Caedes

Desktop Wallpaper, Art, etc.

Discussion Board -> Desktop Wallpaper, Art, etc. -> People Who Don't Download

People Who Don't Download

::Lithfo
12/22/05 11:57 AM GMT
Why would someone see a picture in one of the galleries, say to themselves, "Gee, I like that. I'd like to see it larger.", click the thumbnail, see it VERY slightly bigger, and then move on? I don't get it and I can't stand it. I'm sure it's mostly non-members that do this, but I don't understand the point. C-index and any other petty footnote aside, why? Why would you want to see an image in its detailed form one moment and then the next moment not really care? I mean, if you're still living in the stone ages on a dialup connection, you clearly have the patience to wait for a gallery page to load, so why not wait for a page to load in your background? If you have broadband...well, you have no excuse. If you see the image as a thumbnail and think it's one thing, click it to see it better, find out it's not what you thought when you see the slightly larger image, why not click it in the most detail you can? You made a mistake about the photo once, why couldn't you do it again?

/rant
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.

Comments

Post a Comment  -  Subscribe to this discussion
::Lithfo
12/22/05 12:05 AM GMT
EDIT: People can't separate subjects.
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
+Samatar
12/22/05 12:36 AM GMT
In regards to no. one... perhaps some people just go through all the images using the "Next" and "Previous" arrows? Which would mean every image they go through would count as a view. Or perhaps the person might want to read the description or the comments on an image, rather than view the actual image itself at full size. Or perhaps the person wants to see what the c-index is, or see if anyone has responded to a comment they made and they have already viewed it full size on another day. These may not be significant factors, I could be on the wrong track, they're just possibilities.
0∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion- Get involved in the Artist of the week!
::Lithfo
12/22/05 10:22 PM GMT
Those are distinct possibilities, but I still don't see the point in having that much interest in a picture, but somehow not enough to see the large size.
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
::anderbre
12/23/05 2:56 PM GMT
I think the low ratings *might* be related in part to the voting booth. Since I cannot see the descriptions that the artists attached to their image, it's sometimes hard for me to determine what to give as a rating. Some images that were uploaded for contests are going to get hammered because the person voting may not understand what the artists intent was.
0∈ [?]
Know your subject, focus attention, simplify.
&prismmagic
12/24/05 11:46 AM GMT
We are back on the C-index rating thing again. I thouhgt we had all grown up and gotton over the issue .
0∈ [?]
Art is the perception of the creator. Meaning is the perception of the viewer. acceptance is the perception of society.
::Morwyn
12/24/05 3:42 PM GMT
No never.. These low rating hurt..
0∈ [?]
One bead at a time
::Lithfo
12/25/05 6:45 AM GMT
Even if you couldn't see your c-index, it's annoying. Why view an image description page, but not the image? There is NO good reason for that.
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
::regmar
12/27/05 11:29 AM GMT
Move on. Move on. The new system's in place. It's not going away. Can we just live with it?

Rodney King

0∈ [?]
ж Regmar ж
::philcUK
12/27/05 4:31 PM GMT
What? and deprive all the trolls from some seriously good whinging opportunities surely not! :-)

Maybe we could have it is a site wide New Years resolution, to comply implicitly with section one of the code of conduct....
0∈ [?]
"Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps"
::Lithfo
12/27/05 9:56 PM GMT
You can't provide a valid answer for not downloading an image. All you can do is accuse me of whining about a different subject.
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
*caedes
12/28/05 8:18 AM GMT
I very rarely view an image at full size. I usually just go through the galleries and occassionally view the information page for the image if I like the image. If I really like it I view the full size.
0∈ [?]
-caedes
::Lithfo
12/28/05 8:30 AM GMT
I don't see the point in that. I don't think you can know if you really like an image until you see it in detail.
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
.Raymond2000
12/28/05 8:36 AM GMT
I notice his avatar is an eye,maybe he can see very well and dont need to do a full view to see all the details.
0∈ [?]
::Lithfo
12/29/05 5:41 AM GMT
Look, I made a valid statement unrelated to the c-index or new voting system. I followed that up with a separate issue which is related to the new system. If you want to spam go to one of those generic boards that has 4300 members posting at any one time.

Alright, how about this? How about I go and edit my second post and anyone who wants to contribute will have to do it about the primary subject of the thread? How's that sound?
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
&trisweb
01/08/06 7:21 PM GMT
Raymond, that was funny, and obviously not spam; it's good to make light of the subject and thank you.

Personally I agree with caedes. There are obviously images that you can tell right away aren't exactly interesting to you, or aren't very artistic or whatever, even just by a slightly larger thumbnail. You may also be interested in the artist or their comments, which, whether you like it or not, makes a difference to the viewer. You also might just want to see what other people think of it in the comments, or maybe you don't have *time* to look at larger versions of every image you view. There are any number of reasons you wouldn't view the larger version! So, I don't understand why you say "There is NO good reason for that." -- there are a lot of good reasons, and the "valid answer for not downloading an image" is that none of them matter -- people should be able to do whatever they darn well please, whether you like it or not. How can you criticize people for their behavior so easily? It might be good to notice that you can't really control how people behave-- you can only study it and try to understand it and alter your own behavior to get what you want.

So really, your argument has no point; and in any case, it doesn't really matter. The larger issue is that there are just too many images to go through on this site, so giving each one individual attention is becoming harder and harder, and it's hard to come up with fair solutions. If you want to do something productive, stop arguing about this pointless little problem and start coming up with good ideas for the larger one.
0∈ [?]
Fiat Lux. | Get Firefox
::Morwyn
01/08/06 8:23 PM GMT
This is why I keep most of my opinions private now days.. No point in even starting a thread on this subject .. It will just get shot down..
0∈ [?]
One bead at a time
::Lithfo
01/08/06 8:32 PM GMT
It's disrespectful to not download the larger image. Period.
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
::Morwyn
01/08/06 9:34 PM GMT
I agree completely.. Lots of disrespectful things go on here with Caedes blessing.
0∈ [?]
One bead at a time
&Crusader
01/08/06 10:34 PM GMT
Disrespectful? That's a bit harsh. Sometimes I see an image that looks interesting, open the page, read the description and see the slightly larger image. That's more than enough for me. Only if the image is exception, or I want to use the image as a desktop do I take the time to download it.

Not everyone is blessed with broadband internet, and I can tell you it sucks trying to download a large image with a ropey dail-up.
0∈ [?]
::Lithfo
01/08/06 10:53 PM GMT
I'd think if you have the patience for a page of new images to load for you on dialup, you'd have the patience for an image to load in a background window, but I will at least lend some credit to that reason. The other excuses people give, though, really are disrespectful.
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
&trisweb
01/09/06 12:58 AM GMT
You know, you'd think if you had the patience to look at a storefront while walking downtown, you'd go in and at least look around. I'd be disrespectful not to, right? I know not everyone goes into every shop they pass. Only the ones that spike his or her interest. And if you're the owner of the shop, you don't expect everyone to come in--or at least you'd better not...

The point is that everyone is free to ignore whatever they like. It may be disrespectful, but hey, some images deserve more respect than others. Don't take it personally.

"Caedes' blessing" is just freedom, and I commend him for keeping a good sense of that in the community. Try not to criticize people for exercising it...
0∈ [?]
Fiat Lux. | Get Firefox
::Lithfo
01/09/06 3:59 AM GMT
That doesn't work as an analogy here. Looking over an entire page of assorted images (new or otherwise, but by all different, random artists) more accurately matches up with walking by a downtown storefront. It'd be impossible for anyone to visit every story they saw, just as it's impossible for them to look at every image on caedes.
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
.MiLo_Anderson
01/09/06 5:19 AM GMT
So your saying when you decide you like a store you look at every aspect of that store in great detail, picking up every item in that store to take a close look at it to make sure you don't miss a subtle detail in a product that only interests you enough to look at it better then just in passing by the store?
0∈ [?]
Its time for a new sig for me, so it is for sale. Any offers can be made via a message in my profile.
.KEIFER
01/09/06 1:03 PM GMT
I suggest you hide in the bushes at night next to an image .. and when somebody walks up and looks at it from a distance, but not up close

JUMP OUT .. and say .. "Hello, I'm from the 'Lithfo Evening News' .. and I was just wondering if you had time for a few questions"

.... I've wondered about the same thing many times .. both, here, and at DevArt .. I've come to the conclusion that the website software is BORKED .. that there is no way somebody could not download a given image if they looked at the information page for it

If the thumbnail is dark or cluttered and they need to see it a little larger to determine if they are interested in it .. then, perhaps, it's a little more understandable

But .. not everybody COLLECTS images in the same fashion .. I've slowed down considerably in my old age .. in many aspects of life (*cough*) .. image collecting is just one of them
0∈ [?]
Clap on ~@~ Clap off ... Caedes Black Label
::Lithfo
01/09/06 6:46 PM GMT
The store analogy doesn't work the way you're saying it. The store compares to one image when you're looking at an entire page of pictures. If I come by a photo that catches my attention I'll look at its info page as well as its matching resolution for my screen, if possible. If I come by a storefront that catches my attention I'll go inside and look at the products. That's just like looking through someone's gallery. If I find, say, a sweatshirt I like, I'll probably try it on. But this analogy doesn't even work perfectly when the right things are compared, much less the wrong ones.
0∈ [?]
If a picture is good enough for you to click on, it's good enough for you to vote on.
.MiLo_Anderson
01/09/06 9:43 PM GMT
There you go. Much better argument of the store front. I acctually agree with you for the most part. I just though you argued it bad :P. You don't really see what the picture is all about until you see it full size. With that said i don't think it is disrespectful not to download it full size. If i think back to times when i haven't viewed full size it is probablky because i have either already been to the picture, or i want to see what it is rated or read some comments about it.
0∈ [?]
Its time for a new sig for me, so it is for sale. Any offers can be made via a message in my profile.
.DevilsJohnson_2
01/10/06 4:19 PM GMT
Bottom line is that it really don't matter. People are going to browse images as they see fit and that is how it is going to be. Is there a right and dare I say respectfull way to do this. I would not like to be in the position to say that it should be this way. Also, being many people are going thorough the site looking for a wallpaper for their machine and not looking at teh images as a more traditional form of art they may well feel that they are givming teh image teh time it needs to make the decision on weather or not to download it to see it in all it's glory.

Those that post here or even those that are members and not post images might see the site as an art site in a more pure form but everyone doing a google search for free desktop wallpapers might not. There is always the possibility that someone might see the thumb and just not like an image enough to see it larger. It happens. Imaging a dial up user that is looking for a wallpaper and don't want to load images full size and take that kind of time..They just want a pretty image on their otherwise boring desktop.
0∈ [?]
.MiLo_Anderson
01/10/06 5:50 PM GMT
bingo ^
0∈ [?]
Its time for a new sig for me, so it is for sale. Any offers can be made via a message in my profile.

Leave a comment (registration required):

Subject: