[red5isalive]

Hi everyone,

I'm posting here from time to time to show some of my racing images as some of you might know. I do also post on the spanish forum about Pentax.
Yesterday I've seen a "Your best photos of 2019" thread with 2-3 pages full of images. There people upload a maximum of 4 images per response as the forum doesn't work very well and everyone has accepted that rule. Yet you can link as much Flickr images as you want.

So I decided to also post my best photos of 2019 and this year I've been quite busy taking images almost every month, so I thought I'd do a message per month and post maybe 20-30 links from Flickr so it takes no space on the forum servers. Yes, maybe is a lot of images but when you shoot thousands then is very hard to pick 2 images.

Most likely in that thread where mostly images of birds, animals and landscapes.

Well, so I did like this. And later on two members complained that I posted 79 links in 3-4 replies. That its too much and that I should instead pick my yearly best images.
So I just decided to delete my posts and write that i'd rather let them post. Today I've tried to explain myself with that same message there but seems that someone got upset in a way.

So, my concern is: is it really that bad if you have a couple tens or even 2 hundred images that are pretty good, to share them on a forum while doing a recap of anual best images from everyone?
Any concerns?

Thanks!

[redmenace]

In the environment you are describing, I would agree that 79 images is too much -- regardless of whether they are embedded or linked.

Consider how many "physical" artworks are in a typical gallery space, and how much time a viewer might spend on them. Then imagine putting 8x-10x as many pieces into the same space.

[red5isalive]

In the environment you are describing, I would agree that 79 images is too much -- regardless of whether they are embedded or linked.

Consider how many "physical" artworks are in a typical gallery space, and how much time a viewer might spend on them. Then imagine putting 8x-10x as many pieces into the same space.

I see, thanks.

Then just to ask, how many is too many? If the same guy posted 16 pics is that fine or too much?

Again thanks

[BrianR]

You could make a flickr album of those 79 images. Post a dozen photos individually (or whatever the forum convention is) and a link to your album for anyone who wants more.

[BigMackCam]

I'd agree that 79 is rather a lot for a "best photos of 2019" presentation, implying - whether accurately or otherwise - the selection hasn't been pruned to show only the best. Unless a specific limit has been set, then it's clearly subjective and up to the individual... but for a fairly prolific amateur photographer taking hundreds of "keepers" throughout the year, it seems like a dozen photos - i.e. one per month - ought to be sufficient to showcase his or her very best work. That's a large enough sample to include some variety, but small enough to imply some discipline in curation and leave the viewer wanting more. That's just my opinion, of course...

[enoeske]

I would be cool with 4 or so "Best Of" pictures. If you posted 10, I'd say your getting a little loose with the definition. But if you posted 79 I'd delete your post. Thats way too many for all of them to be "Best Of". You need to be more critical of your work and narrow it down. You can easily take 79 good photos but that is like 1 normal photo shoot, not you best shot of the year.

[HoutHans]

Same here, around five would be OK, but the best images would be a top three and for me the most important thing would not be the image as such, but the explanation why this is considered the best. In other words: I'd like to see how the image actually responds to the ideal the photographer had in mind. As regards the reactions on the spanish forum, I'm not sure what happened there and how upset people got, but it is very easy to strike a bad tone (or one that others find upsetting) when writing, but on most fora that kind of thing is easily resolved. Good luck with this.

[red5isalive]

You could make a flickr album of those 79 images. Post a dozen photos individually (or whatever the forum convention is) and a link to your album for anyone who wants more.

Thanks, this is a good solution and probably the best approach.

I'd agree that 79 is rather a lot for a "best photos of 2019" presentation, implying - whether accurately or otherwise - the selection hasn't been pruned to show only the best. Unless a specific limit has been set, then it's clearly subjective and up to the individual... but for a fairly prolific amateur photographer taking hundreds of "keepers" throughout the year, it seems like a dozen photos - i.e. one per month - ought to be sufficient to showcase his or her very best work. That's a large enough sample to include some variety, but small enough to imply some discipline in curation and leave the viewer wanting more. That's just my opinion, of course...

Thing is, there wasn't any specific amount on the initial post, and everyone was posting as much posts with 4-5 pictures as they wanted.
Sure usually for an amateur 79 images are a lot, but I've been taking some thousands this year as accredited media, and it is not as simple to choose just 2-5 images.

I would be cool with 4 or so "Best Of" pictures. If you posted 10, I'd say your getting a little loose with the definition. But if you posted 79 I'd delete your post. Thats way too many for all of them to be "Best Of". You need to be more critical of your work and narrow it down. You can easily take 79 good photos but that is like 1 normal photo shoot, not you best shot of the year.

