Is this site dying out or are my stats wrong?

[Christopher C.M. Cooke]

In conversation with many members recently, there appears to be a slow deterioration in the usage of this once wonderful site.

Those much more knowledgeable than myself may want to comment on this but I certainly find this a much less vibrant site than it once was, with much less participation in the forums than before.

All I want is some direction as to where this site is going as I feel now part of a failing entity.

Many of the comments that friends and members have made to me are the commercial direction that the site appears to be going.

The many questions asked, seem to be directed to an advertising mode and the once great philosophy of photography for the greater good of the art appears to have been sacrificed to expensive and unaffordable to most, guided tours that though wonderful, are out of the range of the majority of members.

Please let us know the true direction of BPN so that many of us can make an informed decision as whether or not to renew our membership when due.

[denise ippolito]

Christopher, I am no expert but it seems to me that you only get out what you put in. This site is filled with lots of great information. All free for the taking. Every post is a learning opportunity. I can only speak for my forum OOTB when I say it is thriving. We have more member participation than ever. :)

[Roger Clark]

Chris,

I see ebb and flow on other sites too. There seems to be a lull in posts on weekends, which I think is a good sign: people are getting out and doing things. Because most members are northern hemisphere, people tend to be out more in the summer (with some exceptions like hot regions) and less online. Membership growth is still going up rapidly. It wasn't that long ago that we had 5,000 members; now it is over 9400. Most activity seems to be in posting images to the critique forums. So it looks like growth is good, and probably a summer lull in forums like gear and workflow. It may also be that the membership has gotten so many questions answered that they don't need to ask more questions, but get out and take pictures. Now if someone would answer my question on stacked 2x TCs.....:o

Roger

[Arthur Morris]

Hi Chris,

re:

In conversation with many members recently, there appears to be a slow deterioration in the usage of this once wonderful site.

I am confused: how does deterioration appear in a conversation?

Those much more knowledgeable than myself may want to comment on this but I certainly find this a much less vibrant site than it once was, with much less participation in the forums than before.

What forums are you talking about??? As Denise mentioned, in part, you get out what you put in. I have not seen an image of yours for months (although you appear to be fairly active on some of the discussion forums).

All I want is some direction as to where this site is going as I feel now part of a failing entity.

On what stats are you basing your comments on? Visits are up dramatically from the same time period last year. On a personal note, I have been more active than ever before in August and September having raised my posts per day average from a low of 14.02 when I got home from Galapagos to about 14.89 as I type. And I can tell you, it is not easy to raise your batting average two years in to the season.

Many of the comments that friends and members have made to me are the commercial direction that the site appears to be going.

Please do be specific as far as the commercial direction that you refer to.

The many questions asked, seem to be directed to an advertising mode

Chris, what in the world are you talking about?

and the once great philosophy of photography for the greater good of the art

Chris, please post a link here to anything that smacks of the above.

appears to have been sacrificed to expensive and unaffordable to most, guided tours that though wonderful, are out of the range of the majority of members.

As far as I know, the only place that tours are mentioned is in the Workshops Forum. Where are you seeing mention of tours???

Please let us know the true direction of BPN so that many of us can make an informed decision as whether or not to renew our membership when due.

We just finished upgrading the site at a cost of many thousands of dollars. Every forum is filled with great images, great information, and tons of basically free tips. Our goal remains the same: to be the very best educational nature web site on the planet. In Avian more than elsewhere, I have seen that many folks post images and rarely comment on images posted by other folks leaving the great bulk of work to the Mods. We are currently looking at a variety of ways to encourage folks to comment on the images of others. Do you have any ideas?

In general I have no idea what you are talking about. Your thread seems biased and negative at best and as I said above, I see no mention of your so-called stats.

What ever happened to a positive mental attitude, participation, and leading by example?

I have taken the time to address your concerns and hope that you take the time to answer my questions above.

