| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/14/2005 01:41:26 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by nards656:
Okay, I have to do it...
Somebody somewhere in one of the multiplicious threads about changing everything from the voting system to the image size and then the file size, said that no one would start a thread just to say they like it like it is.
Well, har har, I'm starting a thread for one reason!
I LIKE IT AT 640x640, 150K, SINGLE SCORE, BAGS OPTIONAL, COMMENTS NOT REQUIRED.
And yes I'm shouting. Just in a friendly way. But I'm serious.
LEAVE IT ALONE! I LOVE IT!
:)
Edit: stupid spelling |
I'm with you, good thinking and well said.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 01:44:39 PM · #52 |
Just because I say I like the site the way it is doesn't mean I would be against every change that could be made. If I had all the power things would be a lot different. But what I mean to say when I post to this thread is that the site does not need to change. It's not sick, it's well.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 01:53:06 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by mesmeraj:
Originally posted by megatherian:
And they never will see it as a problem if people don't present it. The more well thought out logical discussion we can have about something the better off we'll all be. (In my opinion) |
Personally i think D&L are a little more intouch with business modules , the internet, and thier own websites that that.
I'm not saying the discussion shouldn't exist - it is healthy. But i do have a problem when the arguement for one side refuses to listen to the logical facts and reason behind something being the way it is and believe whatever suits them best should suit everyone best, or they should just suck it up.
I love this site.
I especially love that when there IS a problem that could be dealt with in a better way, the changes are made to accommedate the site (as a whole) need. Sept brought us more weekly challenges due to the average entry being over 500 for the open. Not only did D&L offer this upgrade, but they said we will try it for a month, and if it doesn't work, if the site doesn't like it, we will get rid of it.
That is some great admins we have got right there. Cheers boys! |
Really? Because every business I've ever been with doesn't want to spend money to enhance products unless their market share goes down or are forced one way or another?
Easy option, have the 640px linked to a larger file. Dial up or users, or users that have to scroll don't have to click the 640 px image to get a bigger image.
Being able to alphabatize the "who's online" list would be nice as well. Would make searching things easier. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 01:56:05 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by megatherian:
I don't have a problem with giving the site a pat on the back. I guess my confusion is with this being in the suggestions thread. Perhaps I misinterpreted what the suggestion part of the post is, if I did I apologize. |
You did misinterpret, apology accepted.
The suggestion was to not change anything right now. Pretty simple suggestion, actually. Maybe I shouted too loud, sorry :)
My point is that I don't have a problem with the site, so please include me with those who would prefer the nature of the site be left alone for now. I realize that change will eventually be necessary and desireable. I just don't desire it at this point and I don't believe it is necessary, and I have a perfectly legitimate right to make that known.
Suggestions to fix the problem? I'm on the side of the fence that feels there is not a problem. As a result, I don't feel obligated to propose a solution for the problem. When I am convinced there is a problem - beliefs typically evolve, after all - I may attempt to offer a solution. Until then, I'm going to stand by what I believe :)
I'm off to run AutoCAD vRockTablet and see if I can draw a straight line with a charred tree branch and a flat rock... It's great being a caveman.
Ugggg.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 01:56:39 PM · #55 |
| Like me pa always said... "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" I think the site is fine the way it is. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:05:52 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Really? Because every business I've ever been with doesn't want to spend money to enhance products unless their market share goes down or are forced one way or another?
Easy option, have the 640px linked to a larger file. Dial up or users, or users that have to scroll don't have to click the 640 px image to get a bigger image.
Being able to alphabatize the "who's online" list would be nice as well. Would make searching things easier. |
And who would pay for the extra storage space? I dont weant to pay for something i am not going to use.
I agree with the other suggestion - maybe you should strat a new thread.
Sorry used the wrong word there - brain fart
Message edited by author 2005-12-14 14:07:45. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:07:12 PM · #57 |
| How did this theas get turned into the screen size thread? Doesn't that have it's OWN thread? :þ |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:13:32 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by megatherian:
How did this theas get turned into the screen size thread? Doesn't that have it's OWN thread? :þ |
I've tried, but it keeps drifting back...
