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

[removedacct1]

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

Just because YOU don't object to blatant thievery and copyright violation does NOT mean everyone should feel and think the same way. This is offensive. "Get over yourself" indeed.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Water marks - no - they look silly and lawyers are available to fight for you.

Paying to be on this site - yes
I do not remember exactly how many years I waited in the mail for Pickers notes.. I paid and I enjoyed and learned like many of the old farts on this site , Pickers Notes were all
that connected us.

Now we have this very well run site.

Sean's move here is going to open a lot of doors that were not able to be opened for him till now. I think he deserves to benefit financially for 15 years of maintaining this wonderful site.
Many young newbies who only know digital cameras, but want to learn about the Ancient Wet Arts, will flock here and those who do not want to pay a minimum fee should be gently shown the door
and those who want to learn the AWA will pay the fee gladly. There is not other site on the net that covers so completely what we do and in a lot of cases what we do well.

I think exciting times are ahead for this site and I am glad to have stuck out the 13 years and be part of it moving forward.

 

[mgb74]

No such conclusion follows from "my logic".

The question here turns on how many new subscribers can be gained on the newly rejigged site.

The subscription model has *already* failed at apug. Witness the tiny proportion of subscribers vs. members that sean has told us about so many times.

Placing further restrictions on what people can do at apug for free will not drive up subscriptions. It'll just drive down new members.

Plus, of course, it will drive away existing members, and thus decrease the advert revenue that is so badly needed.

Being angry and punitive towards current non-subscribers serves no purpose.
if you want apug to be a special and exclusive club, that's fine. But it'll die with you.

I don't consider it angry or punitive to expect someone to pay for what they use. I consider it punitive (to others) to use a resource and refuse to pay. There is hardly anything "special and exclusive" about paying $24/year for a subscription.

There are basically only 3 models (to my knowledge) to pay for online services; excluding those like LFF that are a "contribution" to the community. You subscribe, you pay by being inundated with ads, or you pay by giving up your privacy. I prefer to pay for what I use. That's not to say I subscribe the every single forum I visit, but I do pay for what I use regularly. And I don't expect the casual user of APUG to pay.

Whether or not the additional non-subscriber "eyeballs" garners enough revenue to justify, I don't know. But given the limited advertising on APUG, I doubt it.

 

[nmp]

Ah, the age-old question since the beginning of internet age. Do you want to be a niche place fully funded by subscribers or much larger open place where greater number of eyeballs bring sustainable advertisement revenue. The current model is a hybrid one. Not knowing what the metrics are, I wouldn't know where to draw the line. What I know is if you make it harder for non-paying member to frequent the forum, you will lose the traffic and potentially ad dollars.

 

[mr rusty]

The resource material for AWA (I like that acronym) here is far beyond anything anywhere else. Why wouldn't you expect to pay a little to access it? A year at apug costs about 2 pizzas. Not much! Cue OT discussion about the size of pizzas. IMO the current paywall for gallery access is just right.

 

[pdeeh]

I don't consider it angry or punitive to expect someone to pay for what they use.

Well tbh your posts on the subject read (to me. I can't speak for others) with a tone of moral disapproval;As though not paying is somehow a moral failure. The same problem infests discussion of healthcare in the USA but that's a discussion for a different platform.

Still and all, Sean is the one in charge here. He's not shown any sign of closing things down, rather the opposite if I read his posts correctly.

In the end, whatever you think about apug's income model is of no moment to me, but I do consider that you are quite mistaken in your take on the economic imperatives that drive people's decisions about how to spend their money.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Remember AWA is mine, I think it has a nice ring to it, I see a subsection for this Sean.

 

[NedL]

Remember AWA is mine, I think it has a nice ring to it, I see a subsection for this Sean.

Even though I intend to remain exclusively AWA ( love it! ), I will benefit greatly from the experience, tips, wisdom and discussion of people who make the same kinds of prints but start with a different kind of negative. The printmaking part is all in common ( and the most satisfying part, IMO ). I'll be among the first to join any AWA subsection.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Eric hit the nail on the head. I read all kind of ridiculous things and see all kinds of ridiculous watermarks and they are all promulgated by amateurs who read some dumb thing on the internet then do it. If you register your images, then post them small you have little to worry about. I don't think I have posted anything larger that about 700/800 pixels wide in the entire history of the internet. 99.999% of people just want to see your images. Watermarks are annoying to them. If you are lucky enough that more than 10000 people look at your images, then you have other issues and are lucky. Stealing of your 700 pixel images isn't one of your issues....

