Caedes

Desktop Wallpaper, Art, etc.

Discussion Board -> Desktop Wallpaper, Art, etc. -> Caedes growth

Caedes growth

noobguy
06/14/04 4:51 AM GMT
Seems like this site is growing awful fast. I havent been a member but for about a yr and a half. But seems like I remember that there werent but a handful of artists and they always uploaded elite photos. The first picture I ever saw uploaded was my friend auburn's pic. Rescue Station It has a rating of 88 and blows away most of my gallery. I think if he submitted it now it would be a 99 and now there is even more to compare to. Also when you look at the new images galleryin the morning, and at night, the pictures at the start in the morning are then some where one the second page, even when viewing 36 a page! I try to look at everyones pictures but its impossible with such a volume. Also if you submit before the time of the day when everyone gets on at the same time and submits, you tend to have your pics forgotten :(. Not to down the site or anything, but does anyone think that it may be growing too fast right now?
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.

Comments

Post a Comment  -  Subscribe to this discussion

Overflow mode, hiding 4 messages. [View]

+Piner
06/14/04 1:31 PM GMT
noob-
Hate to break the news to you, but we are already there at @ 3 new pages a day. I am looking right now, and there have been over 100 uploads in the last 24 hours. That is almost three whole pages at 36 images a page. :c)
0∈ [?]
The work of art may have a moral effect, but to demand moral purpose from an artist is to make him ruin his work. (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 1832)
noobguy
06/14/04 1:38 PM GMT
!!! Thats too much
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
::philcUK
06/14/04 3:39 PM GMT
it might be an idea to limit submission to one a day for everyone - hopefully to address quality/quantity issues and stop new image galleries being flooded at peak times.
0∈ [?]
"Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps"
noobguy
06/14/04 4:19 PM GMT
good call, I agree, though that would probably upset some people
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
+Piner
06/14/04 4:43 PM GMT
I have to disagree with you Phil,
I have no problems with the amount of uploads we are receiving and personally I don't think we should restrict uploads any more then they already are.
What if someone tries to post an image and for some reason it doesn't upload correctly? They should not have to wait 24 hours to try again. Also there are the paying members in the Cadre to think about. They donated with the understanding that they would have perks, mainly a couple more uploads per day.
0∈ [?]
The work of art may have a moral effect, but to demand moral purpose from an artist is to make him ruin his work. (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 1832)
*caedes
06/14/04 5:25 PM GMT
Noobguy: I certainly understand where you are coming from. While I'm very tempted to implement a technical solution to the problem, I'm not so sure that it would be as effective as we would like. I agree that often people upload images that are not their best work with only the hope of getting noticed (any publicity is good publicity and all that).

I think that the best solution would be to step up the level of work that is expected of members. If people receive frank critiques of their work, then the authors will know when an image is not really up to par. We should encourage people to only upload the top 10% or so of their images. If people only get short, positive reviews of anything they upload, they can be expected to continue uploading mediocre images with little or no improvement.

I'm currently considering several ways that we can encourage both frank critiques and the 10% rule. Any suggestions?
0∈ [?]
-caedes
+Piner
06/14/04 6:18 PM GMT
I post only about 1 or 2% of my images.

A suggestion: Maybe implementing a larger minimum upload size of 1152 x 864. Anything uploaded smaller then that gets automatically rejected.
There have been 31 out of over a hundred (@ 25%) posted in the last 24 hours that are 1024x768 or smaller when they were uploaded.
0∈ [?]
The work of art may have a moral effect, but to demand moral purpose from an artist is to make him ruin his work. (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 1832)
+ppigeon
06/14/04 7:04 PM GMT
I think one picture per day and per member is totally sufficient.
No one is able to produce a good picture per day...
And also... To visualize 60 to 100 pictures per day is a big job for the ImageMods... ;-)
0∈ [?]
"Violence is the last resort of the incompetent" (I. Asimov)
TRACYJTZ
06/14/04 8:25 PM GMT
Agree with Pierre - I remember when I was uploading 4 a day - now I'm lucky if I find one a week adequate for uploading in my work. In regards to Tom's concern - maybe (dont know if this is possible) caedes could limit non-subscribing members to 1 per day and if there happens to be an error in uploading, it wouldnt be counted as an upload. They could then try uploading again until it is accepted. The subscribers could have 2 per day.
0∈ [?]
oowenaas
06/14/04 8:38 PM GMT
I agree with Caedes and Pierre. I'm nearly new to photography and am currently posting more photos on critique forums than on Caedes, though it is nice to hear feedback here as well. Naturally, my images are 'subpar' in comparison to those who are more experienced in photography and especially in editing--I've done little to null to my pictures.

And so especially 'amateurs' such as myself, I believe, should attempt to establish more of a 'top 10%' way of uploading images; perhaps more experienced members might be allowed more.
0∈ [?]
'I realized that If I had to choose, I would rather have birds than airplanes.' - Charles Lindbergh
+Piner
06/14/04 9:46 PM GMT
If you limited the uploads to one a day, then what is the benefit of donating and being in the Cadre? I feel limiting the uploads may cause the donations to Caedes.net to suffer.
Not having to see the ads is cool, but just that alone is not worth the $3 a month.

Automatically rejecting the smaller uploads that don't have a chance to make it to the permanent gallery makes more sense. If they were serious about uploading something artisitic to share and to have downloaded by others, they would do it in a larger size.

-Piner-
0∈ [?]
The work of art may have a moral effect, but to demand moral purpose from an artist is to make him ruin his work. (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 1832)
+Samatar
06/14/04 11:57 PM GMT
I am against the idea of restricting the uploads to larger sizes. Some peoples cameras are only capable of taking low res photos, does that mean their work isn't worth our time? Whereas someone who can afford a better camera can upload their photos regardless of the quality? Remember, if you don't want to look at images below a certain res, you have the control to restrict it. That is why we decided that the "Other" gallery (where all the good low res images used to go) was no longer necessary...

