What I miss from the old NPN

What I miss from the old NPN
0

(Allen Brooks) #1

There are a number of changes that have improved NPN, not the least of which is the ability to upload a photo without having to re-size the image and having to be concerned about file size. I like the idea of using the “like” button to provide positive feedback for a good critique, something that was lacking in the old NPN. In a short period of time there appears to be quite an influx of new members, no doubt impressed by the new format.

There are, however, some features I miss from the old NPN. I liked the ability to click on “all photos” and see a page of 48 thumbnails showing a variety of images from all galleries. The current NPN shows “latest” on the home page that consists of the latest posts as well as responses and an image posted less than 24 hours ago is soon removed from sight. There is another “latest” button in the header that shows recent posts without comments, but this format doesn’t provide a good overview of the most recent posts.

The other feature I like in the old NPN was that the discussion area was separated from the galleries. One could click “all topics” and quickly see what was on the mind of fellow NPNers. It was also much easier to follow any given thread.

While in the old NPN the landscape gallery did dominate with the most views and critiques, for some reason this seems to have significantly increased in the new NPN. Looking at the old site, in the 48 last thumbnails shown in “all photos” there are only 6 landscape entries. The latest 48 image posts in the new NPN shows 29 landscape posts. It also appears that most of the new members introducing themselves are landscape photographers. I guess what I’m getting at is that in the old NPN each gallery appeared to have equal weight, but I don’t have that feeling with the new NPN. I think it was Bill Fach who stated something to the effect that NPN had the best floral gallery on the planet. (Correctly so!) One could go to the gallery and see 48 colorful photos by very creative photographers. We no longer have that type of view and the floral critique has been lumped with the macro critique.

I understand the reason for eliminating “views”, but it did provide the photographer with a sense that at least someone was looking at their image (or not). Now, I have no idea if I’m wasting my time posting an image no one is looking at.

Do others feel the same?


(Kathy Snead) #2

Allen
At this point, what concerns me most is the declining participation in floral as that is my primary interest. I don’t know if we can do anything to drive photogs interested in floral to the site but I would sure like to explore something we could do. I belong to many other free sites, mainly on Facebook. They used to be my secondary interest by a long shot. Now, for floral, I find myself going there more and more , in addition to here. Not what I want as the critiques here are so valuable. Not only critiques of my work but of others.
I like seeing the landscape as I am trying to rekindle my interest there so reading those critiques and viewing exceptional photography is very helpful as are the other forums that I am interested in.
Some of the rest of the things you mention have been discussed in another thread .


(Ian Cameron) #3

Allen in short I agree with you and have said so elsewhere, but number of views have gone for good. I have no idea why number of comments has been maintained as it seems to me to be at odds with the Site Admin doctrine for the very same reason number of views was eliminated but I think we should just embrace it and post work as before and see what happens. :slightly_smiling_face:


(Sandy Richards-Brown) #4

Firstly - all the work that clearly has gone into this new site is truly impressive - GREAT work and a huge thanks to David and Jennifer!!! Amazing site in such a short time up and running!!!

Allan’s comments above express much of what I’m feeling, so far - so I will be lazy and quote some of what he said, plus a few comments:

Allan : “There are a number of changes that have improved NPN, not the least of which is the ability to upload a photo without having to re-size the image and having to be concerned about file size”

Sandy: **BE VERY CAREFUL HERE, if you don’t want your work stolen. I’d suggest strongly that people post the SMALLEST size image that looks good on this siite. I’m experimenting to see what that size might be. A couple years ago (and I’m sure since then) someone found a website that was almost exclusively images stolen from NPN -from probably 20 different people. Posting a full-size image ANYWHERE on the web is an invitation for theft.
Is there a possibility of disabling a right-click on an image when someone tries to “save” it? Most of the good sites and personal websites already do this, and it helps, at least to some extent.

Allan: There are, however, some features I miss from the old NPN. I liked the ability to click on “all photos” and see a page of 48 thumbnails showing a variety of images from all galleries.

Sandy: Agree 1000% !! IMO, not having this on the new NPN is a major drawback. I want to see the work of everyone who posts, in every category, as it inspires me to try new things and expand my interest and abilities, such as they are. If others don’t want to see a certain image, simply bypass it and don’t enlarge it.