[Mike Tracy]

I doub't the site is dying out and sites are cyclical like Roger pointed out. Several of the top posters have left so there is a void to be filled. Of the top 20 posters 8 no longer participate and 10 are either mods or have a vested interest. Site stats seem to indicate steady traffic so it's just that people are looking more than participating. With time, new and existing members will probably fill the void left by the members who vacated.

My personal sentiments are that this forum provides a wonderful learning environment and agree with Denise in regards to you get out what you put in. However, I do feel that a sense of this forum being a "fun" place to participate is not there and my discussions with both members past and present as well as non members support that. It's the responsibility of the core group to foster an atmosphere to retain members, enlist respected photographers and balance making BPN a educational resource along with a place one feels at ease with voicing his opinion.

I happen to like it here for the most part and participate when time permits. I also was always the first one in class to raise their hand so thats why I took the initiative to reply to your query from a "regular" members perspective.

Edit: Mr. Morris beat me in his reply so I have not yet read it.

[Eric Virkler]

Chris, I believe that there are many of us in the background learning from the discussions, critiques, posts, etc. of those more experienced and more knowledgeable. Since many may not be posting or critiquing it may seem that they are not participating in this great forum. The information gained and knowledge increased by each one is not measureable by post numbers.

Eric

Faces of Nature Photography
www.ericjvirkler.com

[Chris Ober]

The server logs show differently....

In conversation with many members recently, there appears to be a slow deterioration in the usage of this once wonderful site.

[Arthur Morris]

Now if someone would answer my question on stacked 2x TCs.....:o Roger

Roger, where can I find your question?

[Arthur Morris]

Chris, Here are a smattering of very recent comments:


"Nature photography pretty much demands perfection; that is why folks need to do the work, put in the effort, and practice." I doubt if things have always been like this but because of you and your efforts, the bar has been raised and you have shown the rest of us what nature photography can be at its best. I feel like I have done 2 things right out of 20 so far; I have found the bird and I have taken a photo from it. Now I'm here to learn the rest of the missing 18 points. :D
Thanks Arthur, Mikko

and

Artie, as someone once said in another context, "Now that's information I can use." Thanks so much . . . Wendell

and

Thanks for the question Artie! Yes, I would have preferred the wings to be fully extended. Ideally, a full extension up or down would have made this a much stronger image. But seeing that I do not have that, it is something to shoot for in the future. Gary.

One would not expect comments like that on a "dying site." And I am sure that the other mods could point you to dozens of similar comments from the past week alone.

And here's one directed at Dan:

Hi Dan, After reading your critique I went back to my NEF file and found as you had observed, a definite file degradation on the pict submitted. I then tried to replicate my work flow to see what happened. As you suspected, I had carelessly used a Noise remover by brush on the file. As for the magenta cast - I will have to work on that. I use each and every critique given me on my pictures as a class in learning. Thank you - Daniel Cadieux for your time, patient and observing eye. Rob

[Nicki Gwynn Jones]

What bothers me is how few people who post in Avian seem to leave a comment, and Artie, I know that you mentioned this point in an earlier pane. I know that a lot of us dip in from time to time - I for one have had no time to post recently, but to post an image and not have the courtesty to leave five or six comments for other people is downright rude. We are all responsible for making this site a fun place to be.
Nicki

[Arthur Morris]

Hey Nicki, We are working on it. Hope to see you posting soon.

[Joel Eade]

Chris,

As a relatively new member I can't say that I see the site "moving" toward an advertising or commercial mode.

Of course there is an entrepreneural aspect where those on a professional level organize and lead workshops for a fee. But what's wrong with that? It's an everyday way of life to pay for skills and knowledge that you don't possess yourself,( there are too many examples of that to mention.) If you are not interested in workshops, don't look at that forum. There are many affordable ways to enjoy nature photography....99% of my images come from my back yard song bird setup that cost less than $100 until just recently I had to move my daughter to florida and I arranged a one day outing with James Shadle that was very affordable. My work and other obligations prevent me from participating in those big time events but I'm not mad about it, I just do what I can and derive enjoyment from what the blessings I have.