Remember caedes is more than just a site for looking at pretty pictures. I probably only spend about 25% of my time on the site going through the new images now (it doesn't take long to scan through three pages of thumbnails, and take a closer look at the ones I'm interested in). I spend the majority of my time exchanging messages, reading the forums, checking the news, etc. If you don't like the amount of new images in that gallery, well just look in the permanant galleries instead, where you know the quality level is controlled.

I do agree that some of the stuff uploaded is not of the standard I would use for my desktop, but this has been the case as long as I have been a member. If you look at some of the early images that received 99/100, they are pretty standard next to some of the stuff that gets uploaded all the time now. It is important to give beginners a chance to share their work, and if it is good enough why shouldn't it go into the permenant galleries? If we turn caedes into an elitist site for experts only, that will certainly discourage new members and lower the number of new contributions, but is that necessarily a good thing?
0∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
noobguy
06/15/04 1:26 AM GMT
I think turning it into an elitest site is kind of an extreme. I think we need to merely moderate the traffic before it gets out of hand. Especially since some people already think its out of hand (myself). I suggest one image per day for regular members and 3 images per day for paying members. I dont know about the size limit, but I have the most inexpensive digital camera one can buy, and at 1.3 megapixels I can take pics at 1280x1024, rarely do people make their desktops larger than this, and larger is just to improve the quality at lower resolutions. Maybe making the cap 1024x768 or 1280x1024 would be good. I dont think paying members will have a problem with 3 a day instead of 4. And the regular members 1 instead of 2. But it would SIGNIFICANTLY improve traffic. Also people shouldnt have a problem submitting at leasy 1024x768 size images if not 1280.
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
+Piner
06/15/04 1:32 AM GMT
Sam,
Thanks for the counterpoints to my post. I am playing devil's advocate. I want others to realize the possible ramifications of cutting into members allowed amount of uploads any more then we already have. It was just a suggestion and I don't really support limiting upload size, but it is just as absurd as suggesting to limit the allowed uploads per day. The reason I put it on the table was, if you look, the images that are under 1024x768 get almost no comments compared to the ones 1024x768 and larger.

You also have to remember that digital cameras are getting better and cheaper to buy at a fast rate. A 2MP pocket camera produces 1600x1200 images, and they go for $75 or so. I got a nice 3.1MP pocket camera for $99 and the store threw in a free full-size Epson ink-jet printer and a 32MB memory card! To get a camera that produces good pictures is very affordable now. I still use the pocket digital when I don't need a zoom for a shot.

Maybe a better idea would be to limit the uploads per week instead...say 5-7 per week for members and 10-14 per week for Cadre members. I am sure I am not the only one, but sometimes I don't get a chance to upload anything except for one... maybe two days out of the week.
It would probably just involve having to change a few parameters in the site's software code - ( 24 hours to 168 hours and change the allowed uploads for that time frame )

-Piner-
0∈ [?]
The work of art may have a moral effect, but to demand moral purpose from an artist is to make him ruin his work. (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 1832)
noobguy
06/15/04 1:40 AM GMT
I dont know, if you changed the code that way. People would submit 5 and 6 at a time, making it even worse. The problem is that with the flow of traffic people are getting the personal attention to each photograph that they should. It takes away from the site and from each picture, numbing the value of each photo and all of the photos. You gotta think about it this way. If you limit the pace that you upload pics, all of your images you want on there will still get to be uploaded, just at a slower pace. It helps more than hurts because then each image gets even more attention than if u uploaded them rapidly. The only thing that could hurt a artist would be limiting the size of their gallery. Changing the acceleration can only help, and it doesnt hurt anyone.
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
noobguy
06/15/04 2:29 AM GMT
btw:
Caedes: as far as the frank comments. I think people only comment on images they like to begin with. hence all of the sweet positive comments. Maybe instituting a comment requirement with the voting requirement, but much less severe. Say 1:15 or 1:10 images downloaded.
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
ShadowDust
06/15/04 2:35 AM GMT
I think everybody is over-reacting, and it should be left just as it is..

Noobguy, appears to me that you are advocating to penalize others just because you don't have enough time in your schedule to view all the new images.
I do agree about the C-index quirks in the other thread though.
0∈ [?]
noobguy
06/15/04 2:43 AM GMT
there are many who agree with me, and you are right about the time issue. most people dont devote their day to browsing (or photos would never be shot/made). Besides i'm more interested in getting pictures seen, everyones, including yours, its not a penalty, its a benifit. I'm not argueing so dont attack, read the post and dont be ignorrant, its just a discussion, take a chill pill.
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
noobguy
06/15/04 2:49 AM GMT
I dont wanna piss anyone off, just pointing out something, offering solutions. If you like it the way it is, just state why, the point of a forum. Flaming helps nothing shadow.
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
ShadowDust
06/15/04 3:06 AM GMT
People should either find more time or learn to live with not being able to view all the new images.
Just browse the permanent gallery if you can't keep up with the new images.
0∈ [?]
+Samatar
06/15/04 3:29 AM GMT
Piners idea sounds better to me than reducing daily limits further. The daily limit could stay as it is, with the weekly as a backup maybe. However, I don't know if either way would make much of a difference; I think most of the poorer quality pics come from non members anyway, and they are already limited to only two pics per day. Did it improve much when the limit was first introduced? Also, there are also ways around the upload limit that I have noticed at least one person using (only once though).