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I think the 'Jones' are a very diverse group. The 'Jones' being DPChallenge members. Not only do we have a wide geographical representation, but also an photography experience range as well with levels ranging from people new to photography all the way to professionals earning a living at photography.
This being said, it's expected that there is also going to be a wide range of views on how this site should function and cater to the needs of this diverse community.
All in all, I would say they've (D&L) done a pretty good job of meeting the needs of the majority, otherwise this site would have failed a long time ago. I would wager that if this was still a personal site catering to a handful of photography friends, many of the suggestions would not only be considered, but implemented, as the user group would be neatly defined.
My additional 2 cents. ;^) |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Did I mention I really like the way D&L added the 'Lenses' feature under 'Equipment'? Looking for a DSLR in the future and this area of DPC is a great reference source.
Oops. I guess that's not a 'leave it like it is...' because they made an improvement (one of many) to this site. ;^) |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
You know something I like about DPC? The 'Update' button! ;^)
I also like the way they've updated the profile page for members. The 25mb of storage is also cool. And just recently I was surprised by the added column on the profile page that let's me sort my portfolio pics by date uploaded...hadn't noticed that before.
Thanks D&L - Keep up the great work! ;^) |
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:13:37 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by megatherian:
And they never will see it as a problem if people don't present it. |
I believe it's been mentioned that a thread such as this pops up reliably every 2-8 weeks for the last three years. Just why would you think the admins unaware of the issue?
For now, they've chosen to leave the file size/dimension limits as they are ... as someone said earlier, better learn to deal with it -- it will change when they decide to change it. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:20:16 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by megatherian:
And they never will see it as a problem if people don't present it. |
I believe it's been mentioned that a thread such as this pops up reliably every 2-8 weeks for the last three years. Just why would you think the admins unaware of the issue?
For now, they've chosen to leave the file size/dimension limits as they are ... as someone said earlier, better learn to deal with it -- it will change when they decide to change it. |
This thread started out talking about a lot more than just screen sizes. Along those lines my statement was about all current suggestions - not screen resolutions.
Again, if suggestions aren't wanted / needed then the suggestions forum should be removed. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:22:30 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by megatherian:
Again, if suggestions aren't wanted / needed then the suggestions forum should be removed. |
I don't think anyone has said the suggestions aren't wanted. But just because someone suggests something, doesn't mean everyone needs to be in favor of it. Lots of suggestions favored change. One didn't. That's all. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:42:00 PM · #62 |
| If the site changes and i dont like the new way i wont come simple and you run the risk of loosing alot of other people if they dont like it too. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:43:22 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by megatherian:
Again, if suggestions aren't wanted / needed then the suggestions forum should be removed. |
Oh, good grief. Where's Slippy or Art ROFLMAO for some comic relief. This malarkey is getting way too serious.
I'm just curious, Dan, why have you never entered a challenge???? |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:46:34 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by nards656:
Oh, good grief. Where's Slippy or Art ROFLMAO for some comic relief. This malarkey is getting way too serious.
|
Oh, OK... I know it's played out, but....
Hey everybody look....BOOBIES!!! |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:54:32 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by mesmeraj:
Originally posted by hyperfocal:
I would be the last person to advocate spending money just to keep up with the Jones̢۪s. |
So you take back your comment that we should all by better monitors or "deal with it"?
Because that is suggesting we need to keep up with the photographic Jones.
Again, the priority of keeping the heat on comes above being able to afford the nice gear you expect photogs to have. If you see freecycle monitor postings for rural kentucky with free delivery, you just let me know :) |
No, I'm not. Your Canon G6 is not a cheap camera, why do own it? There has to be a minimal acceptable standard. Currently the system is exclusionary of certain types of photographs, those that don̢۪t compress well due to lots of detail. I̢۪m asking that the standards be brought up just enough to equalize the field.
Going back to my music/ musician analogy what if this were a music sharing website instead of photographs, and only mono tracks could be uploaded. There was a time when bandwidth was really expensive, and I understand why the standards were set so low, but now is the time to increase these standards even if it mean alienating some.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:02:55 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by nards656:
Originally posted by megatherian:
Again, if suggestions aren't wanted / needed then the suggestions forum should be removed. |
Oh, good grief. Where's Slippy or Art ROFLMAO for some comic relief. This malarkey is getting way too serious.
I'm just curious, Dan, why have you never entered a challenge???? |
People keep telling me D&L already know about all the issues and they'll change what ever they feel like changing. I've even been told a few times not to bother posting my ideas (I'm not just talking about this thread). I wasn't trying to be melodramatic, I'm serious - if ultimately suggestions for the site aren't needed and just piss the majority of users off then maybe we shouldn't have a thread. An anonymous e-mail would be more effective.
I have been asked numerous times why I haven't entered a challenge - with the general implication as to who am I to question things. I worked in the industry as a photo editor for a few years. I also went to various Art schools for 6 and studied a variety of mediums. Actually taking pictures is something I've just done off and on here and there though. So while photography is not new to me I guess you could say taking pictures is. I haven't felt comfortable entering the challenges thus far with images that (from my own experienced opinion) aren't all that great. The pictures I have up of my dog were only posted in answer to a "show me your dog" thread and by no means quality enough to be entered into a challenge.
With that said I have actually entered the Cheese challenge and in my humble opinion am doing fairly well.
I really don't believe how many challenges I've entered has much bearing on my abilities to critique photos or share my thoughts and opinions in the forums though. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:08:11 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by hyperfocal:
No, I'm not. Your Canon G6 is not a cheap camera, why do own it? |
It took me 9 months of myself and my spounce skipping 1 or more meals a day to afford it if you must know.
There is a minimal exceptable standard. It is 640x. I don't see any type of images being excluded by this type, maybe you need to zoom in if you want more detail in your photos. Your analogy once again says that everyone on the site ought to keep up with the Jones, something you claim to not attend to. This is all i have to say with you on te matter, because you are not taking into consideration the many logical reason that D&L keep the site as it is, because you are too gunho on your own desires. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:12:58 PM · #68 |
Already posts "less" than 640x get nailed. I've seen nice shots, just too small of a crop get like 2's and 3's.
:| |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:17:21 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by wavelength:
like I keep saying, at least take a vote on the stuff, these threads mean nothing. actual data on what the users want does. |
Actually, a vote means nothing, what the admins want does. |
Oh, right! communism rules!!! Yay, forget the users who pay for everything around here (or could if you just put in some Ads) lets just stick to what the admins want, like stupid killed threads stats.
nyah!! :P
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:18:07 PM · #70 |
Okay, I'm gonna bite on this, since there's an ongoing argument that is not supported by any facts currently in evidence....
Could someone please post in their personal portfolio or somewhere on the web two versions of the same photo, just for comparison? One should be 640x480, 150k or less. The other should be 800x600, 250k. Pick something with as much detail as you like, please.
Then, please pick a different photo and subject it to the same treatment. Again, pick any image you like. It would be good if you could find two images such that one is better than the other at 640, while the opposite would be true at 800. In other words, can you make the "apparent goodness" of the photos "flip-flop" simply based on presentation size? (A rule for fairness here would be that you may not simply upsize a 640480 to 800600, you should be downsizing a larger image for all images so that quality is not compromised unfairly).
Please prove to me that the difference will be obvious. Given, one will be smaller than the other. To really make a fair argument out of this, it should be obvious to the average voter, who MIGHT look at the photos for 30 seconds each, that there is a flip-flop.
Prove to me there is a problem. I'm open minded. You say that "photos with a lot of detail don't compress well." Okay, fine. But prove to me that it's going to make your photo a winner and mine more of a loser for yours to be 800x600.
