Photo posting limit

[Colin Key]

I have posted on this topic in a couple of recent threads, but they seem to have "gone by the wayside".

Whilst this is not a predominantly "photographic" forum, I think that the addition of images to individual posts, threads and members's galleries are an important part of what is a very "visual" hobby.

It seems to me that a number of members (I would not mention names) are just "blitzing" the recent posts in the member's galleries with an inordinate number of images, most of which are of very poor quality.

I would again advocate that a limit be placed on the number of uploads (I think I suggested two in any 24 hour period) per forum member.

I find it rather annoying when a few good images are displayed in the "recent posts" header, only to be obliterated by a barrage of images which are often "not very good" (being polite!!) - the good shots are not getting the "exposure" they deserve because of this.

I would never be so rude as to vilify or degrade anyone's photos (in fact I am very keen to offer help with advice on the actual photography as well as post-processing techniques), but I find that the "swamping" of the member's albums with large numbers of sub-standard photographs unacceptable.

Colin:nah:

[Andrew Cunningham]

Perhaps a rating system could be of some use.

The decent images should then become the popular ones and could be pushed up the pecking order of a link to a dedicated gallery for premium photographs?

[Colin Key]

Perhaps a rating system could be of some use.

The decent images should then become the popular ones and could be pushed up the pecking order of a link to a dedicated gallery for premium photographs?

I think that that would be too "élitist" Andrew, and therefore not desirable.

I have no wish to prevent anyone of any ability posting photos; the quality of images varies enormously with the equipment (not everyone can afford top-end gear), photographic ability, processing skills, etc. My concern is that uploading large batches of images (whether they be absolute perfection or not) at one time means that the images in the header "recent photos" (or whatever they are termed) are rapidly buried before many people get a chance to see them, criticise them and make comments.

I would prefer to see an upload limit of one (or at most two) images per forum member in any 24 hour period. If someone has been to a locality and taken loads of great shots then a selection of these could be embedded in a separate thread (maybe in the "Been birding today" section?) and subsequently "dribble" the best into the members galleries at the daily rate.

Maybe I am "flogging a dead horse" on this one!! :chatterbox:

Colin

[Colin Key]

Clearly my suggestions are falling on deaf ears.

We now have another new member who is flooding the "members galleries" and "recent photos" with an inordinate number of poor quality images all posted in a very short space of time.

Am I the only member who finds this practice rather anti-social? I think it is time to have some stricter limits on image uploads (with specific guidelines on image dimensions and file-sizes) - a move to quality rather then quantity, without excluding those impeded by gear and ability, would not be a bad thing. It is the sheer volume of uploads of low-quality images which "pigs me off" - I am more than happy to comment on one or two shots and make suggestions for improvements, but twenty or more uploads a day is just too much.

Colin :nah:

[Joe stockwell]

why does it upset you so much? in what way does it actually affect you, surely your time could be better spent :err:

yes your shots are good but could you please stop winging about others work!

[Colin Key]

why does it upset you so much? in what way does it actually affect you, surely your time could be better spent :err:

yes your shots are good but could you please stop winging about others work!

I am not whingeing ("winging" means "to fly away" :ohdear:) about other people's photos, and if you read my posts properly you will possibly discern that I am not wishing to bar any photographers, through lack of owning the best equipment or due to their own limited photographic and processing skills, from posting images. What I am complaining about is the dumping of large batches of often low quality images in a short space of time. There are only four images posted in the forum header as "latest photos" and if people are going to post 10-20 images at a time then this makes this feature of the forum home page totally redundant - good photos as well as not so good (which might deserve some constructive criticism) are immediately subsumed and never get the exposure they deserve.

What is arguably the world's best showcase for bird photography ("Naturescapes.Net") has a very strict upload of only one bird image in any 48 hour period. This gives a time delay in which recent images can be viewed, apprecciated and commented upon before they are assigned to the "basement archives". There are some guys on that forum (mainly N Americans) who are so good and so productive that they would simply overwhelm the forum with images if that limit was not rigorously applied, and "Joe Bloggs" would simply not get a look-in.

