Wed, Nov 27, 11:57 AM CST

Renderosity Forums / Community Center



Welcome to the Community Center Forum

Forum Moderators: wheatpenny Forum Coordinators: Anim8dtoon

Community Center F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Nov 26 7:01 am)

Forum news, updates, events, etc. Please sitemail any notices or questions for the staff to the Forum Moderators.



Subject: Voting on Gallery Uploads


voodoo ( ) posted Thu, 01 May 2003 at 11:10 PM

If once a day is good enough for vitamins, it's good enough for me.


treemont ( ) posted Thu, 01 May 2003 at 11:25 PM

I think it is good that renderosity has so much members, that's why we have lots of images and lots of people to respond to them. All the sites have rules. I'm sure you guys know that the best artists here don't unload everyday and I don't think anyone would post as much as 3x7=21 pics per week hehe. So 7 per week sounds good.

I like the idea on a "select masters gallery". And someone competent to select the images... like the AOMs. Just a thought hehe ;)


Smitthms ( ) posted Thu, 01 May 2003 at 11:31 PM

Limiting the file size is probably the best solution..... Agreed....... a 1250x1250 image weighing in @ 497kb is just rediculous, I'd opt for that in a heartbeat. But limiting My u/l, that'll most definately PISS Me off. Thomas


RayMcLester ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 12:14 AM

I would like to see older pictures on the front page, Tammymc. Perhaps you could make it where half the front page of the all gallery is new uploads and half is random older pictures from the galleries. Older pictures with no comments and few views could be put on the front page and if they still get few views and no comments then their owners could be contacted and asked if they would mind if the pictures were deleted. It could be automated and the owners could delete the pictures (or not) themselves. What do you think? Over time it could clean up a lot of pictures that arent looked at and it would let us see a lot art that we might have missed.


Seliah ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 12:17 AM

While I really don't think limiting folks to one upload per day is going to help all that much with the problem of the sheer number of images going up ... I did vote on the poll.

Personally, I think what's in effect now is fine just as it is, those who are uploading images that are not all that well done are going to continue to do so I feel, until either A) They start improving, or B) they just stop bothering.

I don't think changing the upload limit is going to really do anything but frustrate the artists.

My ten bucks worth.

~seli



Niles ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 12:19 AM

One way to help the poser gallery is for people to start posting in the mixed medium gallery. I think a little post work in a paint program is fine... but when it is render in bryce, filtered in photoshop, touched up in painter, and tubed in paint shop pro... it should be posted in the mixed.


UrbanEspionage ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 12:40 AM

Attached Link: http://www.mindfields.vze.com

file_56618.jpg

It should stay the same. I havent posted up on rosity in months, but when I start posting i dont want to wait a day post one, wait a day, post one, wait a day, post one. And as someone previously stated, we do have sub categories now, so, that should've really been enough lol, well, just a thought, I felt like I needed to be a part of all this lol


UrbanEspionage ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 12:43 AM

Also we should all look through our galleries, and maybe delete ones we kno really shold'nt be up for display, and help out in that way too. I am goin straight to my gallery and tearing it apart! =)


MRIguy ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 1:12 AM

I have to ask "why"? If the issue is storage/bandwidth, Then say so and put in place appropriate restrictions.
As far as images getting buried, that sort of problem comes with the territory - 16000+ images in the last 30 days - DANG! Images in the last 30 days: Bryce- 1764; Poser- 5283; Fractal- 2138; 2D- 1883; Photography- 1550; etc. etc. verses Beginner- 206; Amapi 3D- 15; Hobbyist- 25; WIP- 92; etc. etc.
Post to a popular section and get buried; post to a lesser popular area and get longer exposure.
The old saying goes "One person's trash is another's treasure". Don't put down someone else's efforts just because it does not meet your standards. On the other side of the coin, folks posting images should strive to make each newer image better than the last (self-improvement) and when making incremental improvements to an image, pull the older, less refined image and replace it with the newer, better image.
Just my 2 cents worth.

Didn't you know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. That's why eyedrops and rose-colored glasses are needed.