Allan: The other feature I like in the old NPN was that the discussion area was separated from the galleries. One could click “all topics” and quickly see what was on the mind of fellow NPNers. It was also much easier to follow any given thread.
strong text
Sandy: Also agree 1000% - I like to see ALL topics that people are discussing, in one place, then I can choose which to read.

Allan: “While in the old NPN the landscape gallery did dominate with the most views and critiques, for some reason this seems to have significantly increased in the new NPN. Looking at the old site, in the 48 last thumbnails shown in “all photos” there are only 6 landscape entries. The latest 48 image posts in the new NPN shows 29 landscape posts. It also appears that most of the new members introducing themselves are landscape photographers. I guess what I’m getting at is that in the old NPN each gallery appeared to have equal weight, but I don’t have that feeling with the new NPN. I think it was Bill Fach who stated something to the effect that NPN had the best floral gallery on the planet. (Correctly so!) One could go to the gallery and see 48 colorful photos by very creative photographers. We no longer have that type of view and the floral critique has been lumped with the macro critique.”

Sandy: strong textI feel strongly that ALL GALLERIES should have equal billing. I know the majority care only for landscape, or Avian in second place, but other galleries are as important to others. FLORA and MACRO, especially, get low-priority billing. And PHOTO ART is a valid form of photography!!! (although I realize some don’t feel so…) Relegating many Galleries to the “Everything Else” category CLEARLY makes them “lesser” Galleries and I disagree strongly with this.

Allan: " I understand the reason for eliminating “views”, but it did provide the photographer with a sense that at least someone was looking at their image (or not). Now, I have no idea if I’m wasting my time posting an image no one is looking at. "
Sandy: ALSO AGREE

Sandy


(Jim Zablotny) #5

Great comments provided here in this forum. I commented on this topic in one of the other discussions, but it was dismissed in short order. All categories should have equal billing. Although a lot of work has been put into this site, I liked having the images displayed in tiles and I could easily choose on which image to post a critique. Popular images are at the top of the list and capture the most attention. Those photos needing critiques disappear from view and require quite a bit of hunting to find them. I tend to look for images that have not received any comments and provide some feedback.

Comments and critiques are few and far between especially in categories other than landscape and avian. I hope that this improves over time. The observations provided by the commenters in this discussion are quite real and Ian summed it up perfectly by stating that we should continue to post and see what happens…Jim


(David Kingham) #6

I apologize for my delayed response, life has been quite busy and I wanted to give this a thoughtful response after some contemplation. There are many things to address here so I will break them down.

Ability to see all photos

I’ve been racking my brain to figure out a way to do this, at the current time I cannot see a way to achieve what you want. The closest I can suggest is by going to each category, for example going to just ‘Avian’ will show you all the avian images in order of date posted (not by latest reply), but you have to go to each category. If we make the change suggested here, then you would only have to visit two categories to see all the images.

Grid of photos

This may be coming in the future, currently it is not possible but it is on the roadmap for this software as a potential option. Whether we choose to use the new option will depend on how it works. I have no timeline on this as I am limited by others who develop the forum software.

Discussions grouped together

I agree that discussions should be together, one option may be what I proposed here. If the consensus is to keep things the way they are, I can still break out discussions from each category. I will plan to make this change either way.

Dominance of the Landscape category

Yes, there has been an influx of landscape photographers and it is dominating the feed right now. I will take blame for some of this because it is what I know best, I have many connections in the landscape world and know how to target this audience. On the other hand, I know very few wildlife, avian, flora, or macro photographers. I need help from all of you to help me draw in these people, we need more big names in here from these categories, please tell me who they are, who I can reach out to. Or, please reach out to them yourself if you have a good relationship with them.

The other issue has been a fall off of members posting from the old site, where have they gone? There were so many posting in these categories regularly on the old site and now they have stopped. Some never made the move over, others have just stopped posting. If you have a relationship with anyone that falls into this category please reach out to them and find out why. I will be doing some research to find out who these folks are so I can get in touch with them to overcome any hurdles they have run into.

Views and Replies

I have brought back view count in the post itself, but kept it hidden in the list view. My hope is this way people will not be influenced to view an image based upon how many views it has by having that count in the list, but the poster can still see how many views they have received by visiting their post. I have also taken into consideration the Replies count, I have hidden this for now to see how if there is any effect, there may be unforeseen consequences that makes me bring this back, but I agree that this could cause ‘popularity’ problems so we will try running without it for awhile.