Some of us are not professional photographers and do not want to have to register every photograph that gets posted. Your opinion is not the only opinion that exists.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Could I just remind everyone that all this talk of watermarking and right-clicking is digital territory and thus off-topic for APUG; Post at DPUG for that sort of thing PLEASE!

Nothing I've read in this thread is off-topic. This is Sean's thread discussing his new website which will include digital and hybrid work flows. It makes sense to discuss all facets of the upgrades.

 

[Sirius Glass]

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.

You missed the obvious one ===> supporting APUG. It does not happen for free.

 

[Sirius Glass]

+1. A paywall is a stupid idea and will cause folks to move on to non-restrictive photo sites.

+1

Many come for a while leave and come back the next time they have a problem. Do not discourage that.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Just because YOU don't object to blatant thievery and copyright violation does NOT mean everyone should feel and think the same way. This is offensive. "Get over yourself" indeed.

+100

 

[Dinesh]

You missed the obvious one ===> supporting APUG. It does not happen for free.

Agreed. It seems unreasonable to expect Sean to do all of the heavy lifting.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

RE subscription dues...
(just a suggestion)

1 month = US$5
1 year = US$25
5 year = US$100
lifetime = US$250

 

[Sirius Glass]

RE subscription dues...
(just a suggestion)

1 month = US$5
1 year = US$25
5 year = US$100
lifetime = US$250

I hope to be around for more than ten years so I rather not pay the lifetime rate. The object is to support APUG.

 

[pdeeh]

Nothing I've read in this thread is off-topic

whoosh ...

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

My opinion, not that it matters, is 'everything in life requires a workable balance'. Below is a humble suggestion.

Variable subscription rates with varying privileges:
(per year)
Visitors... can't post, see only small images, see more adverts (not 'too' many), classified ads invisible.
US$15... 20 textual posts/month (no images, links okay), see only small images, fewer adverts, no cl. ads.
US$25... unlimited posts, post larger images, see larger images, few adverts (can be switched off), yes cl. ads.
Free 7 day trial... (one time only) - Yes I know some folks will cheat.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

No disrespect intended but I suspect a few naysayers are reticent regarding their opinions of subscriptions. Once one has had a free ride at the expense of daddy (Sean), and as time moves forward, it becomes increasingly difficult for us to pull our own weight. Papa won't kick us out... but he will (and should) charge us rent. The cost of 'rent' depends on how much we expect to consume and what privileges we want. Pay nothing... sleep on a hay stack in the barn and hunt/grow our own food... OR be swamped with door-to-door salesmen who each pay the 'old man' $1 to visit us.

Sorry sons/daughters... but nothing in this life is 'free'.

 

[eddie]

You missed the obvious one ===> supporting APUG. It does not happen for free.

I did mention altruism.

 

[Diapositivo]

Wrong. Everyone here is talking about posting their images HERE at APUG. Hardly off topic.

I agree with you but if we are right also discussions about how to scan images, how to set levels and curves, should have been allowed because it's all inherent to the functioning of (part of) the site. I raised this point in the past. The general consensus was one has to learn those skills in some other fora, and then come back here and upload

I am VERY glad the new system is being implemented.

 

[Diapositivo]

+1. This is a non-issue.

For me it is an issue. Not in every country there is a registration system which fits photographers. In Italy we still have a monopoly of SIAE and it is all structured around the protection of texts or music. The procedure to copyright images is ridiculously expensive and cumbersome.

If one limits himself to 700 pixels larger sides the risks of theft for commercial uses are limited, but there are a lot of people on the internet who would just grab your pictures and post them everywhere as if they were their work, and this represents a cost in terms of liver intoxication

 

[Sirius Glass]

Re $, isn't the creation of the Photrio platform (ie basically moving APUG to hybrid) itself intended to grow subscribership?

Hey, stop confusing use with facts! This is the internet.

 

[Julie McLeod]

Hey Sean,

Re $, isn't the creation of the Photrio platform (ie basically moving APUG to hybrid) itself intended to grow subscribership?

I thought the hybrid platform was intended to grow membership and viewership so that Sean can better monetize through advertising. More eyes on the site, more ad dollars flowing in.

 

[faberryman]

The general consensus was one has to learn those skills in some other fora, and then come back here and upload

My experience has been that it depends on who responds to the posts. I have seen some scanner threads go on for a while, yet for other threads the first person to respond has said it is a forbidden topic which kills the discussion. Just a few more days and such nonsense will be history.