What does the gallery need?

I would welcome a Gallery similar to the zeissimages.com gallery design.

A more modern look plus a flood of in-Forum publicity could generate more widespread interest. I doubt it would lower participation.

Years ago (and no doubt several gallery versions ago as well) I just quit posting photos because the SW was too clunky. This Thread makes me realize I want to participate again and I will.
 
I'd like to see direct uploading to the forums without having to go through f(oot)lickr. And the size of image uploaded to gallery should be bigger, if possible.
 
Everyone is so nice in their comments there appears no way to improve, so unless you just need a pat on the back, why post.
 
I've noticed that some people just dump the contents of their (digital) cameras into gallery (within daily limit), without even bothering to put a title on the image. I understand that some images are better left untitled, but when dubious-merit pictures are thus "shared" with the rest of us it brings the quality of whole gallery down. On the other hand I can't imagine some kind of "artistic merit" censorship. It's a veritable bind.
 
faberryman said:
Everyone is so nice in their comments there appears no way to improve, so unless you just need a pat on the back, why post.
Click to expand...


This has been talked to death in many photo forums (remember on this forum a few years back - "honest criticsim" ...... what a #$%#@ war that turned into. I think a few people ended up being kicked out after that battle (?)
People post images for a variety of reasons.... simple social sharing is a big reason ..... asking for personal / technical opinions is another.
If you want critical opinions, just post and ask for it.
 
I haven’t added a picture to my gallery in several months now. No specific reason actually, I just rather put any good pictures I take on my website. I do however, contribute to the Words/No Words picture section. All the various categories there really interest me.

Jim B.
 
I've posted a few gallery pics to try it out. But isn't it somewhat redundant when most of us have web sites, blogs, social media pages, etc.? And we can post to threads.

Honestly, I can't think of a reason to post there when all those other resources are available, many with the ability to create the look and feel we want.

John
 
Doug said:
Done! :)..................
Click to expand...

Thank you Doug. I'm shooting a lot of the EDU films & just received some rolls of the Kentmere 100 from B&H. I read its a good replacement to Plus X. We'll see.

I really like loading to the gallery. So simple. Like looking at images in the gallery. Much easier to control than flickr. You guys do a good job & know what ever improvements are made will be awesome.
 
I don't think this is related to the topic, but...

PaulCooper said:
I've noticed that some people just dump the contents of their (digital) cameras into gallery (within daily limit), without even bothering to put a title on the image. I understand that some images are better left untitled, but when dubious-merit pictures are thus "shared" with the rest of us it brings the quality of whole gallery down. On the other hand I can't imagine some kind of "artistic merit" censorship. It's a veritable bind.
Click to expand...

Titling is only option. Rare option. How many titles do you remember from world known photographers?

"Dumping" or "series" depends on the viewer imagination capability.

"Quality of whole gallery" is like "quality" of all food on the food market. Eat what you are get used to of or dare to try something different. In RFF Gallery I'm finding even some junky digital cameras pictures ignitive for my imagination.
 
johnwolf said:
I've posted a few gallery pics to try it out. But isn't it somewhat redundant when most of us have web sites, blogs, social media pages, etc.? And we can post to threads.

Honestly, I can't think of a reason to post there when all those other resources are available, many with the ability to create the look and feel we want.

John
Click to expand...

Perfectly stated.... I feel the sae way
Threads are enough for me here ;)
 
Easy uploading of photos which means automatic resizing.
This is at least the third time of my requesting.
Surely it can't be difficult to write the code needed so there must be another good reason.
 
Originally Posted by johnwolf
I've posted a few gallery pics to try it out. But isn't it somewhat redundant when most of us have web sites, blogs, social media pages, etc.? And we can post to threads. John
Click to expand...
Agreed, also since the ''gallery'' is missing most ''Flickr''-like characteristics and features.
 
jesse1dog said:
Easy uploading of photos which means automatic resizing.
This is at least the third time of my requesting.
Surely it can't be difficult to write the code needed so there must be another good reason.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the resizing comments. As it stands if your image is bigger than defined dimensions, it gets resized.
 
Why won't the gallery here accept my photos but Facebook will?

I don't have to do anything special with FB.

Maybe it's me!
 
Bill Clark said:
Why won't the gallery here accept my photos but Facebook will?

I don't have to do anything special with FB.

Maybe it's me!
Click to expand...

try posting it on leicaimages.com and see what happens or send me the photo so I can see what is going on. But, please provide more details.
 
Just tried to upload a photo:
'exceeds maximum file size' - message appears.
No automatic resizing here.
Image was bigger than defined dimensions and didn't upload.
Does this make my observation clearer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top