I certainly agree that it is easier to post images than to critique others, for myself I just don't feel very qualified other than to just say something that may not really help the poster learn or improve. Maybe a guide or trainig aid on how to properly critique may be useful. Despite this I don't think there is a slow down in posts.

I think for the small membership fee you have available at least 5 or 6 forums you can post one image daily and receive critique from recognized experts....if you do the math I bet you could submit as many a 2000 images in a year for review....that's pretty good for $20 IMHO!

Don't worry, be happy!!!

Joel

[Arthur Morris]

Chris, As a relatively new member I can't say that I see the site "moving" toward an advertising or commercial mode. Of course there is an entrepreneural aspect where those on a professional level organize and lead workshops for a fee. But what's wrong with that? It's an everyday way of life to pay for skills and knowledge that you don't possess yourself,( there are too many examples of that to mention.) If you are not interested in workshops, don't look at that forum. There are many affordable ways to enjoy nature photography....99% of my images come from my back yard song bird setup that cost less than $100 until just recently I had to move my daughter to florida and I arranged a one day outing with James Shadle that was very affordable. My work and other obligations prevent me from participating in those big time events but I'm not mad about it, I just do what I can and derive enjoyment from what the blessings I have. I certainly agree that it is easier to post images than to critique others, for myself I just don't feel very qualified other than to just say something that may not really help the poster learn or improve. Maybe a guide or trainig aid on how to properly critique may be useful. Despite this I don't think there is a slow down in posts. I think for the small membership fee you have available at least 5 or 6 forums you can post one image daily and receive critique from recognized experts....if you do the math I bet you could submit as many a 2000 images in a year for review....that's pretty good for $20 IMHO! Don't worry, be happy!!! Joel

Well said Joel, and thanks. As for the critiquing all that is asked is for folks to look and an image, state what they like and what they don't like, and tell us why. It is actually quite simple; anyone can do it. :)

[Nicki Gwynn Jones]

Artie, I shall try to post soon :)
Joel, I agree with Artie that critiquing does not need to be complicated. If you have enjoyed an image then I think that the photographer would always appreciate knowing this. Your input is always valuable and valid :cool:

[Michael Bertelsen]

I'll be posting a bunch as soon as I'm done the moose trips and fishing trips.
I know there is quite a few people like me who are to tired after a long day in the feild or at work to carry on a conversation but for me that is what the winter is for and I look forward to these discussions.

Keep them coming folks,

Michael Bertelsen

[Roger Clark]

Roger, where can I find your question?

http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...with-1D-bodies

Roger

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks Roger, Amazingly sharp moon image. Thanks for the link. I posted a question or two there.

[James Shadle]

Chris,
I'd like to take this point by point.
You said: "In conversation with many members recently, there appears to be a slow deterioration in the usage of this once wonderful site.
Those much more knowledgeable than myself may want to comment on this but I certainly find this a much less vibrant site than it once was, with much less participation in the forums than before."

As Chris mentioned (as only Chris can) so eloquently the server log shows no recent decrease in visits or hits. We are in fact up from the same time last year.

Roger's point that most nature photography forums (with a majority of it's users in the northern hemisphere) dip a little in the summer is valid. Mike's point that a few "top posters" are no longer participating is also valid.
In both cases the impression could be that volume is down, however the server log and analytics shows otherwise.

You said: "All I want is some direction as to where this site is going as I feel now part of a failing entity."
Failure is not an option. We did not spend the time and money we did upgrading our server and forum software to fail.

You said: "Many of the comments that friends and members have made to me are the commercial direction that the site appears to be going. "
Help me understand this - we have not added any advertisers in over a year and a half.

You said: "The many questions asked, seem to be directed to an advertising mode and the once great philosophy of photography for the greater good of the art appears to have been sacrificed to expensive and unaffordable to most, guided tours that though wonderful, are out of the range of the majority of members."

