APUG.ORG to PHOTRIO.COM Migration, Final Details.

[Photo Engineer]

It's not widely known in your circles.

Eric, my circles span the globe and I promote APUG at every opportunity.

PE

 

[Eric Rose]

That's great that you promote APUG, all I was getting at was your circles might be more vertical in nature.

 

[Eric Rose]

It's going to be fun watching all the "storming and norming" when this is all unleashed.

 

[Molli]

Hi Sean,

I just re-subscribed a week or so early in the hope the little addition I made might be of some help in the lead up to the migration. Like others, I am happy to support any direction in which you care to take your site and also am very grateful to be a part of it. While I haven't been posting much, or even logging in, I generally do stop by once every day or so.

Wishing you all the best with the big move and merge!
Sincerely,
Molli

 

[michr]

There are few good photography forums left so we need this new site to build on the successes of APUG. I hope the new site can become a more open place for photography discussion in general.

 

[Photo Engineer]

That's great that you promote APUG, all I was getting at was your circles might be more vertical in nature.

They are more spherical!

PE

 

[Sean]

Thanks again everyone!

Just a quick update on a new feature for Photrio based on some feedback in this thread. I have had a system coded that allows you to list up to 5 social groups you belong to, under your avatar. You can select which groups you want to show in your user preferences. The groups you list will also be clickable. One reason for doing this is I intend to have an APUG social group, for those APUGers who want to stay in touch as "APUGers" (a bit of a virtual pub). The APUG social group can also contain some historical info as well as other topics. You can then list the APUG social group in your avatar area like so:

and if you want additional groups listed:

This should help with visibility of groups. I also intend to do a lot of additional work in the groups area to improve it. I'm sure with the new roll out we'll be flooded with feedback and feature requests. I hope to get to all of it as quickly as possible.

Thanks,
Sean

 

[mr rusty]

It's definitely something I am considering for the new site. It would be open viewing for registered members, but not guests though. And we'll need to keep an eye on bandwidth usage.

Hmm. Not sure this is a good idea for the benefit of the site. From my own perspective, APUG has been an immense resource of knowledge, but what triggered me to subscribe initially was NOT being able to access the galleries. I thought "what am I missing" and "I want to show my work", so the access to the galleries became the "return on my investment"; i.e. I paid something and got something. If you allow access without subscription (i.e. just registration) what do you actually get for your subscription. If it's just a "warm feeling" that you are "contributing" it may not be enough.

I listen to Radio Paradise a lot "listener supported radio" that relies on donations but also on merchandise. I do buy a few T's but as I don't actually get anything additional for a "donation" there is no incentive to make regular subscription, and that I think is the problem. People might subscribe once, but if they don't actually get anything over and above a registered user for the subscription, I expect many will "slip".

 

[Diapositivo]

Hmm. Not sure this is a good idea for the benefit of the site. From my own perspective, APUG has been an immense resource of knowledge, but what triggered me to subscribe initially was NOT being able to access the galleries. I thought "what am I missing" and "I want to show my work", so the access to the galleries became the "return on my investment"; i.e. I paid something and got something. If you allow access without subscription (i.e. just registration) what do you actually get for your subscription.

The idea is to let everybody see the galleries, but only subscribers to post in the galleries. The flip side is the bandwith that generates.

Maybe the simple members could see a reduced version of the images in the galleries, something like an expanded thumbnail, a decent "preview". That would be a compromise between allowing subscribers to show their work and get critique, saving bandwith and encouraging subscriptions. The preparation of the "previews" would require processor resources but for the existing galleries can be carried on with spare processor resources (with calm) and for new uploads it would probably be a negligible load on the machines (considering how small is the number of subscribers )

 

[removed account4]

it would be a colossal drag if spyders and slurpees would be able to index images
especially if / when a uploader to the gallery doesn't want that to happen ..
maybe a big, fat, juicy, photrio-watermark would be helpful if preview becomes a non sub-user option.

 

[Julie McLeod]

it would be a colossal drag if spyders and slurpees would be able to index images
especially if / when a uploader to the gallery doesn't want that to happen ..
maybe a big, fat, juicy, photrio-watermark would be helpful if preview becomes a non sub-user option.

Maybe an option could be enabled to allow subscribers to prevent their gallery photos from being viewed by non-subscribers.

 

[winger]

I have had a system coded that allows you to list up to 5 social groups you belong to, under your avatar. You can select which groups you want to show in your user preferences. The groups you list will also be clickable.

I like this solution.
Since some users' geo location is being truncated, will that be addressed at some point, too?

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

The idea is to let everybody see the galleries, but only subscribers to post in the galleries. The flip side is the bandwith that generates.

Maybe the simple members could see a reduced version of the images in the galleries, something like an expanded thumbnail, a decent "preview". That would be a compromise between allowing subscribers to show their work and get critique, saving bandwith and encouraging subscriptions. The preparation of the "previews" would require processor resources but for the existing galleries can be carried on with spare processor resources (with calm) and for new uploads it would probably be a negligible load on the machines (considering how small is the number of subscribers )

Some of us never upload to galleries... but we want to see the galleries. I think it's a good idea to allow non-subscribers to view tiny thumbnails though... to dangle that carrot.

This would also serve to make shared information more usable for everyone. Often, a post or thread makes little sense without the referenced visual data. The thumbnails should be just large enough to have an idea of what the image looks like... but far too small to show significant detail.