My suggestion that a limit be applied here and, if someone wants to post a batch then they do so in the "Been birding today" section, seems fairly rational to me. Otherwise Admin might just as well do away with the "Recent Photos" header. It was I who suggested that we have a "Photo Critique" section, which is now in place, and I have been in contact with a number of people who have been very grateful for help I have given them after they have emailed me original image files and I have suggested ways of improving their original camera settings and actions in post processing.

I have commented on your photos (as they have appeared in "Recent Photos") and you have commented on mine - with the current regime most photos, good as well as bad (as in "this needs so and so doing to it"), come and go in the blink of an eye. And, to be more pragmatic, anyone uploading more than four images at a time to their "Member's Album" is simply consigning the fifth onwards to the bin where no-one will see them until they magically appears for a brief moment under "Random Photos".

Think about it - "you know it makes sense" (you have to be of a certain age and have lived in a 'Barrett Home' and know who Patrick Allen is to get the joke there.):laugh:

Colin:biggrin:

[Kenwin5]

It seems not many members are stating their views on this. I agree entirely with Colin's proposal. I think it is in the best interests of the forum and its members. It would make members think hard about which photos to post and therefore generally raise the standard without excluding anyone. I know nothing about Surfbird procedures in getting things agreed and implemented, but I think it does need more members to speak up.

Ken

[michael23]

hi, i am inclined to agree with colin! It is nice to see a diversity of images uploaded to the albums. But if the top quality images are being over shadowed, maybe its time to split the galleries. I think we should have a seperate gallery for the top quality photos and a separate gallery for photographs that dont qualify for "top quality" that way, we still enjoy everyones contributions and keeping everyone happy at the same time.
Or instead of putting up batches in the gallery, maybe put them in an album on photobucket, and provide the link to there album.
:beer:

[Colin Key]

I think we should have a seperate gallery for the top quality photos .....
:beer:

Michael, firstly thanks for your support. Secondly, I am not in any way trying to be "elitist" (as I have stated above) in what is posted so would not agree with your suggestion about separate galleries, it is the volume of images uploaded at any one time which I would like to see limited.

It is nice to see first rate images posted and to be able to compliment the photographer, but I also like to see not so good or even poor images and be able to give some advice on possible ways of improvement; currently, the habit of one or two members of uploading large batches makes this impossible.

My inclination is to stop uploading my own images and also stop commenting on other members' photos.

Colin :frown:

[Kenwin5]

I too do not feel inclined to upload photos at present, and have practically lost all interest in the photos part of the forum, and it looks to me as if the number of people viewing photos generally is down. I certainly don't feel inclined to trawl through 20 new photos on one day from one member.
I too am not in favour of any grading of photos.
Any way we can get a vote or some other consensus on this point? Something needs to happen!

Ken

[Colin Key]

I too do not feel inclined to upload photos at present, and have practically lost all interest in the photos part of the forum, and it looks to me as if the number of people viewing photos generally is down. I certainly don't feel inclined to trawl through 20 new photos on one day from one member.
I too am not in favour of any grading of photos.
Any way we can get a vote or some other consensus on this point? Something needs to happen!

Ken

Thanks for supporting my viewpoint Ken. My suggestions would be:

1. Limit the upload to members galleries to one image in any 24 hour period (which gives you the chance to add seven photos to your gallery in a week, which seems reasonable to me). There could be technical reasons why this difficult to implement - I do not know.

2. Anyone who wants advice on how to improve their photographic and post-processing skills can begin a new thread and upload one or images with Exif data to the recently created "Photo Critique" section.

3. People just wanting to display a series of photos could embed them (or link to them) in the "Been Birding Today" section.