I'm not following you on this one either, so please elaborate. We allow members to post workshop notifications in the appropriate forum at no cost to them.

You said: "Please let us know the true direction of BPN so that many of us can make an informed decision as whether or not to renew our membership when due."

BPN's true direction has not changed, as matter of fact we are more on target than ever. Our goal and direction is to be the best internet forum community to learn and teach nature photography.
We are not a back slapping, great shot, good ol' boy forum, rather we are an educational forum where you can get honest critiques from some of the planet's best nature photographers.

I am a big believer in "community" and frankly this is an area that I do believe we can improve.

Helping one another, getting to know one another, fun, sharing, laughing, getting irritated, learning and teaching are just a few qualities of our forum community.

As mentioned, "you only get out what you put in". I'll go a step further and say "everyone only gets out what you put in". Imagine if everyone had that attitude!

We will continue to work hard to make BPN a fun place to learn and teach nature photography.

[Norm Dulak]

Christopher:

I tend to agree that the problems at BPN have been steadily growing. As a further example, I posted an image of a Galapagos land iguana recently that was referred to by one commentator as having a "grunge look." Constructive criticism that can lead to improvement is always welcome, but such derogatory comments serve no one.

Norm

[Paul Randall]

I don't see any degradation of the site:confused: Still a great place for info and inspiration.

[Arthur Morris]

Christopher: I tend to agree that the problems at BPN have been steadily growing. As a further example, I posted an image of a Galapagos land iguana recently that was referred to by one commentator as having a "grunge look." Constructive criticism that can lead to improvement is always welcome, but such derogatory comments serve no one. Norm

Norm, You did not understand my use of the term and chose to see it as derogatory. That was not at all my intention. The "grunge" look, very much in style at the moment refers to using HDR followed by a variety of filters to give an image a sort of ancient somewhat grungy look. Click here to see both an example of the style and use of the word "grunge."

I am confused when you say "a further example" as there have not been any examples given, just opinions and innuendos. And after posting a comment that obviously would get folks attention, Chris has disappeared at least for now.

I will always give my honest opinion as gently as possible. Some folks do not like that and would prefer to hear "Big Congrats" even when an image (such as your iguana) has serious problems. Perhaps now that you better understand the use of the word "grunge" you might consider posting the original image as requested so that I and others might attempt to help you.

[Arthur Morris]

Norm, seeing that you opted to voice your opinion in the iguana thread, please do provide us links to you the "other manifestations" that you mention. Thanks.

[Norm Dulak]

Norm, seeing that you opted to voice your opinion in the iguana thread, please do provide us links to you the "other manifestations" that you mention. Thanks.

Arthur:

Thanks for belatedly explaining what the term "grunge" means to you.:) Had you explained that for those of us who regard the term to be derogatory when applied to what we do, there would have been no problem. But not everyone viewing BPN is a professional photographer cognizant of all of the current terms of art in photography.

If you want a link to another example of current problems with BPN, I'll provide one below. But by way of background, I posted an image of a Hibiscus that was generally well regarded and which generated much discussion over an issue of which most viewers to the thread were unaware. One BPN member noted that reds in the image were over saturated.

To make a long story short, the problem occurred during conversion to JPEG for posting and was not present in my earlier files. At one point in the discussion, when no one had offered a good suggestion for overcoming this problem, I suggested that perhaps unexpected over saturation of reds and yellows due to conversion for posting might be disregarded for critiques on BPN.

In reply, a moderator of the macro/floral forum issued a scathing rebuttal to my suggestion, without offering the slightest suggestion as to how the red blowout during conversion problem could be corrected. Later, this same moderator stated in the thread that he had run his rebuttal past other moderators and was told by them that it was too harsh. But he posted it anyway. He later apologized, but a bit inappropriately and too late, especially since the apology was directed in part to comments I made only to him in a PM and were not known to the others viewing the thread!:(

The link to this thread is: http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...70996-Hibiscus.

I could post others, but I see no point in doing so. The two I've posted adequately support my point.

Norm

[Arthur Morris]

#1: Here's what I wrote in part at your iguana image, "I have no explanation for the mega BKGR noise and the quasi-HDR/grunge look." Rather than ask what I meant you chose to take the remark as derogatory. Your choice.

#2: In Pane #1 of the hibiscus image, the image contains clipped REDs. Lot of them. In Pane #3 there rather than taking the JPEG into PS to see if the REDs were indeed clipped, you sprang to your own defense in part lecturing the poster on your superior techniques.:

"Thanks for your comments. I'm a bit confused by your suggestion, however, that there is considerable clipping in the reds. I don't see how there could be, unless something weird happened during conversion from the PS file to the web image. That's because whenever I photograph anything with strong reds or yellows, I immediately review the captured image and evaluate the histograms. The LCD on my D300 camera is set to not only display the captured image, but four separate histograms also, for the red, green and blue channels plus overall luminance. In an earlier frame there was in fact some clipping of the reds, and that is why I applied a strong -2 compensation to my camera's matrix metering to get the present, correctly exposed frame.

As it turned out, Jerry was right as you later admitted.

As to the "scathing rebuttal," again, scathing was your interpretation. I wish Roman had asked me as I did not feel that his reply was at all harsh. Like me, Roman speaks his mind (heck, we do not always agree either). Blunt yes, but harsh, not at all for me. Based on #1 and #2 above Norm, it seems that you opt to see the negative side of things and that you do not like any criticism at all of your images.

You and I have had our differences in the past as we both have strong opinions and are willing to back them up but for the most part we have kept things civil. With the hibiscus thread, the end result was an improved image and greater understanding by all. Instead of seeing it that way you again to choose to champion the negative side of things by citing the thread as an example of "problems at BPN." I really don't get it.

[Norm Dulak]

#1: Here's what I wrote in part at your iguana image, "I have no explanation for the mega BKGR noise and the quasi-HDR/grunge look." Rather than ask what I meant you chose to take the remark as derogatory. Your choice.

#2: In Pane #1 of the hibiscus image, the image contains clipped REDs. Lot of them. In Pane #3 there rather than taking the JPEG into PS to see if the REDs were indeed clipped, you sprang to your own defense in part lecturing the poster on your superior techniques.:

"Thanks for your comments. I'm a bit confused by your suggestion, however, that there is considerable clipping in the reds. I don't see how there could be, unless something weird happened during conversion from the PS file to the web image. That's because whenever I photograph anything with strong reds or yellows, I immediately review the captured image and evaluate the histograms. The LCD on my D300 camera is set to not only display the captured image, but four separate histograms also, for the red, green and blue channels plus overall luminance. In an earlier frame there was in fact some clipping of the reds, and that is why I applied a strong -2 compensation to my camera's matrix metering to get the present, correctly exposed frame.

As it turned out, Jerry was right as you later admitted.

As to the "scathing rebuttal," again, scathing was your interpretation. I wish Roman had asked me as I did not feel that his reply was at all harsh. Like me, Roman speaks his mind (heck, we do not always agree either). Blunt yes, but harsh, not at all for me. Based on #1 and #2 above Norm, it seems that you opt to see the negative side of things and that you do not like any criticism at all of your images.

You and I have had our differences in the past as we both have strong opinions and are willing to back them up but for the most part we have kept things civil. With the hibiscus thread, the end result was an improved image and greater understanding by all. Instead of seeing it that way you again to choose to champion the negative side of things by citing the thread as an example of "problems at BPN." I really don't get it.

Arthur:

Individuals who post images for critique on BPN do so because they want to learn how to do things better. Whether responses from moderators are scathing or not depends upon one's point of view. But mere criticisms without solutions are essentially useless. So too is endless argumentation by moderators, instead of meaningful guidance!

You don't see this kind of thing happening on other nature photography sites, including the ones to which some of your best moderators have in disgust migrated!

Your continuing argumentation enables me to rest my case. I will not respond to any more of it.

Norm

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Norm. I am curious as to why you are still here if BPN is so bad. I am sure that your images would garner dozens of "Big Congrats" on those other sites. What you see as "endless argumentation" I see as folks trying to help folks with thin skin who choose to defend their positions rather than take criticism with an open mind.

[Arthur Morris]

And one last comment on the hibiscus thread, what you see as an example of "problems at BPN" James Shadle and I see as an example of our greatet strength. And so do lots of others. Perhaps its time for you to take a look in the mirror rather than point the finger of bitterness at BPN.

[Norm Dulak]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Norm. I am curious as to why you are still here if BPN is bad. I am sure that your images would garner dozens of "Big Congrats" on those other sites.

Arthur:

Although I said I would not respond further to your comments, I think you are right here. Other sites might receive my posting more favorably than the technically obsessed BPN. But that's because they know enough, unlike BPN, not to obsess over technicalities.

Your moderator ranted about a technical histogram, while others reviewed my image for what it visually meant to them. Still others pointed out that adjusting an image to avoid blowout of any particular color in a histogram could actually damage the overall quality of the image! Perhaps you missed that point in your apparently hasty reading of the thread!

But an interesting posting in my Hibiscus thread was made by Anita Bower, who wrote:

"I like the original post, Don Lacy's post and your repost, though, I must say, I can't tell much difference between them. I like the painterly look, the details, the swirls, the lines, the colors. I think you made the right decision to keep the greens toned down a bit, thus highlighting the flowers. Beautiful flower and beautiful capture".

Anita could see no difference between my original posting and subsequent posting in which adjustments were made to avoid the technical histogram issues.

It sometimes helps to read everything, not just the things that serve your interests! Yet another problem IMO with the new BPN.

As for your last comment, I try to work around unreasonable moderators, but increasingly that is becoming impossible.

Norm

[Arthur Morris]

I thought that the originally posted image was lovely too.And I am glad that Anita liked it. But there were REDs without detail. You continue to rant about moderator argumentation yet you find yourself doing the same thing. Here's a great suggestion: post your iguana image on one of "the other" sites and see what types of comments it gets. Whatever is said, that image is nowhere near your usual standards. You are a very good photographer but the iguana image is of poor quality at best.

[James Shadle]

Let's stay on topic.
If we want talk about specific images, let's do that in the thread they were originally posted.

I see passion in this discussion. Any relationship counselor will tell you that when there is apathy in a relationship, it's done. When there is passion and debate there is hope:).

[Norm Dulak]

Let's stay on topic.
If we want talk about specific images, let's do that in the thread they were originally posted.

I see passion in this discussion. Any relationship counselor will tell you that when there is apathy in a relationship, it's done. When there is passion and debate there is hope:).

Here, here!

[Grant Eldridge]

For the most part if someone is posting an image on BPN they believe they have something special that they are proud of. Criticism, no matter how constructive, can hit a nerve with a lot of people and they don't take it very well. As Arthur said there are plenty of "Great Shot" forums around but that does not teach you anything, just makes you feel good. If you are posting here you need to understand that its not personal its about learning and improving. With the media of an internet forum intent and meaning can sometimes be lost in translation, best rule here is to assume the best intent. Nobody is out to make you look bad and be a jerk. Keep in mind also that some critiscim is subjective and you don't have to agree with it, we all hang different art on our walls. Its what makes the world go round.

Having said that its important to be concious of the sensitivity some people have and be sure you are clear in your critique. That helps everyone in the long run. With some key members leaving recently there is indeed a big void, I hope we can fill it. Best way for that to happen is for some of us lurkers to start posting comments (myself included). If that happens then not only will we fill the gaps, I'm sure we will exceed expectations.

As for the commercial aspect...I just don't see it. Lots of discussion around various new products but nobody trying to push them.

Just my opinion.