Personally, I tend to upload quite a few images at once, and then may not upload for several days/weeks. This is because 1. I usually take photos when I am away, so I have several to upload when I get back and 2. If I start a session in Bryce/PS/TG etc. I will usually spend several hours creating what I want, and may produce a few variations on the way. So again, when it comes time to upload, I have several images that I want to use. If some aren't so popular I may delete them after a few days. I also regularly go through my gallery and "spring clean"; even though I know my gallery has more images than most, it would be at least twice as large if I didn't do this. Anyway, enough babble from me... for now... ;-)
0∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
+camerahound
06/15/04 4:18 AM GMT
The first most difficult thing for a creative artist to do, beyond his creation of course, is to show same to non-family for criticism. The second most difficult thing for the artist is to accept criticism of same from same.
0∈ [?]
"Success is getting what you like. Happiness is liking what you get." -anonymous
+cc_Beowulf
06/15/04 4:47 AM GMT
One upload per day we would be more than alright with me. I really hear you noob. I have been getting nostalgic for the days when only the top quality images were uploaded and only the very very best of the best were put into the permenant galleries. I also think that the minimum upload size should be raised significantly. It used to be 1280x1024 for a long time (for the permanant galleries). My computer is set on 1600x1200 and I don't really care for the smaller ones because I can't really use them. Besides if their camera doesn't take larger than 1024x768 I doubt the quality would be all that good either.
0∈ [?]
"The sceptics, like bees, give their one sting and die." -G.K. Chesterton
::philcUK
06/15/04 3:22 PM GMT
I understand what Piner is saying but surely the primary point of donating cash is to support the ongoing existence of the site as opposed to reaping rewards in the form of perks - i really dont know what an answer would be that would suit everyone but there obviously appears to be a problem that needs addressing one way or another.
0∈ [?]
"Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps"
*caedes
06/15/04 5:32 PM GMT
Another idea would be to reward members would upload a limited number of images per week. For instance, if you've only uploaded one images this week then your image would be on the front page of the site for a while (maybe until you get enough comments).
0∈ [?]
-caedes
::regmar
06/15/04 8:18 PM GMT
I agree with Phil about the donations. We give to support Caedes not to buy favors. Since I'm a new member to the site I noticed several things:

1) There are a lot of members who have joined in the last month.

2) People who join often do so, because they have been shooting photos for a while and someone just told me (I mean them) that they're good. Because of this situation the new users have a relatively large archive of photos that they want to show. This results in their flooding Caedes with their stuff until they run out of archives photos and have to produce new work to keep uploading.

3) I use Caedes as a way to judge the quality of my work, since I am certainly unqualified to judge it myself.

Now in light of these observations I can suggest that if Caedes wants to limit its use to those who are likely to stay around, then start new users (like me) off with a two-per week upload limit. Users who have been with Caedes for a certain period could then have their limit raised, because they've proven by their longevity that they're likely to stay around.

This approach might be preferable to limiting all users.
Reg
0∈ [?]
All our lives, from the moment we're born no one sees what we do through our eyes. But when you take a picture, all that changes. - Karly Kohler
oowenaas
06/15/04 8:47 PM GMT
I like Regmar's suggestion: Limiting new users (like him and me) to a certain restriction of uploads per day or per week until they've been at Caedes for a certain time or until they've uploaded enough images that receive good praise.
0∈ [?]
Raziel252
06/15/04 9:45 PM GMT
I like Caedes last suggestion, as it would solve another issue that goes along with people being unable to keep up with the number of images being uploaded and so images that may deserve attention do not get comments or votes and hence do not get a high enough c-index to be posted on the front page or to get into the top rankings.

One thing that worries me is that if new comers images are not viewed, even the below par ones, then the lack of criticism and tips will mean that their work wont improve. Poor work means less viewings...an so on, untill the user looses intersest in the site.

So, limiting the number of posts may help contol the flow of traffic, instead of it coming in waves. This may disapoint some users, i.e. Samatar after going on holiday..., who tend to load by the bulk. But the reasons for are justifiable.

And limiting the number of below par imagesthat are sent to the permanent gallery...is tough, because it links in with what I said above about novices loosing interest. For example my work isnt that great compared to some of the users who have commented here. But I'm still very proud of it, and thanks to the site I.(think) I'm improving.
Anyway, I'm too tired to check for typing mistakes. Sorry if I babbled...
0∈ [?]
+tbob
06/16/04 1:30 AM GMT
Maybe for the first month and image is on the site the c-index could be changed to a simple keep it or lose it system.That might discourage the "I'm going to upload the maximum allow just so I will get noticed" mentality.I agree with Caedes I think this has been a problem for a long time.I think a rewards system is the best,that way users get perks for quality not for quantity.
0∈ [?]
noobguy
06/16/04 1:47 AM GMT
All great comments, I like regmars suggestion, because that would offend some of the older users less (though 2 a week is a bit extreme compared to the 14 a week now). And I agree with Raziel completely. I understand where Sam is comming from. I typically take my pictures in waves, go out on trips and take lots. Then come back and filter out the ones I want to post. But if it were a bit limited (for you since you pay it would only be limited to 3 in my suggestion, for me 1) I would still get all of my images uploaded, just a little slower, and each would get more attention. I dont think changing the paying limit to 3 will hurt people very much, its still 3 a day, but you would notice the change in traffic. 1 a day for regular users would significantly show a change. This would also force people to choose more (for intance uploading 2 versions of the same image at the same time, etc.) I understand the frustrations of the artists, they want their work critiqued and now, but if you make this small sacrifice to slow things down, it will help everything as a whole tremendously. Besides, if growth continues at the current pace, not doing something soon may have really bad results. Anyways, just a suggestion. Peace people, keep up the good work :)
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
noobguy
06/16/04 1:55 AM GMT
Maybe since quality control is such a hot topic, you should focus more on just traffic control for now (since this would help some of the quality control by nature).

Think about this, when is a person more likely to view/download/comment on your picture.
They have 20mins and thewre are 20 new images they havent seen
They have 20mins and there are 10 new images
They have 20mins and there are 5

they are obviously more likely in the latter
in fact on the last would they would probably view your pic even if it sucked. may be more likely to tell you it sucks

Traffic control would help, just give it a chance
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
+Piner
06/16/04 2:16 AM GMT
tbob, when you say "a keep it or lose it system", do you mean that the members should just vote if a image should stay on Caedes past the first month. I like the idea, but I see a few possible problems with that scenerio.
The Cadre is a perk for quality, for the ones that placed top in the contests... I am totally for giving perks for quality. Quality should be encouraged.
I just had a good idea!!! Maybe a limited time (three month) Cadre Membership for keeping your total uploads vs your images that made it to the permanent gallerys, above a certain ratio or percentage. When your Cadre membership time is up, your R/P is checked and if you have posted at least a couple of images in that time and you have a high enough R/P you get free re-ups on your cadre membership as long as you keep it high enough... also the person has to have been posting images for at least three months to be eligible. :cD
0∈ [?]
The work of art may have a moral effect, but to demand moral purpose from an artist is to make him ruin his work. (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 1832)
noobguy
06/16/04 2:33 AM GMT
Dern, pretty slick, that would keep people on their toes for sure. Smart man Piner.
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
tbhockey
06/16/04 11:33 AM GMT
Limiting people to one upload per day, is not just to confine them, it is to give other peoplpe a chance to get noticed. It is pretty ignorant to upload 100 poor picutres, when sombody spent lots of time and produced one single picutre which looks good, but they cant be noticed because of the other person's 100 pictures.


I am all for the 1 a day rule. Also I think Caedes' last suggestion is an exellent idea. That should help a lot. Also i was thinking, maybe post up all the people somewhere, who only did 1 image for that week.

0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
tbhockey
06/16/04 11:38 AM GMT
oh, (haha) i guess i am against the resulustion restriction. Cuz I just recently uploaded Tears, I didn't realize it till now, but its only 1024 x 768. Yet i personally think it's a pretty nice shot. So...i think the way it orignially was is the best way. Where you can upload any size image, but in order to make it into the gallkey, it must 1152 x 864. And since i am going there, I think if you do restrict it, it should be restricted to 1024 x 768, that is a very common res. (alought i persoanlly use higher)
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
d_spin_9
06/16/04 4:19 PM GMT
I would be for the restriction in limiting the number of uploads per day to 1. i know personally i usually upload in burst ie. if i went on a trip, or if i had two variations of an image that i liked, but i think that it would be more beneficial to keep volume down, which would increase quality. Also i think this site should somehow put more emphasis on constructive criticism. millions of comments that just say "nice work" or "beautiful" are appreciated, but they dont help you become a better artist.
Personally i usually dont comment on images unless i have something specific to critique about them, encouragement is important but the idea behind this not being an elitist site is that we help amateurs (like myself) improve, and without good advice it isnt very effective, and poorer quality images that could help the artists improve just become a waste of webspace....
0∈ [?]
It is impossible to win an argument with an ignorant man.
d_spin_9
06/16/04 4:38 PM GMT
I dont know if this would be a little drastic, but couldnt the image mod simply screen some of the really poor quality images before they even make it to the new images category? they still have to go through them all, but that would get rid of them right away
0∈ [?]
It is impossible to win an argument with an ignorant man.
noobguy
06/16/04 5:14 PM GMT
I think that may be a bit far, its hard enough for a handful of people do decide the quality of the pictures for the permanent gallery. The image mods have a hard enough job, and besides thats the point of the new images gallery, to let the users decide the quality, I'm glad y ou support the volume control its prolly the best solution, although I still think piner's idea was pretty slick
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
tbhockey
06/16/04 9:46 PM GMT
i am with spin, I made that suggestion a long time ago, but apperently nobody else thought it was a good one...
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
+Piner
06/16/04 10:32 PM GMT
I still think that restricting uploads shouldn't be done, or only as a last resort, after other options have been tried and fail.
0∈ [?]
The work of art may have a moral effect, but to demand moral purpose from an artist is to make him ruin his work. (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 1832)
noobguy
06/17/04 12:18 AM GMT
Thats only fair, if people disagree with something it probably shouldnt be forced upon them without trying other things. Of course, in the end the decision is pretty much up to caedes.
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
::mayne
06/17/04 12:59 AM GMT
Carl and Tony, how are artists going to improve if their images if automaticaly deleted. We need freedom here;-) I think we need to imagine the future when dealing with this situation. Ideas such as reducing the uploads by artists will work in the short term. But the population is growing exponentially on Caedes and what happens when we reach double the members that are here now...back to square one;-) In light of this I have to agree with Tom. Ultimately I see the site splitting:-) Wheeee!
0∈ [?]
Darryl
+Samatar
06/17/04 1:00 AM GMT
At the moment new uploads are only rejected if they are offensive or copyrighted material. As noob said, it should be up to members to judge what is good and what isn't, not one person. That way other members will also know the quality level that is expected of them, and it gives the person who uploaded a chance to be told why their image may not be up to scratch. Personally I like the great range and scope of the new images gallery, it gives everyone a chance to experiment and receive feedback and that's what it's all about. The only reason I think that any changes should be made is if caedes has to increase the bandwidth (ie spend money) due to the number of uploads. Other than that I think it should stay the way it is. That's just my opinion though and it bears no more weight than anyone elses.
0∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
noobguy
06/17/04 1:14 AM GMT
I agree with both Darryl and Sam about the rejecting images that mods dont think are good enough quality. Like I said before, its up to the users to decide whats "good" or not, thats the idea of the new images gallery. In no way do I want to halt progress. Only suggested slowing things down a bit, it looks like the pace is hurting things more than helping. I didnt consider long term. Looking at it, alot of the users posting now have joined within the last month or two, if it keeps up at that rate, I dont think much can be done as far has slowing down traffic. Hmm, I just hope that one day they arent just comming too fast to handle. Meanwhile, keep up the good work everyone. As usual ;)
Cheers
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
d_spin_9
06/17/04 1:33 AM GMT
yes, sam i think its important for the new images gallery to be open to almost any level of work, i think that it would also be important that members comment critically on their work. rather than just saying nice, to images that strike your fancy, i would rather members make more critical comments on any images, not just ones they can say good things about
0∈ [?]
It is impossible to win an argument with an ignorant man.
tbhockey
06/17/04 1:56 AM GMT
well sam, you're right. But you must also realize that not everybody is trying to improve their skills, they are just uploading pictures they took. I know you cant justify allowing a picture or not by that, but i just thought i'd bring that to your attention.
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
d_spin_9
06/17/04 2:09 AM GMT
very good point, maybe allow mods to simply reject normal pictures, but be a bit more lenient with edited photos or abstracts?
0∈ [?]
It is impossible to win an argument with an ignorant man.
noobguy
06/17/04 2:14 AM GMT
mods reject pictures al the time for the permanent galleries, they shouldnt do it for the new gallery, the new gallery is a free and open gallery, this is what it should remain, I was just noticing the excessive traffic it gets.
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
+ppigeon
06/17/04 6:23 AM GMT
Anthony: ImageMods were created to:
1) filter new images and avoid "anti-code of conduct" pictures
2) move (why do you say 'reject'?) good images from the 'New Images' gallery trough permanent galleries. The 'New images' gallery is just a provisional gallery...
0∈ [?]
"Violence is the last resort of the incompetent" (I. Asimov)
tbhockey
06/17/04 10:44 AM GMT
...oh, i couldn't figure out what you were talking about ... (my name is Anthony too ; )
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
+ppigeon
06/17/04 12:21 AM GMT
Ooops! It was a message to noobguy :-)
0∈ [?]
"Violence is the last resort of the incompetent" (I. Asimov)
noobguy
06/17/04 1:27 PM GMT
haha, yeah I know the job of a mod, was just using the word reject (refering to the ones that are never moved) to refer to d_spins statement earlier. sorries :)
0∈ [?]
Shameless plug - Summer Shed There is nothing like being able to share your passions with the one you are passionate about.
reddawg151
06/17/04 11:59 PM GMT
Sorry, I can't get myself to read all the posts in here, and I came into this really late.

Caedes said something about encouraging people to post longer, more fleshed out reviews-- would it be possible to slightly weight the vote of a member who posts a fuller critique? Say if the critique reaches at least X amount of characters (signature excluded)? Anyone copy/pasting the same long review would eventually be noted by one of the imageMods and asked to stop.

For a more direct approach to stem the influx of images... well, one a day I don't think would help too much. If there are 100 loaded in a day, what would that become if it were 1 per member? Probably still way more than 50, yeah? The problem is people uploading whatever springs to mind.

No offense to anyone, but unless you're spending your life full time as an artist (and even then it's difficult) you can't upload as many images as some people do that are quality. Masterpieces aren't made in hours, much less one ever few hours! You can't expect people necessarily to decide their work is unworthy; that's not fair or right. Nor can the imageMods always say "no, this isn't good enough". So that's the dilemma.

I guess limiting to one a day would be a good start. If you have two, you can simply load the second the next day. Anyone who has so many images that they average more than one a day... can talk to an imageMod about making an exception, if they really need to.
0∈ [?]
~Bob
noobguy
06/18/04 2:22 AM GMT
Just had a light bulb, this is very rare. How bout instead of limiting the amount of uploads for each user. Put a cap on the new images per day, say 65 (random). Any images uploaded after the cap are put on queue by the server. Then the server can maintain exactly (x) new images per day). Doesnt have to be monitered by the images mods, just by the server automatically. what do you think?
0∈ [?]
A change in Point of View: 1 2 3 4 ... more to come. Ideas?
::Torque
06/18/04 4:26 AM GMT
Whew that was a lot of reading, wish I hadn't stumbled onto this discussion so late :). Anthony, I see where you're going with the last idea you posted, but I just thought I'd point out that unless that (65) cap discourages people from uploading images, it will just become an increasing buffer of time between when an image is submitted and when it appears in the new image gallery. At first this would probably be ok but when it becomes many days and even weeks between when an image is submitted and when it is posted, I think people would be quite frustrated by the delay (and I'm afraid this might happen sooner than later with the ever-increasing number of submissions). Clearly there is no easy answer here but I think there have been a lot of ideas suggested above that have at least some merit for flow control. I will think on it and see if I come up with anything myself (apart from realizing that I am in fact part of the problem with all the photos I've been taking lately)...
0∈ [?]
~My select image - Summer Magic
d_spin_9
06/18/04 4:28 AM GMT
i dont know about that i think it would only encourage a huge rush of uploads at one time, so the nerds who sit on their comp waiting for that time of day to come around could upload tons of pics, whereas other members who have lives may not be there to upload at that specfic time.

however limiting by uploads per hour might be an idea, say 3 per hour only, or one every 20 minutes would limit it to 72 posts per day, what do you think?
0∈ [?]
It is impossible to win an argument with an ignorant man.
+Samatar
06/18/04 5:01 AM GMT
I was thinking (as I walked home today with my camera full of photos) that you could possibly keep the limit at 4 per day (for cadre members) but make it 2 every 12 hours instead of 4 every 24. Or even 1 every 6 hours? That would help spread out the uploads, which would help avoid that problem where if you upload at the wrong time your image goes unnoticed, and also help avoid people just uploading whatever they happen to have lying around, which seems to happen occasionally. As I have said before I don't really think it needs to be changed, but I wanted to share the thought anyway.
0∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
::Torque
06/18/04 5:08 AM GMT
I think Sam's idea to cut the time-span and image count in half for all users would be a nice small step to start with, without really changing much. I'm sure that many users who would have uploaded 2 images at once will probably not even upload the second one because they have to come back in 12 hours to do it. It will probably have a small impact up front and does not seem destructive in the long run~
0∈ [?]
~My select image - Summer Magic
noobguy
06/18/04 1:10 PM GMT
Sams idea seems like it would work pretty well for ironing out those "Peak" times of the day. Theres not too much of a problem now, so a subtle solution like that may have a pretty large effect. Hopefully the site slows down in its growth a bit, what in the world would we do if we were getting +200 uploads per day!!!
0∈ [?]
A change in Point of View: 1 2 3 4 ... more to come. Ideas?
::CaptainHero
06/19/04 1:13 PM GMT
I came to this discussion late.

I too have been yearning for the good old days when you could see all the new images at once and they were all good ones. I have not been spending as much time on the site for some months now, and part of the reason is that when I go to look at the new images, I am just overwhelmed.

It is certainly a problem, but not an easy one to crack. We do seem to be shooting ourselves in the foot - there are so many images now that it is impossible to adequately review them all. Like other people I am often guilty of only looking at the ones that interest me. However, that means that the images that are perhaps lower quality (and it is all subjective of course) will not get the constructive criticism that they deserve.

