[Mikesul]

I do not get the social photo sites like 500px and much of Flickr. I have used Flickr for years as a place to store photos for easy retrieval and to share with family and actual friends. But it is clear that for many, perhaps most, people the fun is just posting photos and getting praise. This is very different from Pentaxforums where we discuss equipment and technique. I was looking over 500px this morning and uploaded a simple picture of a rock to see how the uploader worked and how the photo would look on the site. Within minutes i had two favs. It is just a picture of a rock I pass it often and use it to test new lenses and cameras for sharpness. No art at all. No interest in comment. Actually here it is. Please let me know what you think of the value, purpose of these social photo sites. Maybe it is just my age which keeps me from being interested in that kind of interaction. I want to emphasize that I am not criticizing those who use the sites. I am just curious about why people do it.

Attached Images

 

[normhead]

I really like that rock….

[Miguel]

Google plus is one of the better social photography sites, but even there I felt that conversation about photography and the images themselves were secondary to receiving "pluses" or "likes." That seems to be the real agenda on all those sites.

M

[Rupert]

That is a wonderful rock! Well shot and in perfect focus with a nice background blur. It appears to have the features of a face...maybe a frontal shot is in order? Overall, outstanding!


That what you talkin' 'bout?

There are little Forums of a sort on Flickr too, we've had this one going almost 5 years.
Flickr: The Pentaxians Pool

Just a casual place where we discuss Pentax gear, squirrels, and anything else that comes along. Sort of like your local corner bar, nothing serious, no gun or knife fights, just friendly relaxed conversation and photos. Look it over...you're all welcome to visit or join in.

I use the Flickr galleries for posting photos to link to other places, or for friends/family to view. Works out nicely, easy to navigate and the new viewing options are great.

Click on this one, keep clicking when it comes up on Flickr and it will go Full screen....neat!



Regards! Keep up those great rocks!

[severalsnakes]

In my experience, you're right about Flickr. If you're not adding photos as favorites and petting peoples' egos, you're an evil b*tch. I made the mistake of making a minor comment about PP on a portrait of some dude's girlfriend and HOLY HELL, the world caved in. I defended myself mildly and eventually just rolled over and let him feel self-righteous about his girlfriend's flat fuzzy forehead, but, my goodness. He ended up sending me PMs berating me for being critical and blocked me from his feed after I apologized.

It was traumatic. It still keeps me up at night...

So I just ignore bad photos and like the ones I like. I admit, I am generous with my "faves" and "follows". I like the social side of Flickr, but I've learned my lesson about making anything but positive comments.

[boriscleto]

In my experience most of the comments on 500px are "Great picture, give me a like" in nature.

[Nuff]

500px is a weird website, I gave up on it ages ago. All the photos have the same look, over saturated etc... people just Fav and Comment to get you to Fav their photos etc... it's too much hassle.

I use Flickr, I follow a lot of photographers who's photos I really like. Also funny enough I use pinterest which I thought initially is useless. I use it to organise photographers who I really like and influence me and to study their work. When I discover new photographer I add him there and their photos, it's great to keep all of it organised in one place.

Technical aspect of photography stopped interest me a while ago, since I found that it contributes very little to photographes and it was me who was the limit, not the equipment.

[severalsnakes]

Technical aspect of photography stopped interest me a while ago, since I found that it contributes very little to photographes and it was me who was the limit, not the equipment.

I like this sentiment.

Knowing how to use your equipment is important up to a point, of course, but if you can't envision the beauty of the image in your creative mind, the gear is useless.

[Nuff]

I like this sentiment.

Knowing how to use your equipment is important up to a point, of course, but if you can't envision the beauty of the image in your creative mind, the gear is useless.

Thanks, but it took a while to realise that.

[severalsnakes]

Thanks, but it took a while to realise that.

It is easy to be distracted by bells and whistles! And there's nothing not respectable with a technically perfect photograph, even if it has no "art"... I'm not going to mention the rock specifically. ;-)

[Rupert]

It is easy to be distracted by bells and whistles! And there's nothing not respectable with a technically perfect photograph, even if it has no "art"... I'm not going to mention the rock specifically. ;-)

Was that a slam on that gorgeous rock? You should be ashamed! Let's see your rock? I hope you are not just trolling sites to rock pick?

Regards!

[Schraubstock]

This article sums it up nicely
Mostly True: Chances Are, You Suck

[EarlVonTapia]

So no one here uses Instagram?

I love Instagram. There are a lot of good photographers on Instagram. Your stuff can spread very very quickly due to the sharing/social nature of Instagram. It's a good marketing tool, and I'm surprised that not all pro photographers are using it.

If anyone wants to check out my silly little feed:

Instagram

[severalsnakes]

This article sums it up nicely
Mostly True: Chances Are, You Suck

I feel like this article is almost ironic, because he really could have taken it a lot farther. You know, just to put some more emphasis on why you (we) suck and how the false positive reinforcement from "Likes" to garner mutual "Likes" is self-destructive. If the author going to tell people what terrible photographers they are, he should take all of the built-up rage from the sub-par images he's seen and dump them all into this writing. But maybe he's just defeated by all the pictures of kittens and children. ;-)

It's funny that there are a plethora of articles about the dangers of online anonymity and bullying, and then this one about how undeservingly polite people are on sites like Flickr, etc. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't experienced the fiery backlash, myself...

Anyway, I guess a "good" photograph is only objective up to a point. First make the image, then decide if you like it.

[tlong423]

500px is a weird website, I gave up on it ages ago. All the photos have the same look, over saturated etc... people just Fav and Comment to get you to Fav their photos etc... it's too much hassle.

I use Flickr, I follow a lot of photographers who's photos I really like.

I agree whole-heartedly. 500px turned out to be a joke. To me it's kind of a parody on how far the state of photography has fallen since the advent of digital imaging. It's as if everyone wants to make stock photos of way-over-saturated landscapes and goofy looking HDR stuff. And no site celebrates that as much as 500px. The only thing that makes it worse is the circle-jerk mentality of its user base.

Flickr is so large and self-organizing that you don't have to dig too deep before you find groups that really focus on whatever interests, resources, talents, etc., interest you. I have found it to be generally less self-congratulatory, but it is true you don't want to make the mistake of criticizing pictures there (as in most venues, it seems). I suppose the difference between those two is that at Flickr, the adage applies, "If you've got nothing nice to say about someone, don't say anything at all," whereas at 500px it's more like you are an unwilling participant at a hastily organized North Korean "celebration" for Kim Jung Un.

Comparing either to a place like Pentax Forum, etc., is probably not appropriate as the mission of a special-interest forum such as this is quite different from that of a site like 500px or, for the most part, Flickr.