Save 10% On Used Camera Equipment & Lenses From CameraWorld! Use ePHOTO at checkout.

The click debate - hopefully the final one!

Attention!

This topic is locked.


trahern 15 863 United Kingdom
24 Jun 2005 8:02AM
Well personally I think this thread is well and truly exhausted. It certainly makes me feel tired.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

elowes 15 2.8k United Kingdom
24 Jun 2005 8:06AM
Looked at the revamped front for the gallery, Like it OK.

Did begin to wonder what was the point when I looked at one or two images, not quite at random as it was type and particular photographers who tend to get attention.

I looked at the gushing (and lads) comments on what were good enough pics, but I thought 'can't be arsed to disagree'.

Hope it's just the hang over from the thunderstorms which woke me before the birds began to sing.
GingerBadger 14 97 Wales
24 Jun 2005 8:16AM
Hmm. Sorry - I like the changes thus far.

No hearts on the gallery.

EC and HC remain - so what is they are ultimately subjective?

I've wrote good articles that got bumped for similar ones by other authors - and vice versa - the entire point is - it's an EC. That's EC people.

To me, they're a bonus that shouldn't be dwelled upon. The important thing is to take the visual [numerical] weighting, evident in the gallery, away - and this has been done. I've just looked at maybe six shots, that in my opinion - simply did not deserve the 35-45 mark they nailed. Being objective.

There are many, many, many shots - that simply did. The measures thus far I think will similarly reward these truly inspiring shots, whilst seperating the wheat from the chaff a tad with regard so-so images that score astronomically well.

Ftr, I'm also happy with my own modest 'highest score', for example - no RC's - which I truly regard as fair - and about as much as I could glean at this early stage [studying and learning the digi-lab].

In the meantime - I'll enjoy the really important thing - trying to get x amount of time to myself and enjoy photography whilst capturing the best shots I can/ :o)

I dunno - if were Epz editor - I'd be a bit concerned about maintaining the wing of obvious quality in the site - and not letting it turn into something throwaway. Devices like EC help that. I think. :o)

Also - has anyone added to this endless debate something along the lines of 'allow the clicks - hide the heart rating until such time any one shot got over 30, then it's revealed and the photographer whoops with delight!!' - TOGETHER WITH after 8 weeks online - all shots reveal their 'mark' in any case. As a point of archival interest - not as the focus of everyone's photographic pursuit!?
evap 14 223 England
24 Jun 2005 8:27AM
Just had to go back a few pages to realise where the hearts have gone!

Very +ve move - faster than I was expecting as well.

Well Done!

Simon
magda_indigo 15 418 England
24 Jun 2005 8:36AM
Must say I WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree with Keith.
"I'm just fed up of the will of the minority being used to influence the enjoyment of the majority."
(o?o)

Why having introduced 'favourites' on E2?
I never used to have 'faves', now, I see who's uploaded and view, etc.
glazzaro 14 70 23 United States
24 Jun 2005 8:37AM
Pete

I was not questioning you or your integrity, just the process and how pointless it is, why we question the majority and not that of one man's opinion. I think Barrie also makes some good points, and can you honestly say you have not given out an HC or EC to a shot that might not be up to quality? To error is human, to forgive is divine! Again I am not questioning you, just this process. This forum and the comments does not represent the community at large, I have read all the threads and most are repeats performers like myself. I do not even have an issue with what process is used; in the end you will see the results in your profits, good or bad.

What I am objecting to is not being given a vote. The voice of the community has not been heard and I am afraid it seems that it will not. I would just close saying that when people lose confidence in the process and they feel changes are made without their consent or a consensus, history has shown us that the results tend to be disastrous!

You have put together an excellent site with great membership, which has been made possible by the community, I just caution you not to neglect the community to pamper a few. If given a vote I would also abide by the results of the whole, one way or the other I want to be heard as a voting member, not a nondescript written message on a forum that is not representing the customer!

Greg
User_Removed 17 7.3k 6 United Kingdom
24 Jun 2005 8:41AM
If the majority doesn't like what the minority say or do (in any walk of life) then it is up to them to do something about it.

As usual with ePz (and all other websites, clubs etc), there are very few people who either care enough or can be be bothered to say or do anything. This being the case, the majority get what they deserve in my opinion (as with the election - if only 40% turn out to vote, then the remaining 60% have no right to complain about the result!)

In this instance, Pete asked for comment and debate about the galleries and that is what has happened.

Whilst accepting Pete's role as Editor (and founder etc etc etc), this is a 'paid for' members site so perhaps the time has come to put this to a poll where we all agree to be bound by the outcome. If the membership at large choose not to vote - so be it.

Barrie Smile
pipapelada 14 135
24 Jun 2005 8:46AM
Oh for god's sake! whinge whinge whinge, whine whine whine YAWN!!!
It's a flipping photography site, that's all - listen to yourselves!
User_Removed 17 7.3k 6 United Kingdom
24 Jun 2005 8:50AM
yes it is a photography site that some of us have been with for a very long time and care about.

Part of that is trying to craft it into the way we personally would like it to go. That doesn't mean it is going to happen, it doesn't mean we are always going to agree with Pete or with opinions expressed by other members and likewise I don't expect everyone to agree with me all of the time (some of the time would be nice).

However, as members, we have the absolute right to express what we feel is right as long as we respect other members rights to do likewise.

I notice you are an e2 member. For years (literally) myself and others berated Pete constantly to be given the facility to show larger images as we were so frustrated at the quality of 500pixel images (we even suggested paying for the privilege) - now it has happened due in main to membership pressure.

It's not whining - it's debate for the common good

Barrie Smile
User_Removed 14 4.3k 2 United Kingdom
24 Jun 2005 9:00AM
Just a thought.
You've made changes to stop the click cliques - okay, but won't they just have everyone in the clique listed in their favourites anyway?
mattw 15 5.2k 10 United Kingdom
24 Jun 2005 9:01AM

Quote:
because a gallery without clicks seems a bit.....empty? pointless?


Why do you think that, Matt?
It is a Gallery and it's doing what Galleries do. It's hanging around with pictures in it.
THAT is its point.



Sorry, I have just realized I may have been misleading. I don't mind hiding the click totals on the thumbnail page - I don't mind that at all.

No, but I do enjoy the interaction of being able to award a click to a photo I like. And yes, I like getting them as well. If I want to put my photo's in a straight gallery, then I could put them onto MY website, but instead I prioritize uploading them to EPZ first because it is more... fun

(oh dear there goes Petes ego)


Mattw
tepot 15 4.4k United Kingdom
24 Jun 2005 9:06AM
you won't please everybody all of the time, thats for sure, even if changes are made, you will still get people bitchin' bout it!
tepot 15 4.4k United Kingdom
24 Jun 2005 9:10AM
has something happened to the gallery just now? there's no click numbers till you open up the image!
akh Plus
15 1.2k 5 United Kingdom
24 Jun 2005 9:11AM
If you buy or subscribe to a printed photo magazine you have no say over the content or direction of that magazine so why do you think you should have a right to craft this e-magazine into "the way we personally would like it to go". Perhaps the editorial team of this site should act the same way as that of a printed magazine and vet all the pictures sent up to the gallery and reject any which do not pass certain criteria. No printed magazine would include sub-standard images and I do know of other sites where pictures have to approved before they are included into the gallery. That would put a few noses out of joint.

I still say leave the gallery as it is without the hearts showing and have a separate critique gallery without clicks for those who are only interested in seeking advice.

Tony
Pete Plus
18 18.8k 97 England
24 Jun 2005 9:12AM

Quote:You've made changes to stop the click cliques - okay, but won't they just have everyone in the clique listed in their favourites anyway?


The change we've made wasn't to stop the click cliques it was a change that was requested in this thread and one that makes sense to help address the balance of which photos are viewed. As I stated I don't want to stop click cliques that's why I'm trying to find an alternative that we're all happy with.

I'm going to lock this now as I've got all the info I wanted and I'd hate it to continue and upset more people. Thanks for the opinions and if we do anything drastic we will have a vote Greg Smile