I just noticed that rosity now only allows one uploaded image a day into member gallerys unless you pay for the privalege of uploading more.I don't like the idea of paying for the additional uploads so I for one won't be doing it...I do however agree to limiting images to one a day.So,I have no problem with rositys new policy...it actually gives all members a greater chance to be seen as its far to easy to get lost in the multiple pages uploaded everyday on here caused by members uploading three images daily.
This post regards something else...why not prune the gallerys at rosity?Some of these gallerys have up to 30 pages or more...having tried to go through numerous gallerys on rosity,I can tell you this is an impossible situation.There's no way people can spend the time to go through so many pages...in fact,when I did this the artists were astonished that I had done so.This raises a question as once posted,does anyone really expect people to go that far back in their gallerys and if not...wouldn't it make sense to prune the gallery to a manageable size that can be gone through?
My suggestion is to limit gallerys to ten pages maximum...at ten pages,the member should have enough images to establish their own website.Now,if rosity is gonna charge to upload more than one image a day...why not limit the gallery to ten pages and start offering member web pages on their servers?If I were going to pay $5.00 a month,I could buy my own website (I know because I have Dreamslayerartworks at this price) and not need rosity for more than one image a day to promote myself...so why not create member websites?
What do you think about gallery pruning and member websites...good idea or bogus lol?Just thought I'd ask....

Mostly because; Overall site speed which relates to bandwidth is directly related to what is being requested the most, which are the newer pictures, not the older pictures. So, really members having a lot of pictures in their gallery truly isn't as much as the problem as are the newer pics that are the majority of requested material here. A large "body of work" relates far more to server space, which there is absolutely no problem with that. And, I guess for one would hate it if some of my fave artists had to get rid of some of their pics here, lol. AgentSmith

What I do is every so often go through and prune those images that have been around and haven't drawn much interest.

Well,I think my real issue is with how big some of these things get.When I find a new favorite or just want to peruse some talented artists gallery,my heart leaps up into my throat when I see they have over ten pages lol.I have numerous artists written down in a little notebook that I keep who I wish to revisit and go through their entire works...but once I get stuck in a big one and finish it,I'm drained and get skiddish about visiting gallerys for a bit.Many people on rosity know me from comments I've made on their work...just wish it were easier to navigate some of these things and if rosity offered members the option of having their own website on their servers when they reached a certain point,then they could also offer options that only make sense for large albums....things like allowing them to reset their gallerys with their best images first;) I don't know as its a touchy subject...but I really would like an easier way to go through the gallerys on rosity as the current way is just too slow.Maybe if artists turned their thumbs into full version thumbs of the image so viewers could look at the thumb and decide if they want to see the whole image?

The problem is that some large graphics look like smudges when reduced to a thumbnail as a full version. I don't think that's the answer. I do wish such huge graphics weren't loaded because I don't have a large monitor and I lose the effect if I have to scroll and, no, I'm not going to download and resize just because some people like to show off and supersize their graphics. I just don't visit their galleries anymore. I know there are people that think every last one of their graphics is such a treasure that not one could be eliminated, but I'm thinking of clearing out my whole gallery. It doesn't represent anything, in my mind, and there might be something gained from starting fresh in 2004. I have thought for a long time, though dismissed by the powers that be, that abandoned galleries should be deleted from the database. If someone hasn't posted in a year or two, and hasn't been on the forum for a year or two, it seems likely they have lost interest. It should be their responsibility to stay active in some manner or so. But that's just me.

I have had the idea roaming around in my head of a full version thumbnail for a while, now that you mention it I'll give it a try and see if it floats.