(Allen Brooks) #7

David, I appreciate your response. I like the changes you are proposing. I think your plan regarding views is a great solution as it will give the photographer some feedback, but shouldn’t influence viewing by others.


(Sandy Richards-Brown) #8

David, I believe this is due to the steep learning curve and many, many changes here. It took me a LONG time to figure out how to post, and get things in the right order - and I still screw up regularly. (Thanks for correcting!)

One suggestion would be to move the “How to Post” instructions FIRST in the FAQ, rather than WAAAAAY down the line. This is one of the first things that people would be looking for, and it’s hard to find as is.
I have reached out to a half dozen people I know in this category, and encouraged them to keep trying or post to ask for help.
They have not been posting, although I know they were excited with the new site and anxious to take part.

How do we look up the postings of friends? I often check several people whose images I never want to miss. I do miss the “Gallery” link under each person’s avatar.

Great site, and improving daily!

Sandy


(Jim Zablotny) #9

Hi David,

The site is improving and I like the changes that you have implemented…Jim


(Sandy Richards-Brown) #10

Another thing may be the strong emphasis on Landscape - look at the statistics, and the fact that it’s listed in the first place.
Other equally impt (IMO) Galleries are relegated to 5th place (again, imo)
ive interacted with a lot of people here who don’t like that at all and are dropping out.
Time will tell, but I sure don’t want a primarily-Landscape site. There are already lots of those. IMO, the strength of the old NPN was it’s diversity.
Sandy


(Sandy Richards-Brown) #11

I personally like seeing the “views” . If unusually high, It’s a clue that there may be something special I missed - either something in the image, or some discussion or exchange that might help me learn. I don’t care at all about the actual number.
Also, conversely, if there are a lot of views but no or few comments, I make a point of commenting, to encourage and help the person.
Sandy


(Preston Birdwell) #12

@Sandy_Richards-Brown , the diversity of NPN still exists. In my opinion, NPN is not primarily ‘landscape photography’ site. It is a Nature Photography site.

Other than the suggestion I will make next, I do not know what the solution is to address your concern, but it may help…

Instead of listing Landscape first in the links under Critique Galleries and Image (sharing) Galleries, they could be listed in alphabetical order as they were in the old NPN galleries drop-down menu.

The same could be done for the Discussion forums, but with General Discussion appearing first, as was done on the old site.

Doing it that way would eliminate any concern about one specialization being (inadvertently) promoted over another.

What do you, and others think?

The foregoing is my own two cents. It would be up to @David_Kingham to decide
-P


(David Kingham) #13

I have re-ordered the categories to be alphabetical. The site is not landscape only and I would hope you would tell those that are dropping out that this is absolutely not the case. I need help from the members to find ways to bring more interest to the other categories as they are not my specialty.

I have brought the views back when you view a post, but I will not be bringing them back in the list view, there is simply too much risk for it to become a popularity contest and people making decisions on where to post based upon this data.

To find all the posts from another user either click on their avatar if it is visible, click on their photo in the user card that pops up which will take you to their profile (or first do a search for the user if their avatar isn’t on the screen). Click ‘Activity’, then click ‘Topics’, this will show you everything they have posted. I know it’s a bit convoluted and imperfect because you can’t see a preview of the image they posted, but that’s what we have for now. I hope to improve this in the future but there are software limitations that cannot be easily worked around.


(Preston Birdwell) #14

Thanks for doing this, David. I believe it will help allay any concerns about prioritization.

I think this is a fine compromise. I certainly do not want NPN to become a popularity contest.
-P


(Terri L Barnett) #15

Now I’m upset because Wildlife is listed last. I’M KIDDING!!!

David, I so appreciate all that you are doing to try to make this a great site and to juggle everyone’s wants and needs. What an undertaking!!!

I hope that we all are able to encourage people interested in all “categories” to join NPN. But especially from our own genres as we are the ones most likely to have those contacts. Thanks for the reminder that we need to be recruiters too!


(Sandy Richards-Brown) #16

David, thanks for all your hard work to get this site up, and then continue to tweak it as we make suggestions!
Sandy


Back
Forward