A question of curiosity

[Chris Calohan]

And not being a cat, I will try to tread lightly and save the only life I have.

In the last two weeks I've been on this forum, the featured front page photos have been more toward what I would consider ho-hum, (with the exception of one). They are not "bad" photos, but they weren't particularly striking to my eye. So, I guess my question is what decides the criteria for being chosen?

While on that subject, is it more a matter of time served that will determine the responses a contributor or is it truely a matter of stunning imagery...again, while I see some of it as stellar, many images are again, ho-hum - to my eye. This is not to say my images desreve more attention than I've received, but far more because I am always interested in what makes a viewer go googley inside which at some point may make or break a sale.

Just curious.

[Isaac]

the featured front page photos

afaik they are all by Michael Reichmann, chosen by Michael Reichmann, presumably because he likes them.
(If you really want to ask, this might be more of a question for "About This Site".)

... is it more a matter of time served that will determine the responses a contributor or is it ...

Somewhere in there you lost me - time served where? - please ask in a different way.

[Chris Calohan]

As to cover shots...totally understand now.

It just seems to me that some people get more responses than others and in most cases, those are contributors who have been on here for quite some time...hence the time served query. It's really not all that important, except as to wonder...

[Isaac]

... some people get more responses than others and in most cases, those are contributors who have been on here for quite some time ...

My guess is that you're talking about those same posts in "Landscape & Nature Photography" and "User Critiques" that I choose not to comment on - so let's hope someone else can enlighten you.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... posts... that I choose not to comment on...

There are such!?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Michael often selects an image that relates to his present writing or testing. Also Michael changes the front page image each time there is a new article.

Best regards
Erik

And not being a cat, I will try to tread lightly and save the only life I have.

In the last two weeks I've been on this forum, the featured front page photos have been more toward what I would consider ho-hum, (with the exception of one). They are not "bad" photos, but they weren't particularly striking to my eye. So, I guess my question is what decides the criteria for being chosen?

While on that subject, is it more a matter of time served that will determine the responses a contributor or is it truely a matter of stunning imagery...again, while I see some of it as stellar, many images are again, ho-hum - to my eye. This is not to say my images desreve more attention than I've received, but far more because I am always interested in what makes a viewer go googley inside which at some point may make or break a sale.

Just curious.

[wolfnowl]

It just seems to me that some people get more responses than others and in most cases, those are contributors who have been on here for quite some time...hence the time served query. It's really not all that important, except as to wonder...

Speaking only for myself, if I 'like' an image I'll usually say so.  If I have a constructive criticism or comment to add, then I'll usually do so.  If for some reason an image doesn't work for me and I have nothing to suggest, then I just don't say anything.  Photographer/number of posts is irrelevant to me.

Mike.

[Bryan Conner]

There are such!?

Yes, there are?

[Rob C]

I can't say that I've noted that phenomenon (balance of replies to images), but if it exists then it might be explained by the fact that people who have come to know/understand one another's minds a little bit feel more free to express opinion because they have an idea of how comment might be recieved. It naturally happens where posts are frequent and more personality is allowed to show through.

Equally, there are those whose posts are normally seen to be little other than ways of demonstrating imaginary superiority of mind, the smart-asses of this world. They usually drift away out of boredom... one hopes.

As for Micheal's 'Cover Shots', I've remarked before that some, that seem exceptionally good to me, don't attract that much comment, whereas others that don't say anything to me at all attract more comment. It simply goes to prove that tastes vary broadly on LuLa, and that's good, otherwise I, for one, might just as well stay home and gaze at my own site all night! I've seen enough of my navel, thank you very much.

I've had a second-thought: yep, I have noted that images of naked ladies do attract more clicks than do trees and rocks. Unfortunately, not so many of us seem to want to show our images of naked ladies.

;-(

Rob C

[Chris Calohan]

Curiosity satisfied. Thank you very much.

[W. Walker]

I've had a second-thought: yep, I have noted that images of naked ladies do attract more clicks than do trees and rocks. Unfortunately, not so many of us seem to want to show out images of naked ladies.

;-(

Rob C

Hey Rob

I know you are an old pro, and, talking of ladies on your site, HRH, Queen Victoria?
Just trying to gauge your age more precisely.

William

[Rob C]

Hey Rob

I know you are an old pro, and, talking of ladies on your site, HRH, Queen Victoria?
Just trying to gauge your age more precisely.

William

Sorry, can only offer you Betty and Phil as they were on 12th November '68... Didn't she look nice! He always seemed to look amused. Caught her young sister Margaret and snapper hubby Tony too on the 7th of that month, but lost their negs along with so much else, including most of my hair, though not on the same day. That should help in sussing my vintage, but it brings no reward, no prize, so best just to dream positively, as I do too, now. I know I've gone through some shit in recent years, but I thank God every day for having given me a charmed life. Nothing can rob me of that.

Rob C

[Justan]

While on that subject, is it more a matter of time served that will determine the responses a contributor or is it truely a matter of stunning imagery...

It could be either, depending on the circumstances. There are a few very frequent posters that make up most of the regulars in UC. They often congregate in some threads. For the most part they have very similar tastes on photo styles. If members of that group don’t participate in a post it can seem as if no one replies.

> I am always interested in what makes a viewer go googley inside which at some point may make or break a sale.

I think we all are interested in that kind of thing. Someone should start a thread in one of the review forums about notable elements in either peoples favorite works or best sellers. That would be a fundamentally different kind of thread compared to what typically takes place in either of the image review forums.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Context matters.

Over the years, regulars here got to know each other pretty well, and not just photographically. People shared their life stories, their life philosophies, political views and, of course, photographic preferences. All that creates a context.

So, when a regular posts a photo, it is not just that photo we are seeing in isolation, we are also seeing it as a part of a body of work, a part of their life and world view. We are seeing it in a context.

It does not have to be "stunning imagery" in order to create posts with numerous replies. People often use that post as an opportunity to stop by and say hello, chat about the photo (or not), digress, provide "comedic relief," etc.

[Rob C]

Slobodan, we sound worryingly like a club!

Fortunately, not a camera club.

Rob C

[opgr]

Slobodan, we sound worryingly like a club!

Fortunately, not a camera club.

Rob C

The Rob & Slob club…!?

[Rob C]

The Rob & Slob club…!?

Oh come on now; we're not that exclusive; in fact, I believe us to be quite approachable people - you just have to know our terms.

;-)

Rob C

[Justan]

The Rob & Slob club…!?

...clique.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Are you saying Rob and I are the only members of this club? 

[Isaac]

Context matters.

Over the years, regulars here got to know each other pretty well, and not just photographically. People shared their life stories, their life philosophies, political views and, of course, photographic preferences. All that creates a context.

So, when a regular posts a photo, it is not just that photo we are seeing in isolation, we are also seeing it as a part of a body of work, a part of their life and world view. We are seeing it in a context.

It does not have to be "stunning imagery" in order to create posts with numerous replies. People often use that post as an opportunity to stop by and say hello, chat about the photo (or not), digress, provide "comedic relief," etc.

facebook

Google+

etc