HellBorn ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 2:05 AM

If we really must have a limit then 7/week or maybe 3/week would work well. Based on a one week period there will be no differens between the 7/week or 1/day option except for the fact that when I hook up my modem und upload i want to upload everything at the same time. If I know I have 3 images to upload and also knows that I only could upload one per day I would probably not bother at all. On the other side of it is the fact that some greate work could be drown by less god work. I say nothing about what's god or not. Sometimes a doodle can have just 'THAT' while it gets lost in the finished work. But what about adding an option box 'Master Class' or whatever ;) This should only be possible to set for one post per week or maybe month. Then add the same option for the viewers. If they check it they only see the 'Master Class' art.


chemicalbrother ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 2:23 AM

personally i think 7 per week, max 3 per day is right (say you are a 3d artist and you have a massive scene that you spent a hell of a lot of time on but can't all be seen in 1 image.... does it make other posts of the same scene from different angles any less of an image.... so you post 3 or 4 from different angles and use the other 3 posts of the week for something else if you need to.... personally i find it hard to do 1 project a week) to say that people just throw stuff together when they post a lot is wrong........ altho admitedly that's what a lot of people do,, there are a hell of a lot of artists who's talents could not be shown to the full by limiting the posts any more than they are already..... if they can't get feedback on the progress of their work here... they will find other places to get the feedback they require... (i clean out my gallery regularly of the wip stuff and the stuff i recon doesn't come up to scratch and leave the finished version once i'm happy with it....) it should be self regulated if it's just down to stuff being buried by other peoples posts....... if however as others have said it's a banwidth issue then i am all for placing neccesary restrictions)


aleks ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 3:02 AM

one PER WEEK!


kbennett ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 3:39 AM

Don't want to tread on Tammy's toes here as this is mainly an admin thread, but there are a couple of points that have come up which could do with a little clarification. 1. This is nothing to do with bandwidth, costs or anything else commercial afaik. The reason we're taking this poll is solely because the topic has been brought up by members in this forum and Community ideas several times in recent months. 2. I think I can speak for all of the mods when I say that the idea of us going through galleries and removing images which are not 'up to scratch' is abhorrent to us. Who are we to say 'your image is not good enough'? The only reason we remove images is if they violate the TOS. Kev.


Bidsy ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 3:39 AM

It should not be changed 3 a day is fine. I agree with Blazer and mlevans. If there are tighter restrictions people will go elsewhere. I for one, do not post every day, but when I do post, its usually in batches of two or 3. If there are limits imposed like 7 a week, then people will stack up work and post seven at a time. Overspill will then flood the galleries. Besides, I think this restriction is only aimed at Poser anyway!! If that's the case, was'nt subcategorising the Poser galleries a waste of time?


lmckenzie ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 4:43 AM

One per day seems to be the general consensus here and that sounds reasonable. If some people find that too restrictive and pull up stakes, so be it. You'll never please everyone. As for leaving things the way they are, clearly, the mods felt they had to address the constant complaints voiced by some people about "Too many." Too many new images burying my masterpiece, too many nude Vickys, too many poor images, etc. etc. etc. Sadly, I think any new limits will probably fail to quell this issue, but at least they won't be able to say that nothing was done. There is a gem buried here, rebekah's idea of a fixed gallery size. Give everyone a chunkm of space to use as they wish. Twenty-five is probably too small but perhaps 100 images per user would be sufficient. Ideally the most recent (x number) of images from each person's gallery would show up in the "main gallery" and clicking on one would take you to all their works.

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken


sabretalon ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 5:21 AM

I think the 1 per day is ideal. Although you may have some people creating more memberships to compensate for the limitations!


Lynne ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 7:06 AM

I've been with Renderoity for several years now. I think it is unique in that it is a HUGE training ground for these new 3D artists...even ones that only one day old and submit their very first renders. This is probably why so many people have come here. With this growing population space is tight and it is hard to see everyone's work. Limit one render per day will help (product renders should stay at 3). Not every one can end up in the top 20...no censorship. We are all here to learn. Quality/Stunning work stands out and inspires all the rest of us, but that doesn't mean "Joes first render" should go unseen. He needs support too.


bonestructure ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 8:18 AM

I vote to leave it the way it is. 3 per day.

Talent is God's gift to you. Using it is your gift to God.