Colin :cool:

[michael23]

hi colin, after considering what you said about my previous comment, i would agree 2 seperate galleries wouldnt be the best course of action.
I would agree with the points which you laid out.
:beer:

[Colin Key]

Well, no-one from Admin has had any input here and after seeing another load of total .... posted today by a new member I am about to give up on the photographic aspects of this forum - total waste of time.

Colin :no:

[admin]

Perhaps, we just show one photo per user in the latest photos so makes no difference if someone uploads 10 photos it will only show their latest photo? So, it looks like members home: http://surfbirds.com/albums/showmembers.php
Perhaps also, we make it two rows, so it's also 8 photos shown on "latest photos"? That way, photos will stay longer and be more available.

We do have to be open to what different people want to do with their albums. The albums were around a lot longer than the forum and were not set up as a photo critiquing medium but rather a place to store and share photos. Photo critiques came along later with the forum and we encourage it. It's very helpful. For some people, however, they're looking for online storage and a way to organize their photos (eg I have shorebird and gull albums etc) and may not care about the sharing aspect or getting a critique. So it may look like they're flooding the galleries when in reality, they're just uploading to their album and unaware they're knocking off photos from the forum header.

[Colin Key]

Well, Since forum moderators are likewise flooding the members galleries with low quality images of such huge (only visible by scrolling) dimensions, I do not see much hope here.

It is possible to turn off the "Recent Images" header by clicking on the small double arrow on the right-hand side of the header bar - this I have now done!

Those gull images should have been posted (embedded) in a separate thread - they are not of interest to everybody, and have zero aesthetic value, IMHO.

Colin :nah:

[Colin Key]

Perhaps, we just show one photo per user in the latest photos so makes no difference if someone uploads 10 photos it will only show their latest photo? So, it looks like members home: http://surfbirds.com/albums/showmembers.php
Perhaps also, we make it two rows, so it's also 8 photos shown on "latest photos"? That way, photos will stay longer and be more available.

We do have to be open to what different people want to do with their albums. The albums were around a lot longer than the forum and were not set up as a photo critiquing medium but rather a place to store and share photos. Photo critiques came along later with the forum and we encourage it. It's very helpful. For some people, however, they're looking for online storage and a way to organize their photos (eg I have shorebird and gull albums etc) and may not care about the sharing aspect or getting a critique. So it may look like they're flooding the galleries when in reality, they're just uploading to their album and unaware they're knocking off photos from the forum header.

There are some suggestions here which go a long way towards achieving what I had originally suggested, and I think that they would work - thank you!

I do wonder whether any forum members are seriously using the "member's gallery" facility as their main photo storage medium - if they are, then they really should think again and consider the free or very cheap alternatives of Photobucket, Flickr, PBase, Zenfolio, etc. There are many good reasons for using an independent photo-hosting website which I have elaborated on in previous threads, and will not go into again here.

I will give more thought to this because I think that it really is important - the "front cover" of the forum in many respects.

Colin

[Kenwin5]

If members genuinely want to create albums on the forum in which to upload photos, why not make it so that photos uploaded to member albums are not displayed, but with a separate "Photo Gallery" into which members can load say one or two photos maximum a day, either directly or from their albums? The Photo Gallery would be where photos are available for members to view when logging in and would be the "showcase" of the forum, but member albums could still be accessed. Just a thought.

Ken

[Colin Key]

Well done admin, the new format of the "Recent Photos" header is a big step forward.

I wasn't sure about the proposal to put up eight instead of four, I thought it might "over dominate" the home page, but it works fine.

I also like the way the "enlarged image" opens in a new pane without any peripheral distractions - looks rather "Zenfolio"-ish?

Colin :smile:

[michael23]

I agree, I think the addition of the extra images works well, and looks great, a nice refreshing look too.