Grant

[Dan Brown]

Interesting discussion! I will chime here. The comment that you "only get out what you put in" is probably true but I am little puzzled here? I recently posted a thread http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...corn-in-flight which got 125 views and only 3 comments, two of which were by moderators. The comments were great but why only 3? For me, all comments are welcome and I always learn from them. If my woodpecker image was the best woodpecker image ever posted here (and it wasn't!) I would still like to have comments. Are we afraid to give a slap on the back and won't comment if we can't suggest improvements? BTW, currently I post about 6 comments to 1 image.

[Arthur Morris]

For the most part if someone is posting an image on BPN they believe they have something special that they are proud of.... Just my opinion. Grant

Hey Grant. Thanks for sharing your thoughts here. Your comments are right-on. We look forward to seeing more comments from you and hopefully some images.

[Myer Bornstein]

I love to get great comments but the comments when something is wrong makes me look at the image and see what I could havge done better. If you need help in fixing something just ask and the help will be there.
Personally I like the site and do miss the Forns but life moves on and I only see great and better things for the site

[Arthur Morris]

Interesting discussion! I will chime here. The comment that you "only get out what you put in" is probably true but I am little puzzled here? I recently posted a thread http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...corn-in-flight which got 125 views and only 3 comments, two of which were by moderators. The comments were great but why only 3? For me, all comments are welcome and I always learn from them. If my woodpecker image was the best woodpecker image ever posted here (and it wasn't!) I would still like to have comments. Are we afraid to give a slap on the back and won't comment if we can't suggest improvements? BTW, currently I post about 6 comments to 1 image.

While one might feel that a single comment that helps you improve an image is enough, I do agree with you 100%. We are currently working on the problem as I indicated somewhere above in this thread. (BTW, my current comment to post ratio is about 20 :1. I need to post more :0) Your 6 : 1 ratiio is commended and appreciated. If everyone did that we would need to move to an even larger server :)

We are trying to do something similar to what you see in the image above with the text appearing in the Post New Thread dialogue box. If you or anyone else has any suggestions on how to get folks who post images to comment on the work of others please do share.

[Arthur Morris]

Of the top 20 posters 8 no longer participate and 10 are either mods or have a vested interest.

Hi Mike, With regards to the above were you able to pull up those stats or are they your gut feeling. If the former I would love to learn how to see the stats.

[Arthur Morris]

I love to get great comments but the comments when something is wrong makes me look at the image and see what I could havge done better. If you need help in fixing something just ask and the help will be there. Personally I like the site and do miss the Forns but life moves on and I only see great and better things for the site

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Myer. I will admit that I miss Axel's eagle eye and I do miss jousting with Arash.

[Chris Sloan]

My opinion, and it's not intended as a critique, is that the fact that there is a membership fee is required to access some of the features on the site is a deterrent to many. Certainly, it is for me; I almost didn't even sign up at all because of it. At present, I am not a subscriber and would contribute a lot more in other forums if not for the limitations on non-subscribers. The fact is that the overwhelming majority of forums like this are free, and most people (myself included) are not included to pay for it. That's not to say I don't see value in the content here; I certainly do. But I can fine similar (if maybe slightly lower signal to noise ratio) content elsewhere for free also.

[Ian Cassell]

Speaking for myself, I'm finding this site as useful as ever. I look constantly (although I may sometimes be a little hesitant to comment on those whose skills far exceed my own).

If I had one comment to make it is that ETL is starting to swerve from it's (perceived by me, anyway) purpose. I'm seeing more and more images there from the more experienced among us and, re-reading the purpose of that forum, it was originally supposed to be for those who are relatively new to the critique world. It can be quite intimidating for me to put my images up next to one of those of our guru's.

[Mike Tracy]

Hi Mike, With regards to the above were you able to pull up those stats or are they your gut feeling. If the former I would love to learn how to see the stats.

On iPhone pardon the brevity

Go to members search > tick posts > it will display posts in descending order. I knew who definetly wasn't around any longer and looked at the others recent activity and last post made
Site stats are available for any site for free and if you have a subscription more detailed analysis is provided.