JohnRender ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 8:42 AM

3 a day is fine. But, there should be some limit on the "WIP #1", "WIP #2", "WIP #3" images that are basically the same. Can't the artist WAIT until the image is done and then post the final image? Or is this whole isue just another "control" issues? First, the Free Stuff starts to get moderated (and slows down contributions), now the Galleries are going to be cut down. Will the Forums be next? Will admins have to approve messages before they're posted? Will people only be allowed 3 postings per day?


tuttle ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 9:18 AM

The issue is not whether control should be used, but what level it should be set at. Anybody against restriction should not be voting for it to remain at 3 per day, but should be voting for the limit to be removed entirely. Since nobody has ever done this, to my knowledge, then it's evident that everyone believes control IS required, and as such should be democratically decided by the members. This isn't a case of Admins imposing some sort of draconian restriction on the site, it is simply a result of requests for change by some members. It has nothing to do with free stuff or forums, why would it?


bulldawg66 ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 10:27 AM

I think the current rule of 3 posts per day should be sufficient. But then I also think that should also include all uploads so if you want to use your uploads in a combination (ie. marketplace, gallery, and free-stuff), then that would be your three uploads for the day. Just my opinon as I don't believe in limiting people too much, if you think there are too many pics in the galleries on a daily basis, nobody says that you have to look at all of them. Or, you could use the viewing filter and just choose to look at the artwork submitted according to the program you are interested in. just a thought.


jagill ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 11:24 AM

The current limit is fine.


dialyn ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 11:29 AM

I voted that I didn't care, because I don't anymore. Most of this has to do with people thinking they don't get their fair share of views because their fine works get "buried" beneath less worthy graphics, but it doesn't follow to me that less postings will mean more views for those folks nor that more views has any relationship to the quality of the work (just as silly as thinking the Hot 20 necessarily represents the best a gallery has to offer). I hang out in the Hobbyist gallery where I am guaranteed a minimum of views, but I suspect the views I do get are from people interested in looking at something other than T&A, and I'm fine with that. The argument is tired and so am I. I don't think changes in the gallery will keep this argument from resurfacing on its monthly schedule. Oh well.


MikeJ ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 12:31 PM

Well, I always thought that 3/day was waaayyy too much to allow, and I'd lean more towards one per week, personally. I agree that if people were more limited in their postings that the quality of the uploads would likely go up some.



morganah ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 12:49 PM

You know what would solve the viewing problem for most people? Being able to filter out the gallery images that you don't want to appear in the "All" galleries. I'd like to check a handful of galleries on a regular basis without selecting each individual gallery, and without having to look at all of the galleries to get to the images I want to see.


eelie ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 1:32 PM

Well, for what it's worth, here's my two cents worth. The way I see it, is this is a venue for established artists as well as new ones to share their work, ask for critiques and do a little pat yourself on the back-ing. While I seldom have enough time to sort through every single picture posted in one day, I take that as my own responsibility. If its important enough to me to do so, Ill do it. If, I cant take that time then Im not going to fuss because too many images have been posted and thats caused the problem. I dont believe its my God given right to have the galleries structured to my time table. That said, I also understand that there are space constraints to consider with any website and that there are people out there who have just, well, not learned to play well with others. Website considerations should be in the hands of the site owners, not the users. Since some people will be less than courteous, I have no problem with restricting the number of uploads. My vote on that is that it should remain that or be decreased. IMO it shouldnt be increased. Someone much earlier suggested having a maximum on the number of images an artist can post and once met, new posts would result in an existing one being removed. That would be a possible solution should server space be an issue, but unless and until it is, Id rather that not happen. When I see an image I like, I will frequently visit that artists gallery and look through the rest of their work. I view these as ways to learn as well as enjoy. Besides, I think its almost a badge of success if someone has many images that date back several years. I think this kind of limitation would force more artists away than the per day/per week limits that are being discussed. That said, Im off to the polling booth to throw in my last two cents worth! :o)


mqshocker ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 1:34 PM

I agree with the one day 7 week plan ...I reconized a few ppl here in this post and agree with most. Galleries such as the bigginer gallery would especially benifit. When I joined five or so years ago I too was a begginer and rely had no talentas a artist ,but what got me motivated was seing the works of others and help from those at the time I thought were good artists,most have already left renderosity and moved on to bettter things or because of other view points. One day, 7 per week ...good idea or bad Ive seen some galleries that could use the change...and others that need to be motivated and get more people involved in that form of art . Any whoots figured Id throw my two cents in :)~ -MQ