It is a catch-22: if uploads are restricted then it is easier to review stuff, but users may not get the range of criticism they might get by posting lesser works. On the other hand if we keep uploading the way we are at the moment, users are not going to get enough feedback anyway. Restricting uploads per user to 1 per day (& 2 for Cadre maybe) is probably a step in the right direction.

Another thing: the fact that the author list is currently weighted in favour of quantity rather than quality certainly doesn't discourage people from uploading too many images.

How about this for an idea? It just floated uninvited into my mind, so it's not really developed: could we introduce a new gallery for 'review' images? Users could upload 'x' number of images to the 'normal' new galleries, but if they had an image they were not too sure about, they could post it for review. This depends of course on people having the self-control and self-awareness to realise that their image wasn't too good. If that was the case, we probably wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. Oh well! I just shot my own idea down.

My post seems to be rambling on, but I would like to finally say that I am opposed to the idea of limiting uploads by anything other than users. Also, splitting uploads per number of hours does not sound good. I'm lucky if I can get onto the site at different times of day, so I wouldn't want to be restricted. Having said that, should we even be uploading more than 1 per day?

Anyway, I'll sign off this post before it gets even bigger...
0∈ [?]
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." Bertrand Russell
tbhockey
06/19/04 2:22 PM GMT
wow captain hero, very very well said. I couldn't agree more with your first paragraph either. (bravo!!) lol
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
phoenixashes
06/21/04 12:31 AM GMT
Wow like the idea of a review gallary. Instead of just getting post supporting because the only people who would bother looking at your picture are those that are interested, you could get the suggestions. Excelent idea el capitan
0∈ [?]
Life is like an analogy.
noobguy
06/21/04 12:47 AM GMT
the new images gallery is the review gallery, in fact every gallery is a review gallery, this would be a very rhetorical addition to the site.
0∈ [?]
A change in Point of View: 1 2 3 4 ... more to come. Ideas?
reddawg151
06/21/04 4:28 PM GMT
Captain Hero said: "Another thing: the fact that the author list is currently weighted in favour of quantity rather than quality certainly doesn't discourage people from uploading too many images."

right on! i think some people upload as much as they can for that reason.
0∈ [?]
~Bob
::CaptainHero
06/21/04 5:49 PM GMT
Thanks, Bob. I definitely think that there is a tacit encouragement to upload many images.

0∈ [?]
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." Bertrand Russell
*caedes
06/21/04 11:43 PM GMT
Bob: actually the change with the author gallery to order it based on the sim of cindexes squared makes it weighted in favor of quality.
0∈ [?]
-caedes
tbhockey
06/22/04 12:05 AM GMT
if the "multiple grading scale" gets implemented in some way, i think there should also be a category for NAME of the piece. (maybe have it count for less or somthing)..
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
*caedes
06/22/04 12:14 AM GMT
Frankly, I'm not seeing multiple grading catagories happening any time soon.
0∈ [?]
-caedes
tbhockey
06/22/04 12:21 AM GMT
oh ok. But why though? Just wondering..
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
*caedes
06/22/04 12:25 AM GMT
I think I just covered that in "c-indexes are getting unpredictable"
0∈ [?]
-caedes
tbhockey
06/22/04 1:21 AM GMT
oh my goodness. lol my bad, i posted those last two in the wrong one. lol sorry.
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
rustectrum03
06/22/04 7:17 AM GMT
no...I'm late to this discussion...lol
I really don't know how things were before I got here, but seeing that nearly all of my newer images get between 5-6 votes before either dropping into the abyss or getting moved to the permenent galleries, I feel people aren't looking at images enough and that's half of the wonderful-ness of this site...
Anyway, the point of this site is image appreciation and critiquing. That being said limiting the amount of images per day is not necessarily the answer, it could be at best only a short term one. With a site as good as this people will continue to come in and soon even limiting image uploads to one per day will eventually be no help at all. We need a permanent solution...
my solution is leave the two (or one or three, it really doesn't matter) uploads per day as it is, and have the main limiting factor as votes and dls of other peoples images. Say you were to vote X number of times on other people's images for each image you are able to submit until you get to the limit of 2 for non-members or 4 for contributors...for caedes core group this shouldn't be too much of a problem but it'd reinforce a behavior. The number of votes per upload would need to be debated a bit but I think 5-10 would be fair,but who knows...
perhaps even a kind of glorified karma could also get in on the act as well...I just don't know (mainly it just depends on how much work you'd want to do caedes) Anyway just my thoughts ~thanks
0∈ [?]
-->"When it is time to die, let us not discover that we never lived." --Henry David Thoreau
::CaptainHero
06/22/04 9:27 AM GMT
Caedes: "actually the change with the author gallery to order it based on the sim of cindexes squared makes it weighted in favor of quality".

I'm a little dumb, and I don't look at the author gallery much. Has this change been implemented?


0∈ [?]
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." Bertrand Russell
noobguy
06/22/04 1:41 PM GMT
it was changed, Read Here
0∈ [?]
A change in Point of View: 1 2 3 4 ... more to come. Ideas?
reddawg151
06/22/04 3:32 PM GMT
Caedes-- i saw you mention that new formula, i didn't know it had been implemented. maybe it doesn't weight things heavily enough? it seems the list is still very close to who has the most images, with maybe some exceptions. Maybe it should be cubed instead of squared? Lol.
0∈ [?]
~Bob
*caedes
06/22/04 6:35 PM GMT
Yes, I was thinking the same.
0∈ [?]
-caedes
::CaptainHero
06/22/04 6:41 PM GMT
Thanks, noobguy.
0∈ [?]
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." Bertrand Russell
::dreamer100
06/26/04 3:08 AM GMT
I hate to move this back up in the discussion board since we've long moved on to other topics, but I was just wondering; We've all seen the results of multiple votes in the 6-10 range. But is there any effect in voting a 1 or a 0? Could some effect be added? In the faqs it says that all images are left in 'new images' for a month. There have been a number of shots that I've seen, some of which I've clicked on the thumbnail for just to see if I'm missing something. If enough people voted a 0 couldn't the image be deleted in a week? I know that this would have little effect on the number of images posted per day but might make the New Images catagory a little less intimidating. My images aren't incredible or the c-indexes astronomical, but sometimes you look and think "Is he kidding?" Since I'm relatively new I was hoping that this was a summer phenomenon, but I guess it's just the price you pay for popularity and moving up in Google. Anyway, my question- Could a 0 vote have any effect?
0∈ [?]
I put tape on all the mirrors in my house so I don't accidentally walk through into another dimension. Steven Wright
jono00
06/27/04 9:39 AM GMT
Two suggestions - i don't know if either could be possible, and sorry if they have already been said:

1) Could there be a way of automatically spacing out uploads? Like put them all in a queue and allow one into the gallery every 15 minutes. Although this wouldn't mean they all get seen, it would still allow more attention than before. There could also be a space for it on the front page? like featured new image.