 

[Sirius Glass]

it would be a colossal drag if spyders and slurpees would be able to index images
especially if / when a uploader to the gallery doesn't want that to happen ..
maybe a big, fat, juicy, photrio-watermark would be helpful if preview becomes a non sub-user option.

I agree. I stopped posting photographs on the internet when I found my photos were downloaded from APUG. A big watermark across the photograph would be great and then I would start posting photographs again. Thank you for that idea John.

 

[Stephen Prunier]

As someone who recently purchased a Nikon D750 during their recent sale, I've spent less time on here as I learn my new Tool!. I've become sick of the bashing that takes place on a couple of the other well known sites. One bashes all things analog, ie. APUG, and bashes the other multi format site for it's format change. I don't understand it. Maybe they need to feel good about spending $40,000 on their MFD cameras and 60" printers, and almost all of them do it as a hobby!

I've been a paying member here for a while, and feel I can get honest opinions, advice, and friendly jabs. I have a great amount of respect for the work, and knowledge of many of the members on APUG. As much as I hate to see APUG change. I welcome the new format. It sounds like those wishing to keep it all analog, will be able too. For me, I hope to be able to advance my knowledge, and abilities as an Artist by having members like Bob Carney, along with others help answer my questions, without having to do it through private messages etc.

I've been a die hard film user for 45 years, but as an artist, I've also seen what can be done using other tools too. Like making contact prints from digital negatives for one. We all know how fast everything is changing online. I would like to believe Sean has spent many hours agonizing over this. We come here to learn, share, and keep tabs on everything analog. Some of us make a small payment for this, while most don't. This is Sean's Career!

FYI, I've been a member over at Nikonian's for at least 15 years. They our pretty big as far as a website goes. I only started visiting again several months ago. Compared to APUG, it's a ghost town.

 

[faberryman]

...as an Artist ...as an artist...

So are you an Artist or an artist?

 

[Stephen Prunier]

So are you an Artist or an artist?

Both. When I sell something I'm an Artist, other wise I'm just another artist! You want me to edit my post? LOL

 

[nmp]

I agree. I stopped posting photographs on the internet when I found my photos were downloaded from APUG. A big watermark across the photograph would be great and then I would start posting photographs again. Thank you for that idea John.

So why is it "downloadable" in the first place? It should be easy to disable the right-click as they have on most sites. I am not sure why that is not implemented here. Something like what DPUG already has would be great. You don't have to have very high resolution to appreciate the work, just a little better than those thumbnails. Regardless of that, I think the right click should be disabled on all images.

 

[pdeeh]

I think the right click should be disabled on all images.

It's pretty pointless tbh, there are multiple ways around right-click blocking anyway, and it just makes life hard for people who use context menus.

 

[Luckless]

So why is it "downloadable" in the first place? It should be easy to disable the right-click as they have on most sites. I am not sure why that is not implemented here. Something like what DPUG already has would be great. You don't have to have very high resolution to appreciate the work, just a little better than those thumbnails. Regardless of that, I think the right click should be disabled on all images.

Disabling downloading of data that you display to a users is like trying to disable photo copying of a physical image - It doesn't really work all that well. If they can see the data to view it, then it is already on their system. Disabling right click is on par with putting a deadbolt on a waist high garden fence: Sure, it will keep some from opening it, but anyone who wants past is going to quickly figure things out.

 

[nmp]

Disabling downloading of data that you display to a users is like trying to disable photo copying of a physical image - It doesn't really work all that well. If they can see the data to view it, then it is already on their system. Disabling right click is on par with putting a deadbolt on a waist high garden fence: Sure, it will keep some from opening it, but anyone who wants past is going to quickly figure things out.

OK. So I had no clue you could do that. I would still want to put the padlock, though.

 

[Sirius Glass]

So why is it "downloadable" in the first place? It should be easy to disable the right-click as they have on most sites. I am not sure why that is not implemented here. Something like what DPUG already has would be great. You don't have to have very high resolution to appreciate the work, just a little better than those thumbnails. Regardless of that, I think the right click should be disabled on all images.

Because among to ways a photography can be stolen with a screen shot. Just put a big diagonal watermark across the photograph on all photographs in the website.

 

[Eric Rose]

I expect my stuff to be stolen if it's posted on the net. People need to get over themselves.

 

[nmp]

Because among to ways a photography can be stolen with a screen shot. Just put a big diagonal watermark across the photograph on all photographs in the website.

You know you can put the watermark yourself and then upload. If you plaster a big watermark across the image, it really makes it useless visually, for me at least. I don't know how other people feel about that. If you make it smaller, Photoshop can remove it in 2 seconds. There are no easy answers, it seems.

 

[eddie]

Right now, as far as I can tell, there are 2 tangible reasons to subscribe. One is the ability to post/ view the Galleries. The other is to be able to sell equipment. I think the latter is of minimum interest to most. Most subscribers rarely, if ever, partake of that option. Altruism aside, the ability to participate in the Galleries is the true "value added" component of a subscription. I think it would be a mistake to open it up to everyone, potentially hurting the financial bottom line. As the saying goes, "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" ( I'm still a proponent of the annual or biannual "free peek/ subscription drive" week for members.) The subscription rate is very reasonable, and Sean should be compensated for the time and effort he puts in to this place.