bostproductions ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 2:08 PM
  • I'm just new to this and I guess I'll be lucky to find (paid) time off my day job to do 7 images a week - I'd be happy if I post something and someone makes a comment that allows me to improve my images * artists who use the galleries to showcase their work professionally deserve all the support we can give them and I expect my occasional post will be overwhelmed - that's the way it is in the world * should I be able to make a series of images that have a storyline or continuing theme like Monet's haystacks then I would like to be able to pose all 7 at once at the end of the week, and maybe the next 7 after Sunday midnight - yes, this would glut the galleries for Monday, but those who want their work to stay up longer can post on a different day - its a tradeoff * as for the contention that merchants are posting thumbs of their new creations in galleries well, give me the credit to recognize an advert from an artwork, and if you want me to buy your product then show me how it works in a presentation that makes me go: "Wow! Look what I can do with this widget!" - if you don't have time to make the items and the art then give the item out to an artist you respect for a beta test in return for a postable render for the gallery - use your post to showcase their work and your product, you both get recognition and I get to see more good art * yes, if I do post something you think is dogpoop, email me and let me know - I will respond * so, my point is that I respect the opinions of the community enough not to post anything in the galleries I am not willing to stand behind to defend or improve its quality - I think that any other use would soon show up to the community for just what it is and people would just hit the "next" button faster


Barbarellany ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 2:29 PM

If it's not an issue of bandwidth, then leave it alone. I believe for some people this is their outlet. The thing at renderosity is that you don't have to be a fabulous artist to "show"For some to show is to exist.To reduce it will have concequences in their lives. I don't feel the need to mess with them just because it takes longer to get through the galleries. Turn your settings to 18, raise your resolution and skim the thumbnails. As for someone who everyday just puts up 3 sqiggles or essentially the same pose and setting, maybe we should put it back to the artist as to what they are showing and why. Help move them along in their process. Or put in a trout button.


bulldawg66 ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 2:40 PM

Isn't that why there is an area to leave comments for individual pieces of artwork? personally, I like when I receive positive feedback, but realistically, it is the negative feedback that helps us along. Most of the time these days, I only post to the appropriate forums and not so much to the gallery anymore. To be honest, I'm here for the feedback so I can improve my skills, and feedback just seems to be something really lacking when it comes to the galleries. If you're artwork doesn't contain T&A, then most of the time one is lucky to even have it viewed, let alone commented on. Now, posting 3 squiggles (for example) in and of itself might not show any particular skill or artistry, but...what if the person was disabled and works their keyboard with their nose? Then it becomes something more and it is kind of judgemental to assume otherwise (although I would have to agree with you as most of the time this isn't going to be the case). Or what if the 3 squiggles are animated in some way using an animation program...then again it becomes something else entirely. But I do wish people would use some discretion when posting. It isn't so much the amount that gets me, but the quality...and in that we should each be policing our own works. Then we don't have to worry about things like censorship. Just a thought.


dialyn ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 2:50 PM

This is the end of me on this thread, but why assume that a person is posting the worst of their efforts? Perhaps that day that person posted what they thought was something important to them to post for what ever reason. I honestly don't think most people put up graphics they consciously think are terrible, but are the best they can do that day. In a year, they may post something much better. It's the arrogance of people around here that gets me...people who pretend they never were beginners, and never had room for improvement, and never needed that shot of self-confidence that seeing your graphic up on a public website gives a person. It must be nice to have been hatched perfect out of your egg, but some of us have to struggle in our growth process. If I put a graphic up and it doesn't met your notions of what is good art, it isn't that I failed....it is the best I could do and I invite you not to look if it disturbs your sensibilities. But, good grief, why assume everyone is putting up bad art for the sake of putting up bad art? Some people may, but I think most are making an honest effort. And in a few months, if they are encouraged instead of discouraged, they will learn and improve and be a challenge to the self-proclaimed superior artists on this site. And, to tell you the truth, I've never noticed any of the truly wonderful artists spending any time whining about there being too much competition. They are too busy creating. Bye, bye.


fitzwell ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 2:54 PM

A 7 image a week limit with a max of 3 a day with in that 7 day period should satify just about everyone on both sides of this issue. The argument about quality over quantity or the restriction of artistic expression is truly a mute point, as all the previous posts show. a. Restricting quantity does not improve quality, quality will only increase with time and practice. b. Not being able to post 3 images a day is not stifling creativity, it is limiting the number of images posted, it does not limit your ability to CREATE images. It is a community and everyone should have at least have a fair chance to be seen and heard. I think that changing it to 7 images a week will have a positive impact on bandwidth (which almost goes without saying) and it will also allow the avid browser to "keep up" with all of the galleries in all the different catergories, and then maybe even leave enough time to catch up with life ;) Thanks for listening :)


rockets ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 3:25 PM

If you scroll up to post 114, kbennett says it is NOT a matter of bandwidth or anything commercial. So I guess that leaves a bunch of people whining about not having their images viewed by every member on this site. Everybody is NOT going to view all of your images no matter how many are posted. The beginners have the same shot at having their images viewed/commented on as the next person. When I started here (in the Beginners Gallery) it took a looooong time for anyone to view mine, not to mention how long it took for anyone to comment.

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!


tammymc ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 3:51 PM
Site Admin

appreciate everyones feedback on this. we are keeping up with it. there has been good participation and we hope for much more. this would help decrease our space, but that is not why we are discussing this issue. as kbennett said .... the main reason is that we see this issue communicated in our forums over and over again. we thought we would bring it to the community for discussion. thanks everyone tammy


Mestophales ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 3:53 PM

Attached Link: http://www.tekbydesign.com

My Personal feeling is that each artists should be allowed the opportunity to be viewed as often as possible, which in some cases is difficult to do, by the time you upload your image it is already 3 pages back. limiting to 1 upload per day allows for each artist maximum exposure.


fitzwell ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 3:53 PM

My point is not about bandwidth and regardless if it is not the reason for the change, it will impact the speed of the site by limiting the total number of images posted. Neither is it a posting/viewing issue or a creativity issue. It is simply that with a reduction in the average daily images that can posted, more images, in more categories, can have a better chance of being seen and the artist can have their creative voices heard. I am a someone who does not post, but loves to view artworks and over the last year, I have been finding it harder and harder to keep up. The favorite artist and favorite image thing was helpful in keeping up with a few artists, but I still miss a lot of other images because I cannot spend hours upon hours viewing every new image, every couple of days. If it is about the community, it cannot be just about the freedom of the artist to flood the galleries with thousands of images a week (which if I had the time, would be fine with me :)), it has to take some consideration for the people who are trying to view all these works. It would be like going to the museum and as you are walking down a hall, they keep adding more and more pieces. You would start to more faster and faster to view them all and eventually, you start skipping over pieces and rarely stop to appreciate what you are viewing, because the time you have is limited. I like to be able to stop and smell the roses, so to speak, and although I know that it will not solve the problem, I feel that if the number was reduced, even marginally, we would all be able to get a better to see what we are missing in haste. Thanks again :)


fitzwell ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 4:11 PM

Jeez, I really need to proof myself before posting :) "we would all be able to get a better to see what we are missing in haste" should read: "we would all be able to get a better chance to see what we are missing in haste" Thanks


tuttle ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 4:12 PM

bulldawg66-"personally, I like when I receive positive feedback, but realistically, it is the negative feedback that helps us along..." I've had a few ideas that have been going round in my head that I'll post in the Ideas Forum soon, to get some opinion on providing a solution to this, because I agree 100%. Honest feedback is invaluable, the more honest the better. It's OT for this thread, I know, but I just thought I'd mention it. dialyn-"It's the arrogance of people around here that gets me" I see no arrogance here, just constant griping from you. rockets-"...a bunch of people whining..." I don't see anybody whining, except you. Unless you're rererring to the 57% of voting members who have so far voted to change the rules. People have expressed valid opinions in a pleasant manner and democratic manner. Don't feel threatened. Smile, and try to be happy.


Kantele ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 5:32 PM

Am not sure if it had been brought up yet (too many posts here:) ) but what would stop person from getting 10 accounts with names like lets say Kantele1, Kantele2, etc and still posting as many as he/she wants. Is there going to be limit on accounts too? Imo 1 a day is best option.


Rebekah ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 6:12 PM

I would have to comment again. I can understand why R'osity might want/need to limit postings. The amount of storage space and bandwidth has to be impressively huge. Having someone decide what it finished or good enough to go up is not a good idea. Someone said to delete all accounts older than a year and no one has logged on in over a year. Great idea. That would clear up a bunch of server space. One other idea, if Renderosity wants to save bandwidth....maybe the power that be should consider disabling external linking to gallery images. Rebekah


Poppi ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 6:38 PM

I would challenge anyone to feel free to publicly list those images which they feel are unworthy of display. that would be very cruel. maybe, i am just not good with poser. even if i could sit home all day, every day, and make renders....well, i still could not do 3 a day. of course, i don't buy stuff for poser, either. maybe, i could post 3 decent renders a day if i had....the latest clothes (mp)...the latest backgrounds (mp) the latest textures (mp)...the latest poses (mp)....the latest lightsets (mp) the latest "camera" settings (mp)....AND, of course, all the latest in (mp)photoshop actions....AND...of course, the latest hair. hummmm.... then, wow...i could post 3 or more renders a day. they all would be polished. and, i guess that'd make me an artist. after all...it was me, myself and i who had the final choice of what part of the temple to plop my vicki into. and, now, i could decide....do i want this dead center....or slightly to the right or left???? omg....decisions like that.....well, they could make uploading 3 a day stressful.


Poppi ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 7:23 PM

but, the poser gallery is so very full. there are some big poser names that can, and, sometimes, do entrance me with more than one image per day....ecstasy, ilona, linwhite, toxic angel, to name a few... what COULD work...is separating one's artist gallery, from the main genre gallery....i.e....to my own gallery....i can upload 3 a day, or whatever is decided....that way, folks who have me listed as one of their favorite artists, can view more of my work. however, uploading to the POSER gallery, or any other of the software galleries....only one per day. if folks like my one...they can check out the rest. and, i would have to pick which one would best represent my style...each upload. now, that could work. everyone could maybe be happy with that.


ShadowWind ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 9:00 PM

Well I was going to leave this thread alone since I posted my opinions earlier, but based on recent posts, just a couple of notes...

To me, the whole matter is not about bandwidth and whether images should be deleted (or size limited), nor is it about the quality of a 3 a day artist's work. Honestly, I'm not sure why this has even been brought up.

It's a simple matter of compromising to provide the viewers of the gallery the best experience while still allowing artists to post their art. The length of time it takes to surf the galleries is only going to get larger as more members join, making it harder and harder for the viewers, until they decide to go somewhere else where they can manage to view what they want in a reasonable amount of time, thus making less views, sales, etc. Sorry, but some people don't have all day to view galleries. I try to, but I can't keep up and I don't look at nearly everything, but it still takes me roughly an hour just to get caught up with half a day's artwork. Yes, it's my problem, but on the other hand, if it gets to be more and more people's problems, then they will have no other choice, but to just say the heck with it.

I'm don't want to stir up a war, but I never can buy the "I do it just for myself and not the viewers." theory. Art is a two way interactive medium. Whether it's for cash, to thrill at seeing your name or pic in a magazine or on a wall, to entertain and make the viewers think, to get help, or just to get a little encouragement, it's all about interaction with the viewer. Yes, people enjoy doing the art, but I think the feedback is also a large part of the experience, one that seems to be discarded by those with the noble idea that art is only to please oneself. By posting your work up, you are saying that you want that interaction, and it's kind of hypocritical IMO to say you don't if you post.

To me, the bottom line here is, think about your goals, but if you want to have viewers and show that you appreciate them, think about the viewer's feelings as well and how much trouble they go through to look at the works presented here. That two way street of interaction starts with both sides meeting at the white line.

Another 2c
ShadowWind


lmckenzie ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 9:26 PM

Think about the viewers? People hasve been hanged for less radical ideas ShadowWind :-) Thinking about it, what rational motive would anyone have for posting something - seeking praise, constructive criticism, recognition, shared thoughts, job offers? Any and all of these are hampered by the simple fact that there are more i8mages than most people can reasonably view. Limiting the numbers should, at least theoretically increase those desired results. Aat any rate, the idea of public/private galleries still seems good and hopefully wouldn't require major software changes, just pull up the selected image and set a filter to that artist's work.

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken


Seliah ( ) posted Fri, 02 May 2003 at 11:30 PM

lmckenzie: Limiting the numbers should, at least theoretically increase those desired results.

Just one hitch in that. What happens the NEXT time? And the time after that? Will we be reduced to one image per WEEK? How about one image per MONTH? Or better yet, one per quarter?

No matter HOW we fry this fish, there are ALWAYS going to be a LOT more images being uploaded to this site than any one person will be able to see. That comes with the territory.

So the staff here decides to limit artists to one image per day. Well, then all of a sudden we have another upsurge in membership, and folks start screaming AGAIN about how HARD it is to keep up with the artwork.

What happens then? We revisit this entire debate? Reduce the limit AGAIN to one for every three days, or on per week, or three per month, or whatever?

It's not going to solve the problem. It's not going to do anything but throw a sprinkle of water on a three alarm fire. It's going to frustrate the artists (yes, myself included) some of whom will likely speak by walking away.

I'd rather not have to leave. I like Renderosity, I like the forums, I like the people, I like the potential that is currently here to LEARN. But frankly, if my hands are tied in that process, then what point is there of staying?

The 3 a day limit I think is fine, the 3 a day limit is already far more strict than MANY, in fact, MOST of the sites out there, and the 3 a day limit is downright extreme to a lot of sites.

I think 3 a day is fine. I think 3 a day is reasonable. I think even if we limit it to one per day there is STILL going to be NO way for anyone here to 'keep up' with every single image that is posted. It just cannot happen in a community the size of Renderosity.

I can't even figure out why this is an issue to begin with, but there's my piece, I'll take my backside out of the thread now.

If the staff wants to lose artists, lose viewers, lose possible revenue - that's their choice. If it's a bandwidth issue, I'll more than happily swallow the stricter limits.

But if this issue is just being brought up because some folks are complaining about the sheer amount of work being posted, well ... it goes with the territory, I'm sorry. Newbies, intermediate artists, experts, all of it. It comes with the territory.

I think I'm done now.

drops her ten bucks, and steps down

~seli



Smitthms ( ) posted Sat, 03 May 2003 at 12:34 AM

Screw it.... I'll just create 10 clone accts....... then I can u/l 70 images a week... heh heh. My solution to being hindered..... bend the system to suit YOUR needs.... 'nuff said. Thomas


mlevans ( ) posted Sat, 03 May 2003 at 12:58 AM

       Thank you, Seliah. Folks, we already have limitations on posts to these galleries. We are limited to 3 per day. Generally I only post once daily, sometimes not even that, but there have been a few occasions when I was working on multiple projects simultaneously and ended up with four decent images. Not masterpieces, mind, but stuff that I didn't have to be ashamed to show. And so I had to wait, because as I mentioned we're already limited to three.
       Fewer images will not fix this problem, assuming that it even is a problem. It will not get additional "hits" for artists who don't think they are getting a their fair share. When I browse the galleries, I don't start at page one and click each thumbnail one after another. I seriously doubt very many other people do that either. If the thumbnail intrigues me, or if I recognize the artist as one whose work I have enjoyed previously, I look. If the thumbnail does nothing for me or if there is none, then I'm very unlikely to look. Tightening the upload restrictions won't change that; I'm not going to start looking at what doesn't appeal simply because there is less of it.
       Do I miss seeing images this way? Absolutely, no question of it. But that is my choice, you see.
       I posted to RDNA this week; can't recall the last time I did that. But I can see which way the wind appears to be blowing around here...the storm is coming...and it looks like the status quo is about to be status screwed. If anybody needs me, I'll be in my gallery, deleting images. Peace.


dayledann ( ) posted Sat, 03 May 2003 at 1:09 AM

Wow! What a byte of the real world right here! The knaves, varlets, protectors, mediators and heroes, letting it all hang out! Yay for the protectors, mediators and heroes!


tuttle ( ) posted Sat, 03 May 2003 at 5:49 AM

Illusions - "I would challenge anyone to feel free to publicly list those images which they feel are unworthy of display. I suppose what I'm saying to those that complain about the lack of standards as a result of quantity is...put up or shut up!" Are you posting on a different topic here? How does this relate to altering an existing limit? I'm not complaining about the lack of "standards" because I don't believe there is a lack of standards (except on some of my own stuff ;)). People are just expressing an opinion on how the limit might be improved. It's no big deal, I promise.


tuttle ( ) posted Sat, 03 May 2003 at 6:24 AM

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12375&Form.ShowMessage=1223125

Views also welcome on this idea, if anyone would like to comment...


Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.