2) Have a scrolling bar or something on the left (under the menus) with any new images with below say 5 votes. When they reach 5 votes they drop off. This would mean that all pictures get at least a C-Index if not proper commentary.

Sorry if my ideas are dumb!
0∈ [?]
Seize the Day!
noobguy
06/27/04 4:22 PM GMT
I suggested your first, the counter was an overwhelmed queue, the second is original and quite intersting, hmmmm
0∈ [?]
A change in Point of View: 1 2 3 4 ... more to come. Ideas?
::Torque
06/27/04 4:30 PM GMT
As to your first idea, Jon, if someone is already on Caedes and 4 new images get uploaded at once, I don't think it's any real trouble to look at them all. The problem arises when you are away from the site for a day, and come back to 100 new images. Even if they were spaced out, this problem would still exist. I think the second idea is good though as well, or maybe we just have an option to sort the gallery by number of votes, so those with no c-indexes yet and ones just based on very few votes will be brought to the front. Anyone who has time to sort the gallery that way once in a while can help in the voting. I like your way too though because everyone would see it all the time.
0∈ [?]
~My select image - Wading Patiently
+Samatar
06/28/04 2:07 PM GMT
Just to note, you can sort the "Image Rankings" list by number of votes, in ascending order. I have done this before and gone through all the low voted images. To be honest though, I think even if it was available in the "New" gallery, people would still only look at the ones they like the look of in the thumbnail ad vote on less. I do like the idea of a scrolling bar, but obviously it would require some new programming. As for your suggestion about the waiting list/queue, just so you are aware of how uploads work: They will not appear in the "New" gallery until a mod has manually approved them. So sometimes images may sit here waiting for approval for an hour or so before a mod comes online... this isn't a problem like it used to be as there are more mods now, but it still might cause a conflict with that system.
0∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
::Torque
07/02/04 12:33 AM GMT
Images don't appear on the "Image Rankings" until they have at least 5 votes. That means that using the "Image Rankings" to find the images with few votes doesn't really address Jon's idea of showing images with too few votes to have a C-index yet. Certainly the alternative would require some programming so I guess it's just a maybe for the future :)
0∈ [?]
~My select image - Wading Patiently
Paws_of_GT
07/09/04 12:53 AM GMT
Too my mind, more variety & choice can only be good where the factor of growth is concerned.

Not only is the image bank so too speak growing, but surely the collective audience of viewers does too. Some of those then turn into members, which again a percentage will turn into contributing (image wise & financially) members of the community.

If you start limiting things more than they already are you could cause a detrimental effect too the viewership & membership.

& I do appreciate the issues raised about the volume of works being submitted & how it does affect some things, but the way I see it, if it ain't broke, don't try & fix it.
(even though my personal motto is "If it ain't broke, kick it till it is. Then rebuild it but better.") ;)

If the issue was bandwidth or storage then sure, I can understand cutbacks or more strict limits being put into effect, but the points rasied about quality/standards of images is one that concerns me a bit, we all have different views or levels of skill too show, so that is a tough call too make. As for the size limit/res issue, again, as mentioned not all have the camera/PC power/ability too go too some of the bigger sizes required. Though they may be cheaper these days, not everyone has the cash to upgrade too the new stuff regardless of how cheap they are, they may be stuck with what they have for the forseeable future, so you would be cutting them out of the loop.

I appreciate the fact I have pretty much just walked through the door here, but there is my thinking on this.
0∈ [?]
I am like Yin & Yang, my lighter side is balanced by my darkerside, embrace both & you get the whole me, play with one & you will meet the other...
glooh
07/09/04 1:03 AM GMT
Taz and all. What you say is more or less stop complaining right? I do agree with you on most things, but thinking about the future isn't a bad idea at all. What if Caedes got a big article in National Geographic for example? It always starts somewhere and before you notice, servers are down because of Hotmail-like traffic.