See, you fine folks are making the assumption that making the pics bigger is going to make a certain type of pic more likely to win. Beyond all the hype about monitor sizes, resolutions, bandwidth, DSL, satellite, infrastructure, and keeping up with the Joneses, my challenge to you is that your basis for the entire argument is flawed and basically an attempt to manipulate the vote in your favor.
Please remember that ALL photographers have the same options, as far as file size, etc., would go. If more detailed shots become available, what is to prevent EVERYONE from making the same advances that you say will be available to those who make photographs with "more detail"?
The playing field at 800x600 would be no more level than it is now. The shots that win are awesome shots, even at 640x480. Their creators learn how to maximize the medium, and they win with excellent material. Crappy shots are still going to lose, even though they may have more detail of their crappiness. We're after a level playing field here, and you are trying to skew it in your favor, primarily without basis.
That's my challenge to you. Prove to me the basis of your argument. Let's stop fussing and fighting and bickering over something that isn't even proven. Prove to me that the playing field will be MORE level if larger image sizes are allowed. Give me something to believe in. :)
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:27:38 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by megatherian:
I really don't believe how many challenges I've entered has much bearing on my abilities to critique photos or share my thoughts and opinions in the forums though. |
That's very correct; my point in bringing it up is that if you really want to get good challenge scores, you'll have to enter. You can't be concerned about your challenge scores, since you don't have any. Thus, I'm not sure what your motivation is. If we're just arguing for the sake of argument, I'm out of here and you are free to chat all you wish with someone else. I don't have time to waste blabbermouthing with someone who really doesn't care. If you really care about the site and really want it to be better, I'm all for some discussion. If you just want to blow off at the mouth about how the OP is an idiot or just play games with semantics, forget it. You're wasting my time and I'm not gonna give you the time of day. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:33:44 PM · #72 |
Did I mention another reason to keep DPC as is it is because it keeps me from needing to watch cable TV (oops forgot - can't get that where I live), and I've cut back on my book purchases substantially.
There's ALWAYS something exciting going on here! ;^)
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:33:53 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by nards656:
Okay, I'm gonna bite on this, since there's an ongoing argument that is not supported by any facts currently in evidence....
That's my challenge to you. Prove to me the basis of your argument. Let's stop fussing and fighting and bickering over something that isn't even proven. Prove to me that the playing field will be MORE level if larger image sizes are allowed. Give me something to believe in. :) |
The proof is in when a photographer resizes a picture and exclaims, "That looks like crap!" Everyone has been there. I have found myself having to simplify compositions to try to compensate. This isn't necessarily a bad thing creatively because you have to challenge yourself more, but is sometimes hampering. Mostly it is just a want, but in specific cases like landscapes, especially panoramics this is a NEED, not a want. But the panorama's also go along with another want of mine, the allowance for merged landscape panoramas.
In the end, this site will remain more a stock photography composition site for lack of certain changes and mindsets, but it is what it is.
Mostly, I want larger pictures in the paid member portfolio sections, but since we must bow to the stictures of the Almighty Admins, i should just shut up right?
ed- I mean no disrespect to D&L, just to the idea that we should sit down and shut up because our opinions don't matter.
Message edited by author 2005-12-14 15:35:55.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:42:27 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Mostly, I want larger pictures in the paid member portfolio sections, but since we must bow to the stictures of the Almighty Admins, i should just shut up right?
|
Perhaps we should all concede that this is a separate argument from changing the size of challenge entries???? Seems to me you are after something entirely different that I would bet would be granted if it were approached properly, since it doesn't affect the challenges at all. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:46:02 PM · #75 |
25mb is 25mb. If I want to load up (25) 1mb files, who cares. I paid for the space, I shouldn't have my portfolio resized.
I had someone point out that I have only entered 1 challenge (in the other thread), and obviously my suggestions are a waste of time since I've only entered one. I think this is nonsense. If I remember correctly, I was one of the few who voiced out over more editing freedom, resulting in advance editing rules. I don't here people complaining about that little change for the better... |
|