[john robinson]

It's the same as the suggested size of pics posted on the general euro site for example. No one takes any notice - so why have guidlines ? You also get several pics of the same bird - almost in distingushable.There should be rules which people need to stick to- if not- no need for rules.
Full stop.
As far as critique- joke !! people don't want it - and that is my experience of a lot of forums of late
-they just want to hear - "nice picture -wonderful , great capture , etc, etc, ) Crawl a few forums and you'll see what I mean.
John R

[Adey Baker]

It's the same as the suggested size of pics posted on the general euro site for example. No one takes any notice

And almost inevitably, the largest pictures are always the worst, quality-wise!

I'm not sure what the thinking is behind it - I mean, if I'd taken a less than sharp shot of a bird that was at least slightly 'newsworthy,' then I'd reduce the size of it to make it appear reasonably sharp rather than splash it right across the page to show everyone what a .... photographer I was :puzzled:

[MichaelF]

No one takes any notice - so why have guidlines ?
Presumably they'd have to take notice, if the site software refused to upload their nth pic and put up a message "You have reached your photo posting limit for today. Please try again tomorrow.".

[Colin Key]

As far as critique- joke !! people don't want it - and that is my experience of a lot of forums of late
-they just want to hear - "nice picture -wonderful , great capture , etc, etc, ) Crawl a few forums and you'll see what I mean.
John R

That has not been my experience John. I have, as a result of that section, had off-forum email contact with quite a few people who I have helped in one way or another (the reason for direct email communication is that I have asked them to send me large, original "straight out of camera" image files).

I will admit that when you go to some of the largely American-populated photographic forums all you hear is "Awesome shot, thanks for sharing" whether the image is $hit or not!! :ohdear:

Colin

[john robinson]

Colin
I meant generally. I too have made a lot of new friends by giving advice etc, etc. What I meant really was that the proportion of the total posters that really want critique in my opinion is miniscule as a percentage of the total. Goimng back to the common birds page posting size. other sites and forums limit the pixel size and there's never a problem. I think they are powered by the same software as this site so I would have thought it easily implemented. Its just that I have this thing about sticking to guidlines If a sign says don't park here- i dont. - but another 20 will.
Thats life I suppose. I'm old fashioned. Cheers
JohnR
JohnR

[Colin Key]

Getting back onto topic (limiting the number of uploads per forum member per day) I note that another new member has just swamped the "latest photos" header with seven images.

Colin :hmpf:

[Colin Key]

Perhaps, we just show one photo per user in the latest photos so makes no difference if someone uploads 10 photos it will only show their latest photo? So, it looks like members home: http://surfbirds.com/albums/showmembers.php

Perhaps also, we make it two rows, so it's also 8 photos shown on "latest photos"? That way, photos will stay longer and be more available.

Well, you implemented the second initiative (which has worked well), but not the first.

Unless some limit is imposed on the number of photos uploaded at any one time (I suggested one image per member in any 24 hour period) then I will cease to post. I have no objection to anyone uploading a single photo which is "less than perfect" (especially if it is from a beginner and inexperienced photographer), but I have no wish to look at the latest batch of seven totally .... images by a new forum member; very selfish, in my opinion.

Colin :no:

[admin]

We haven't forgotten about the last request to only show 1 photo per user, it requires more hardcore coding which someone is working on.

In the meantime, until the change is implemented, you can click on the little blue arrow in the top right of "latest photos" to toggle them off so you don't have to look at them everytime you come to the homepage.

[Colin Key]

We haven't forgotten about the last request to only show 1 photo per user, it requires more hardcore coding which someone is working on.


Jolly good, keep at it!!

Colin :cool:

[Colin Key]

We haven't forgotten about the last request to only show 1 photo per user, it requires more hardcore coding which someone is working on.

In the meantime, until the change is implemented, you can click on the little blue arrow in the top right of "latest photos" to toggle them off so you don't have to look at them everytime you come to the homepage.


I don't want to toggle off the "latest photos", I enjoy looking at them and commenting on them, but this latest Italian twit "heuglini" has just uploaded 89 images today. What is the point?

Until such time as you get this image upload restriction in place, maybe a "Sticky" to advise against this would be useful?

I am certainly not posting any more images until this is sorted out.

Colin :hmpf:

[Colin Key]

Since my last post a few minutes ago he/she is now up to 98 images today!!

Please shoot him/her.

Colin

[Jacqueline Burrell]

Since my last post a few minutes ago he/she is now up to 98 images today!!

Please shoot him/her.

Colin

I have had little time to browse the site lately, but was appalled when I logged on this afternoon to find the gallery swamped with photos by someone I’d never heard of.:hmpf:

I was not in the best of moods as we have been suffering from some very nasty temperatures and high humidity for the last week and after a long drive from half way down the Red Sea with little to look at but mirages and desert, I just wanted to relax and enjoy some high quality pix by my favourite photographers before bar opening time:beer:.

Better late than never: You certainly have my support, Colin.

[Paul Woolnough]

Have followed this thread for some time and have just looked up the Photo Albums for the very first time.:SLEEP:

Would be nice to see a variety of photographs from different people.

[Colin Key]

Have followed this thread for some time and have just looked up the Photo Albums for the very first time.:SLEEP:

Would be nice to see a variety of photographs from different people.

That is precisely why I started this "campaign" Paul; many of us would like to see a few different images from different photographers each day,and have the opportunity to comment on them, but this last twit from Italy who uploaded 100 images in one day is just spoiling the "ambience" for everyone else.

Selfish sod (Berlusconi syndrome?).


Colin :hmpf:

[dogface]

That is precisely why I started this "campaign" Paul; many of us would like to see a few different images from different photographers each day,and have the opportunity to comment on them, but this last twat from Italy who uploaded 100 images in one day is just spoiling the "ambience" for everyone else.

Selfish sod (Berlusconi syndrome?).

Never liked them very much.

Colin :hmpf:

Almost unbelievable...... To be honest, this kind of rudeness exhibited above (language, general attitude and racism) is quite possibly going to put new members off posting and even new people joining this forum..... not very impressive IMO. Probably has already.... :mad:

Totally unnecessary and well out of order. I'm sure others would agree.

The new(?) member posting all the photos which are 'so offensive' possibly is not even aware they are doing anything wrong- after all, as admin have pointed out, the original aim of the gallery was so that people could put their photo albums online.

---

On the issue of the fact that so many general pics can be put up on the header page, if it is an issue, and I agree it could be, could it be worked so that only one or two representative photos from a series from any one photographer came up on the main page per day? It would be a shame if for example I or someone were to have a fantastic days birding and get some great pics of a number of interesting species, behaviours or views and be unable to post them to the site. I'm sure that there are different ways that this can be looked at without necessarily throwing the whole baby out with the bathwater...

Anyway, nothing's worth getting too worked up over. Trust this can get sorted.

[Colin Key]

Language ammended:smile:.

But, for someone who has never made a post before to upload 100 images in a couple of hours is bloody selfish. I mean, what is the point, when all but the last eight just get buried? I would have expected any new member intending to do this might have had a look around the forum first and hopefully gleaned what the majority view on this is.

Colin :nah:

[Brian S]

Thanks for changing the message, Colin. I am trying to take a back seat and not jumping in, but do agree that you might have used deliberately provocative language to make your point. ("Who? Me?")

As Andy says, we are looking into this. I don't think that 'Heuglini' meant any harm.

Cheers

Brian S

[Colin Key]

("Who? Me?")

Cheers

Brian S

Sorry officer, but I was nowhere near the scene of the crime when I did it, honest. :biggrin:

Colin :smile:

[FayJ]

A photo upload limit is probably a good idea. I belong to a photography forum which allows three uploads per member every 48 hours. This keeps it sensible and prevents the site being completely inundated.

[Colin Key]

I thought that the original, pre-edit version of your post was much better Fay :biggrin:.

Colin

[FayJ]

I thought that the original, pre-edit version of your post was much better Fay :biggrin:.

Colin

Lol, I thought better of it. Let sleeping dogs lie and all that! :laugh: