Did the average Quality drop ???

[suredeath]

[before you read on, I do not consider myself a good photographer, I have the gear but I lack skill and talent. Heck my gf makes better pics with my old camera and she knows zilch about technical issues and stuff]

I joined PBase in 2002 when it was still free. I was amazed how many good photographers/photos this site 'had'. When it became a pay site I decided not to join and wait and see first what would happen to it. And similar as to what seems to have happened at Photosig, it appears to me contrary to my initial thoughts on the matter the average level of photography has dropped, not risen.

Is it true the better photographers simply refuse to pay for showing their shots here and the less talented ones gladly pay for a chance to show their work ? Of course this is my personal subjective opinion. I'm just curious if more people here have the same idea....

I have nothing against this being a paid site, and the way it is maintained is textbook eample of good web practice! I just think it is a shame the introduction of membership fees chases away the ones whose pictures are the most worthwile to be seen! I'd like your opinions too!

Keep shooting!
Sjoerd

[minoltaman]

I do not think I buy your banter. Bandspace and storage costs money. Many will gladly pay for that. The longer I stay here the better and more diverse work I see posted to this site.

Cheers

BTW...You claim yourself that you are not a very accomplished photographer so by what standard are you judging others on?

Cheers

[kushti]

[before you read on, I do not consider myself a good photographer, I have the gear but I lack skill and talent. Heck my gf makes better pics with my old camera and she knows zilch about technical issues and stuff]

I joined PBase in 2002 when it was still free. I was amazed how many good photographers/photos this site 'had'. When it became a pay site I decided not to join and wait and see first what would happen to it. And similar as to what seems to have happened at Photosig, it appears to me contrary to my initial thoughts on the matter the average level of photography has dropped, not risen.

Is it true the better photographers simply refuse to pay for showing their shots here and the less talented ones gladly pay for a chance to show their work ? Of course this is my personal subjective opinion. I'm just curious if more people here have the same idea....

I have nothing against this being a paid site, and the way it is maintained is textbook eample of good web practice! I just think it is a shame the introduction of membership fees chases away the ones whose pictures are the most worthwile to be seen! I'd like your opinions too!

Keep shooting!
Sjoerd

Another good but cheaper option is

http://www.photosnapper.com

There is a basic free account as well as subscription options. They are a new site but its looking good so far.

[minoltaman]

The sheer number of uploads alone here should tell you pbase is possibly the best photo-hosting site on the net. Simple, effective, and the awsome thumbnail display arrays that allow for maximum exposure are second to none. I think slug has the best pdatabase on the net. Getting better all of the time too.

Cheers

PS..Where ya at Joe??

[peterb]

I'll have to admit that the overall (average) quality of images at pbase has dropped. This is simply due to the law of averages...there are so many more users now that it can't help but be the case. Having said that, I've also seen some of the best photographers on pbase arrive since it became a pay site. I think that this has less to do with it being a pay site than the fact that some of the better photogs appreciate pbase for what it is...the best photo storing/sharing site on the web. Some of the sense of community has been lost but, that's to be expected with the exponential jump in usership.

[minoltaman]

I'll have to admit that the overall (average) quality of images at pbase has dropped.

Hmm...you would think if people have to pay to post they would post better stuff overall. As time goes on and freeloaders cannot upload to there accounts anymore and those accounts eventually get deleted I think the quality is or will be on the upswing. IMHO

Cheers

[polyvios]

I really doubt anyone can say since pbase is simply HUGE (the bigger something is the hardest it becomes to get a clear statistic for it's quality). It may well be that since it has become more popular it has attracted people that under past circumstances would have known about it (aka amateurs, like me )

Afterall pbase aims to do business in storing pages for more and more indivituals, not better and better photographs.

If you were asking me I'd have to say that I am amazed by the service quality even through the huge growth

[minoltaman]

Afterall pbase aims to do business in storing pages for more and more indivituals, not better and better photographs.

As people remain here you would think they gain experience and become better photographers. They also usually purchase better cameras along the way so the pics they post also usually get more dynamic. They also probably are deleting bunk earlier, lessor shots. In effect raising the overall quality I would think. But as you say it is almost to big to rate and what exactly would you rate anyway?

If you were asking me I'd have to say that I am amazed by the service quality even through the huge growth

You can say that again.

Cheers

[darter02]

Being that I am a relatively new member I cannot compare to how it was “before.” I like this site and I have seen some very good work by members here. I have also found a very active creative outlet by becoming involved in the growing group of users who are doing the “Photo a Day for a Year” project. Overall, I have to say I really enjoy this site.

[pstewart]

Darter, I agree there are a lot of really good photos here...amazing collection. I joined in 2002 and was just a browser for a year, not a paying member, until I finally paid the pittance they ask and made some galleries of my own recently. I haven't noticed it getting worse or better myself. I really can't imagine how a tiny amount like $2/month could make any difference in who would choose to use it.

The only thing that I've noticed lately is the number of nude galleries appearing in the pop list. Some of them are very tasteful and artistically done, and I even voted for one of them, but some others are just average "snapshots" of subject matter bordering on porn, if not actual porn. I would prefer not to have this site head in that direction, as there are more than enough real porn sites on the web already. But it's not up to me to set the standards here.

Phyllis

[ang1970]

I'll second polyvios' comment. How could any one of us possibly go through all the galleries here? Nevermind a thorough analysis and comparison of pre- vs. post- pay status.

Also, I encourage Phyllis to start a new thread on the qualification of porn vs. art. I think it would be an interesting topic to explore.

And finally, I'd like to suggest that pbase find ways to increase incentive to review other people's work. This would benefit in several ways. The main one being to help people improve the quality of their own photos. One major reason I come here is to get real critique from real photographers... people who have a higher standard than, let's say for instance, my mom.
It seems right now the only ways to get a review are:
A. Tell people directly
B. Post 20 times a day in this forum
C. Have an outstanding (above average) gallery to begin with, which doesn't garner any critical feedback at all
It doesn't help anyone to improve if the only reviews are "Looks great honey... why don't you call me more often son? Your father and I miss you very much."

Another benefit of increased reviews would be more selective posting. After receiving a great deal of negative comments, people would think twice about posting any less than their best work. The drawback is that some might stop posting altogether, and some will be quick to cry "elitism". Well guess what... tough. You're either here to improve your work, or to get your ego stroked. I could do without the latter, no matter what the quality of work. Let's start weeding out now, no wringing of fingers.

How about a "vote against this gallery" option?

That's my $0.02USD. Hold on a sec... ok got the asbestos suit on, fire away.

Cheers,
Angelo

[minoltaman]

It seems right now the only ways to get a review are:
A. Tell people directly
B. Post 20 times a day in this forum
C. Have an outstanding (above average) gallery to begin with, which doesn't garner any critical feedback at all
It doesn't help anyone to improve if the only reviews are "Looks great honey... why don't you call me more often son? Your father and I miss you very much."

You missed the easiest way...(other than asking your friends I suppose) stay in the upload list with quality stuff and they will come and comment if your stuff is any good at all.

I would question that the number of posts in any forums leads directly to comments. Maybe marginally I suppose.

Cheers

[minoltaman]

I forgot another good way to garner comments. Look around for compelling galleries and when you find one that is unique or very nice make a comment on it. You never know, someone may return the favor if you have any compelling stuff. If they have the time to find it, deem something worthy, and leave a comment.

Cheers

[minoltaman]

One more. Get a gallery or two high up the popular lists by compelling votes from people. This will give you exposure and you will get substansial amounts runoff traffic from your popular galleries. This is also a very good way to capture comments. The more popular galleries in the top 100 of all lists the better for drawing comments.

Bottom line...work hard and upload many good pics.

Cheers

[suredeath]

Quite a nice line of responses, thanks all for your thoughts so far.

As to 'how I can judge a photo's quality being a poor photographer myself' ?, I think the answer is simple: I don't need to be a writer to have an opinion on a book, and if I read enough one might argue the opinion becomes more and more funded, a bigger frame of reference. Besides, ANY opinion is subjective, and as valuable in itself as any other. Most art criticasters don't paint....

The suggestion made wrt to the question about critiques/comments seems a bit weird to me. To get more critiques and advice on how to improve my work I first have to improve my work and become more popular? It's comments they want, not necessarily feathers up their hinies. I agree with those who'd like a better mechanism for getting comments on work....

I don't share the idea that 'because people pay they are bound to send in better work'. If people have to become choosy based on nearing storage limits it does, but the fact they pay might sooner make people stuff their 'locker' to the max (if there is a relevant effect from that at all).

By the way, A site like photosig.com is more geared towards critiqueing. One can only send in a very limited amount of photos per timeperiod (3 every 72 hours I think), and only by participating more in critiqueing other peoples' work you can get extra 'upload credits')

Thanks for the suggestion of a free or cheaper alternative, it was not exactly why I posted this but it is nice to know and I'll definitely take a look!

To conclude with a positive remark on PBASE, it is clear this site has become more and more popular as member numbers have increaseda lot, and the service has always been good. Haven't heard many negative stories about it!!!

Early to say what the poll will yield, it is nice to see that all the options seem to be realistic at least to some...

Keep shooting!