[Arthur Morris]

TAT Mike. Right now I am struggling with finding members search... Any suggestions?

[Arthur Morris]

Never mind. I found it. Thanks a ton.

[Dave Mills]

Hi Ian, When I was moderating ETL I was also wondering why some of the more experienced or accomplished photographers were posting there. I think the area was designed for less experienced folks to get help with their images.
Not sure if these people just wanted to be stroked and stand out from the rest since the avian section is where they belong.

[Dave Mills]

Chris, I find it hard to believe that you feel the small fee attached to being a member is out of line.
The fee for the site is equal to the price of 3 value meals at McDonalds
You can post an image a day in any of the areas for 1 year and get personal critiques...honest critiques that will help you and not just make you feel good
You get valuable information on your images and others that would take you along time to amass from reading or trial and error
If you PM'd any of the mods for add'l info or questions you would have an answer.
You get info on where to go, what to do when you get there and the best times.
I could go on and on...so to complain about the site not being free when thousands of dollars are spent to run it ...is really a bit much.
By the way...the mods do not get paid for their work....

[Dan Brown]

I have posted to ETL with images that I thought needed help and also when I wanted to post more than one avian image in a day which was probably not right and I don't do that now.

Hi Ian, When I was moderating ETL I was also wondering why some of the more experienced or accomplished photographers were posting there. I think the area was designed for less experienced folks to get help with their images.
Not sure if these people just wanted to be stroked and stand out from the rest since the avian section is where they belong.

[Chris Sloan]

You misunderstand what I am saying. I am not complaining, I'm simply saying that I do not see enough value to become a paying member. That's not a complaint, it's just a statement of my opinion, backed up by the fact that I'm not as of yet a paying member. As I noted, there are tens of thousands of forums like this around the web, the overwhelming majority of which are free, and many of them also have moderators who volunteer their time. In that context, charging a fee simply for access to a forum like this, however valuable, will be perceived as unusual by a potential new member. So, while I understand your perspective on the business model, that doesn't make it any less unusual relative to what most internet users would be familiar with.

To give you a specific example, non-members are not permitted to post items for sale. I had a couple of nice lenses that I wanted to sell recently and was told no, I can't post unless I subscribe. So, I sold them on eBay. It was cheaper and probably fetched me a better purchase price.

Again, I'm not being critical of anything; I enjoy the site and am still able to derive some value from it at the non-paying level. I'm simply offering an opinion that the membership fee may be hindering the growth of the site.

(Also, just by way of background, I'm a startup lawyer and I work with online businesses for a living, so I also have some business experience for offering that opinion.)

[Dave Mills]

Hi Dan, You bring out a good point. I hadn't considered that...

[James Shadle]

Chris said:
"that the fact that there is a membership fee is required to access some of the features on the site is a deterrent to many."

What features are you unable to access? As a Forum Participant you are allowed to post images using your host, start threads, comment on threads, criticize the site, access the member list etc. I look at it is like this, photographic knowledge is much more important than the gear a photographer uses. $20 US is such a small amount to pay for an education when compared to the several thousand dollars most photographers have invested in equipment.
No one on staff or ownership receives a salary, the dues cover the cost of hosting, software etc. I don't mind working for free, but I prefer not to work for free and pay forum overhead out of pocket.

The fact is that the overwhelming majority of forums like this are free, and most people (myself included) are not included to pay for it. (I'm guessing you meant inclined)

We are a free forum. We just ask that if you want to use our hosting, participate in the IOTY contest or have a personal gallery you help cover the cost of hosting.

[Dave Mills]

Hi Chris, first off if you sell on Ebay there is a fee attached.(paypal also) Here the sale is between buyer and seller with no fee attached. It can't be cheaper.
Secondly,if you spend thousands of dollars on camera equiptment and don't see value in a small fee(under $30 per year) that gives you an immense amount of personal info and much much more there isn't more to be said.
Remember, all sites aren't created equal....