Well, I think I haven't expressed myself properly. I have posted a total of 79, not 79 per post. I posted 3-4 times. Each post had around 15 links to Flickr, not even images using the server of the forum.
Yet nobody specified the maximum amount per user to be posted.

Well, 2019 has had a loooots of pictures so just simply picking 1 or 2 is simply impossible.

** Once counted the amount of images from this season on Flickr, the total is 3127 images. Then, how is it possible to pick only simply one?

---------- Post added 11-06-19 at 02:10 PM ----------

Same here, around five would be OK, but the best images would be a top three and for me the most important thing would not be the image as such, but the explanation why this is considered the best. In other words: I'd like to see how the image actually responds to the ideal the photographer had in mind. As regards the reactions on the spanish forum, I'm not sure what happened there and how upset people got, but it is very easy to strike a bad tone (or one that others find upsetting) when writing, but on most fora that kind of thing is easily resolved. Good luck with this.

Thanks!
Yeah I understand it. But then why someone was posting 15 pics in different messages?

I think nobody got specially upset (not me, at all, i deleted the images pretty straight forward), but a guy that I think did not understood what I was trying to explain.

[BrianR]

On the topic of culling- it might help to look at your collection from the eyes of someone who isn't a fan of racing. You might have a great panning photo of a car driving around a bend. And another similar photo of a different car driving around a bend. A racing enthusiast might know who the drivers are and think these photos are both great and take some time to examine each. From my perspective, all cars are pretty much the same and all the drivers are people I don't know or have any attachment to. Once I've admired the general aesthetics of one of the images, I won't take time on something that I consider similar.

I say this as someone with hundreds upon hundreds of photos of moths. A moth enthusiast might want to see a hundred, as they may value not just the image but the content. A nature enthusiast might want to see a dozen of the most distinct ones. I might be able to sling a dozen together that are interesting from a general photographers perspective. An average person might get bored after 2 or 3. So I cull according to audience to try to avoid boring or overwhelming anyone.

Culling is hard.

For me, a one-to-one ratio is best because that way, if someone clicks "like", I know which picture it was that stimulated the positive reaction. I couldn't care less about how many someone else may choose to post; I don't know any rules about that and am not in charge of enforcement anyway, and if I don't feel like scrolling through to see 'em all, then I don't. No big deal either way.

[tokyoscape]

Thing is, there wasn't any specific amount on the initial post, and everyone was posting as much posts with 4-5 pictures as they wanted.

A Golden rule for me is: Don't get too fussy about people on the internet.
If you post with in the forum rule's permit and some people complain, ask them to take to the moderator to change the rules, otherwise don't care about it.

Besides that, I usually post one here and there with the embedded link to my own online album.

[BigMackCam]

You could make a flickr album of those 79 images. Post a dozen photos individually (or whatever the forum convention is) and a link to your album for anyone who wants more.

Thing is, there wasn't any specific amount on the initial post, and everyone was posting as much posts with 4-5 pictures as they wanted.
Sure usually for an amateur 79 images are a lot, but I've been taking some thousands this year as accredited media, and it is not as simple to choose just 2-5 images.

I understand. And I'm not for one minute suggesting that your 79 chosen images aren't a reasonable and well-curated presentation of your best work. If you were publishing a book for folks to enjoy just your work in isolation, that might be a perfectly reasonable (if somewhat generous) collection. But in an online forum with multiple contributors, I'd say you really could / should be more economical. Imagine if ten photographers submitted 79 "best of 2019" photos... that would be 790 photos for forum members to wade through. No matter how good the photography, I respectfully suggest most folks would get bored (I know I would, and I love looking at other folks' work).

I'll stick with my original advice to pick maybe a dozen from those 79. In fact, @BrianR gave the best advice in my view... show 12, but provide a link to a Flickr album containing the entire body of work (if permitted)

[jumbleview]

I personally like this saying:

Creativity = Productivity + Selectivity

[AggieDad]

It seems to me that when they ask for your “best of 2019,” they are asking you to make hard choices and select only the creme de la creme of your year’s photos.

You may have many, many excellent images, but they are expecting only your 4 ( or 3, or 5 ) absolute favorites - the ones you would want to have on display at The Prado.

[Kerrowdown]

I should instead pick my yearly best images

For me when presented with these kinda limitations... I just post the few that still make me say out loud... WOW when I open then up.

I don't usually have to look too hard to find 'em... as these are the ones that still up on the wall.