. If we do see a fall off in comments, we will revisit the posting limit and make any changes we deem neccessary to keep NPN an active site and maintain its high quality of participation.
I think that if anything it would encourage more participation. I'm the type to post in bunches... I get out on the weekends usually and want to post photos, but when I have to wait 48 hours between uploads, after posting two photos I've already burned through a week - so I'm not able to get the instant gratification from posting photos that I took a day or two before. I'm sure there are a handful of people that will go on a torrent of posting every day but those are few and far between and won't be able to keep up with that pace anyway.
I agree with Luke. Especially if I've worked an area or have a series, it would be nice to be able to put them up in a timely fashion. And when I have something for galleries I typically don't frequent, it'll be fun to get those up sooner, too.
Yep, more work for the moderators, though... Okay with me. I'd love to see more posts in my own regional gallery, of which I am one of the moderators.
It's not a requirement that you post comments on every photo, or even every photo in a forum. I try – not always with success – to offer at least 7-10 comments before I post my next photo. Usually ten sequentially, so that I don't play favorites (another common complaint). When I post photos from the field, I don't always have time and bandwidth to work through my ten, but that's my goal.
Luke & Catherine comments are very interesting and the moderators should discuss and evaluate them. If it is so than why not to change to post 3-4 images per week at any time? This would be more appropriate IMO. I don’t agree with Jim. To be selective is nice but what are the criteria for selection? Commenting the best images with wow...... Or to comment the average or not good images to help the photographer to improve? What are the comments & suggestions for? In my comments I try to be honest with all categories and I feel not good when I praise excellent photo and at the same time I overlook average image.
And finally I wish to comment Jim response. Jim is stating that he is not seeing any marked increase in the number of photos being posted; this is not based on facts. I took the time to count the photos submitted in Flora Gallery (I've not idea about others) with the result: before change average around 2-25 images per week; after change over 40 images per week. This is almost 100% which is equivalent to 100% in the time limit.
If we are frightened from competition like 500px we have to fight the with innovative methods to make NPN more attractive and unbeatable. IMO this introduced time change is not very innovative. I'm ready to help with advice in case NPN will listen a bit. Thank you all.
No more suggestions, so I'm closing this Topic. I was just surpriced that except one no other Moderator contributed with their opinion (neithet to here nor to Jim Topic on this subect). Many thanks to all contributors and I wish to all NPN members excellent summer time and good photowork.
Discussion
7 repliesMay be a good idea, but IMO the quantity shall not replace the quality.
I don't mind to see more excellent photographs displayed in NPN galleries, but I believe we will get less comments & critiques, so the quality can suffer.
I personally like to send my comments & suggestions to as many posts as I cab, but now I'm in great dilemma. How to continue commenting this larger amount of posted photographs? In the past when I was free for commneting I tried (at least in Flora gallery) to comment each image posted, but now with increased number of photos I've to be selective. But on the other side I don't like to upset other members without commenting their great work.
May be the best way is to stop commenting (not good idea but at least I will treat everybody equally). IMO 48 hours waiting time was very reasonable. What is yours opinion to this subjet? How many of you are pro 24 hours and how many for 48 hour witing time?
In this case a member suggested that we change the posting limit in the galleries from 48 hours to 24 hours. Due to the emergence of mega-photo sites like 500px.com and declining participation on NPN, I thought the suggestion warranted further discussion so I then asked the gallery moderators for their thoughts. After some discussion, they were all in agreement that it would be worth a try.
So far, I'm not seeing any marked increase in the number of photos being posted, nor am I seeing any fall off in the quantity or quality of the comments. If we do see a fall off in comments, we will revisit the posting limit and make any changes we deem neccessary to keep NPN an active site and maintain its high quality of participation.
I hope this sheds some light on this issue!
Yep, more work for the moderators, though... Okay with me. I'd love to see more posts in my own regional gallery, of which I am one of the moderators.
Jim DeWitt
Frozen Feather images
And finally I wish to comment Jim response. Jim is stating that he is not seeing any marked increase in the number of photos being posted; this is not based on facts. I took the time to count the photos submitted in Flora Gallery (I've not idea about others) with the result: before change average around 2-25 images per week; after change over 40 images per week. This is almost 100% which is equivalent to 100% in the time limit.
If we are frightened from competition like 500px we have to fight the with innovative methods to make NPN more attractive and unbeatable. IMO this introduced time change is not very innovative. I'm ready to help with advice in case NPN will listen a bit. Thank you all.