I'd say... don't stop people from becoming member, or voting but quality is what I noticed the first time I came here, like everybody, and the more people will become member, the more the risk quality goes down. I probably am to blame as well, I don't know. The only thing I notice, like everybody and that's what this discussion is about, is that quality falls back and I would totally agree if there would be a seperating in "highly professional" and "creative amateur" for example. Your images could always go from one to another, right?
0∈ [?]
"Just a little, nothing more."
tbhockey
07/09/04 1:25 AM GMT
right glooh. CLEARYLY the more member, the less quality..and i personally think it is getting absoultly ridicolous... When i first came (about a year ago) probably 70 - 80% of the images were spectacular! I remeber Saily, ppigeon, xentric...etc.. (oh my goodness i am getting nostalgic!!!) But anyway. There really doesn't seem to be a pracical way to handle this situation....Even with all of us "brainstorming" .. I just "yearning for the good old days" as captain hero said...
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
noobguy
07/09/04 1:32 AM GMT
digital blasphemy was free until the volume came in, now look what its become. this shouldnt happen to caedes, caedes seems to have good nonprofit intentions. but i guess ya never know. I've stopped worrying about it, what happens will happen
such is life
0∈ [?]
A change in Point of View: 1 2 3 4 ... more to come. Ideas?
::CaptainHero
07/09/04 11:37 AM GMT
Agree, Tony. The average image quality has definitely dropped massively. However, as you say, all this discussion has so far got us nowhere.
0∈ [?]
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." Bertrand Russell
::grimbug
07/09/04 1:52 PM GMT
Another late comer to the convo.. but if anyone is interested to here my '2 cents' worth then read on.....Certainly i feel its the quality of the the quantity and the not the sheer volume thats the major issue...( warning I am being hypocritical here, as im guilty of not commenting as much, or as critically as i should.. primarily due to the fact that i only really comment on work that catches my eye.. but i do make a point of voting as much as possible) we should be doing more to encourage image posters to make improvements to thier work, which will in turn imporve the general quality on site.To this end, the best way for people to improve is to recieve constructive critique, and in my eyes it's the absence of this that has the most effect on the site....By far the best comment system i have seen comes from photosig.com, have a look at a photo to see what i mean...but as far actually making people comment well thats a toughy... the best i could suggest would be to use a coment system such as photosig, where people recieve a rating for thier comments .. this would generate a score like the current karma one. the tangible reward for this aside from a pretty number you can show to your friends.... would be an extra title... which would appear under your name on a post. your somment rating score effcting your title.... say starting at ' novice' ...'Trainee commentator'...'Offical advisor' ..to the lofty ranks of 'wise-man'.. 'guru'... 'omnipotent being' ... well it's any idea.. it thinks thats all i wanted to say.. and i think im rambling off the point probably... ;)
0∈ [?]
- "I dont have my own opinions, i just get them from the huge sums of cash i recieve"
noobguy
07/09/04 1:58 PM GMT
This comment probably belongs in this discussion: Constructive Karma

your idea was suggested in that discussion

I havent seen this site I'll have to give it a look see, its good to know that its implimented in another photo site,

maybe you should recopy your comment into that discussion?
0∈ [?]
A change in Point of View: 1 2 3 4 ... more to come. Ideas?
::grimbug
07/09/04 2:10 PM GMT
hmmm ok i'll copy it across!!!
0∈ [?]
- "I dont have my own opinions, i just get them from the huge sums of cash i recieve"
Mr_Fetero
07/16/04 4:15 AM GMT
Welp i am really late coming into this conversation, but i agree that a cap should be placed on the number of uploads per day. I dont have a suggestion of what that should be. I have not been a member for very long but i already seen a large increase in uploads. I constantly see many images that resemble other images, and images seem to be uploaded in trends. Perhaps caedes could discourage people from uploading images that look identical, and incourage people to find their own style of art. As for myself i find it hard to upload more than 2 images a month. If people who have a problem with not being able to upload as many pictures a day as they want than they will just have to deal with it and wait. And maybe while they are waiting they can try to improve their other art work.

I have also noticed that many of my images get very few votes and comments. I have many images that only have 6 or 7 votes but have been on the site for over a month. And it is not that these images are not being viewed or downloaded, the downloads and the views of these images greatly excedes the votes. I know that users must vote on a certain amount of images based on the amount they download. Maybe user should be have to vote on 1 out of 3 images he or she views, instead of 1 out of 5 he or she downloads.

Then again maybe nothing should be changed, i really dont know.
0∈ [?]
fantom
07/16/04 7:49 AM GMT
i think that we should leave the rules and regs to the people who are currently in charge ... they seem to be doing a great job now and if they make a decision that does not suit everyone we should be big enough to accept it and move on .. i think that discussion is great .. but at the end of the day their decisions are what count, and they should make them without fear or favour
0∈ [?]
LiquidguitarJP
07/23/04 5:22 AM GMT
Maybe if there was more Caedes.net s (sorry if this isnt the discussion topic anymore I didn't have time to read all of the comments). But for the uploading overflowing growth. Ya know like maybe www.Caedes2.net i know that sounds kind of taky but... and then upload images there and have this be ...like a graveyard of images haha j/k like just for downloading images ..not uploading. I dont know if this is out of the control of Caedes but ...i dont know.


or split people into different caedes.nets (if they were going to make more) ...but we all know each other here and spliting us up wouldn't be right. ....since there's only one Joost ahaha.

i dont know just an idea to play with.
-Sean
0∈ [?]
Without Love...Without Trust...Without Hope and most importantly....Without Faith There will Be No Journey Back. ...§Carpe Diem§…
::JOHANNA
08/22/04 6:30 PM GMT
Caedes is growing but also bursting at the same time,
1) changing the system of c-indexes was a problem
2) they are cleaning without any system or ranking.
Sorry this is my idea.
0∈ [?]
Carpe diem.
::CaptainHero
08/22/04 6:32 PM GMT
Joost, calm down for heavens sake!
0∈ [?]
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." Bertrand Russell
tbhockey
08/22/04 7:09 PM GMT
i think the new c-index system works good joost
0∈ [?]
-tbhockey
LiquidguitarJP
08/22/04 7:37 PM GMT
Agree completely with your number 2 Joost. ..that is if you are refering to the mods deleting images.
0∈ [?]
-Graceless intrusion... Are you sanctified in your judgment of me? -Someone else's fate We are deciding -I can see much clearor now I that I'm blind -I was told there'd be no one to call on when I feel alone and afraid -I used to be frightened of dying I used to think death was the end -John Petrucci ...†Carpe Diem†... My most famous image: Speaking Words of Wisdom
::stuffnstuff
08/23/04 6:42 PM GMT
Why can't I keep up with the quickly rising standards for keeping images online for good? I know it is way back, but I like caedes' idea of rewarding those who upload a small number per week. I almost would have suggested added publicity for the cadre members, but then it turns into a money game; whoever has the dough is the best artist. That isn't fair. On the other hand, I think Jon's idea of sorting images by the number of votes received is a great one. Trying to be equal, we could search for the images with less than 5 votes and help out those small time authors (not being critical, just stating the truth).
0∈ [?]
-to live between the stones and walk in His dust, this is my task-
::noobguy
08/23/04 7:00 PM GMT
"I like caedes' idea of rewarding those who upload a small number per week"

what about members who submit rarely because they visit the site rarely, or members who submit often but consitantly submit high quality imagery?
0∈ [?]
An image rated way too low! Dragonfly Environment

Leave a comment (registration required):

Subject: