Feedback On Featured Photographs...

[mike3996]

We're gaining in members and we've been having discussions about discoverability of photographs, among other topics. We have tangented the topic of featured images section on our front page already. I would like to voice out a, well it may not be a concern but let's call it that, for a lack of a milder word:

The selection process is not very transparent. What pic gets there, what doesn't. We have that stickied thread where anyone can make a suggestion and then a moderator judges the suggestion either way. But how I see it, the majority of featured content comes from an opaque machine from the moderators.

Moderators, in plural or is it just Matt busy there?

Seriously, no offense to Matt. Thanks to his background, he's probably the most qualified one as a curator. But anyone, qualified or not, is just a one individual making the choices. And it's not like photography can be measured objectively anyway. There's always individual taste present in curation.

I hope this will not be a touchy subject but it's something I wanted to open a discussion about. Can we democratize and open up the process?

 

[RichardC]

We're gaining in members and we've been having discussions about discoverability of photographs, among other topics. We have tangented the topic of featured images section on our front page already. I would like to voice out a, well it may not be a concern but let's call it that, for a lack of a milder word:

The selection process is not very transparent. What pic gets there, what doesn't. We have that stickied thread where anyone can make a suggestion and then a moderator judges the suggestion either way. But how I see it, the majority of featured content comes from an opaque machine from the moderators.

Moderators, in plural or is it just Matt busy there?

Seriously, no offense to Matt. Thanks to his background, he's probably the most qualified one as a curator. But anyone, qualified or not, is just a one individual making the choices. And it's not like photography can be measured objectively anyway. There's always individual taste present in curation.

I hope this will not be a touchy subject but it's something I wanted to open a discussion about. Can we democratize and open up the process?

Photography is so subjective.

You could randomise the process, but many of the photo's posted here would look very odd if posted out of context (think 'post a picture related to the one above' etc). Upvotes couldn't really be relied upon either, for the same reason.

Matt seems to have a good eye.

 

[John King]

Mike, any number of people make suggestions, and since they are (always?) referring good photos, a lot of good or excellent photos make it onto the 'featured photographs' page.

It's a philosophically interesting question that you raise, but the existing 'system' seems to work pretty well. After all, anyone can suggest any image, and just add @MoonMind to the suggestion for Matt to act on their recommendation.

 

[mike3996]

Precisely. It is subjective. Why have the selection shown under a passive title, some sort of false pretenses.

In the name of said transparency it would be more transparent to name it to "Matt's picks" or something. If it's a "featured selection of our finest", it implies more. Loftier goals.

 

[Kevin]

HHhhhhhmm........

It's a pretty transparent process of what ends up on the front page; members nominate images in that thread and a member of the moderators team adds it to the 'featured' list.​

​

There have been a few cases where a specific image hasn't been nominated but rather a link to a post in general in which case one of the mods' team (and, yes, it's usually Matt who does a great job helping things running smoothly here) asks the nominator for a more specific nomination. I know I've seen a few where the mods' team member chooses an image from the nominated post when a specific image from the post isn't specified but that's something that happens infrequently.​

​

The only images I've seen 'featured' but not posted in that thread where done by me, not the mods' team. I don't do it often but sometimes when I'm testing something or digging through posts for various purposes I'll end up coming across some images that I'll add. It's one of the few perks of being the site admin'. Just to be clear though, any & all of the moderator team members have access to feature an image and they are more than welcome to do so at their own discretion. It's usually pretty easy to spot the ones I've added, they're likely from the 'Dogs' thread. ​

​

I don't think there have ever been any images nominated that haven't been added. I may be wrong on that one but it's never been a problem where an image was nominated but it was decided to not add it to the featured listing. It's also never been a problem where a member nominates an image that doesn't deserve to be featured.​

​

The current list of the volunteer moderators team is publicly viewable on the Members page at https://cameraderie.org/members.​

 

[MoonMind]

If it's objectionable that I also feature content I see as worthy, I'll just stop doing that and only act upon nominations.

It is true that I do most of the Featuring. But I cannot say why this is the case - see above; any moderator could do it.

And yes, it has yet to happen that a nominated image is not seen as suitable, my own opinions notwithstanding.

EDIT: I just checked. Of the currently shown photographs, three have been picked by me, and none on a whim; the rest are nominations.

M.

 

[Kevin]

Matt, thanks for clarifying.

If it's objectionable that I also feature content I see as worthy, I'll just stop doing that and only act upon nominations.

Don't stop. If anything, we should nudge the rest of the team to feature some as well so it's a good mix of member nominations and mods' team picks.

 

[mike3996]

I'm glad we got shed a little light on the process. More than anything I was hoping to hear from you guys.

 

[DeeJayK]

I don't have any complaints about the existing process per se, but sometimes feel that the nomination thread is not as well known (or used) as it could be. I see photos that strike me as amazing all the time, but am sometimes hesitant to recommend them, particularly if several of the recent posts in the nom thread are mine.

Would it be possible to design a "wisdom of the crowds" type of process that brought posts with a large number of emoji reactions to a queue for review by mods? Although I'm mindful that we don't want to heap now work on the plates of the volunteer moderators.

- K

 

[MoonMind]

I don't have any complaints about the existing process per se, but sometimes feel that the nomination thread is not as well known (or used) as it could be. I see photos that strike me as amazing all the time, but am sometimes hesitant to recommend them, particularly if several of the recent posts in the nom thread are mine.

Would it be possible to design a "wisdom of the crowds" type of process that brought posts with a large number of emoji reactions to a queue for review by mods? Although I'm mindful that we don't want to heap now work on the plates of the volunteer moderators.

- K

"Likes" and other emojis are too random in their interpretation and usage to serve as a reliable indicator of quality; besides, most people don't review all threads and images, so it'll be skewered. Not a good direction to take.

Anyhow, the nomination thread isn't that old - Kevin invented the process not too long ago, so it's just a matter of being aware of what's happening on the site once you join, you'll come across the "Feature" process soon enough, and the first post of the nomination thread should be a must-read. You'll be good very soon ... As far as I'm concerned, I thought it was a really nice idea ...

What I'd do is *not* hesitate to nominate an image, just be discerning - it's not as if the front page turnover did need a massive increase, visibility for several days is quite deserved in most cases, so if you were to swamp the nomination thread (especially with a lot of very similar images or subject matter), it will most probably lead to the moderators and/or the admin being forced to be more choosy and critical at some point. I'm really super-happy with the fact that as of yet, nominations can just be taken and acted upon without a second thought and would really appreciate things to remain much the same as far as our role is concerned. One to four freatured images a day would be great ...

...

However, I'm beginning to feel thoroughly fed up with all this fuss. What was a nice job has become a burden because of completely unrealistic expectations as to the "reliability" of a process that is, after all, *based* on appreciation - so, subjectivity plays a major part, period, as does the need to get active if you want to see something *being* further appreciated. What's so hard about this? If too many people have difficulties accepting having to stand for their own opinions as well as accepting that of others, I vote for cancelling the whole "Feature" feature. We've so far literally lived by being supportive - if the strongest form of support and appreciation, that of being chosen to contribute to the front page, our official "face", causes so many people so many headaches, we really shouldn't cause anyone so much grief and seize doing this immediately.

For the time being, I'll abstain from further using the feature, and I'll no longer react on nominations. Make up your minds first.

M.

 

[DM Larson]

I personally love the way photos are featured. It's not perfect, but it's pretty dang great. And a big THANK YOU! to Matt for his work here.

 

[DeeJayK]

"Likes" and other emojis are too random in their interpretation and usage to serve as a reliable indicator of quality; besides, most people don't review all threads and images, so it'll be skewered. Not a good direction to take.

Point taken. This idea was half-baked (at best). My thinking is just that the current nomination process (while good) seems to introduce just enough friction in the process that it ends up being not used enough, IMO.

Anyhow, the nomination thread isn't that old - Kevin invented the process not too long ago, so it's just a matter of being aware of what's happening on the site once you join, you'll come across the "Feature" process soon enough, and the first post of the nomination thread should be a must-read. You'll be good very soon ... As far as I'm concerned, I thought it was a really nice idea ...

Agree. And my suggestion was not to replace the process, but merely to augment it.

What I'd do is *not* hesitate to nominate an image, just be discerning - it's not as if the front page turnover did need a massive increase, visibility for several days is quite deserved in most cases, so if you were to swamp the nomination thread (especially with a lot of very similar images or subject matter), it will most probably lead to the moderators and/or the admin being forced to be more choosy and critical at some point. I'm really super-happy with the fact that as of yet, nominations can just be taken and acted upon without a second thought and would really appreciate things to remain much the same as far as our role is concerned. One to four freatured images a day would be great ...

Good point about a bigger volume of featured images reducing the length of time they show on the front page.

One possible answer to that is to change how the front page section works from displaying a certain number of images (or taking a prescribed amount of real estate) to making it show images added in the past X days. This is just another thought I'm throwing out without considering all the potential negatives nor knowing whether it's technologically feasible.

...

However, I'm beginning to feel thoroughly fed up with all this fuss. What was a nice job has become a burden because of completely unrealistic expectations as to the "reliability" of a process that is, after all, *based* on appreciation - so, subjectivity plays a major part, period, as does the need to get active if you want to see something *being* further appreciated. What's so hard about this? If too many people have difficulties accepting having to stand for their own opinions as well as accepting that of others, I vote for cancelling the whole "Feature" feature. We've so far literally lived by being supportive - if the strongest form of support and appreciation, that of being chosen to contribute to the front page, our official "face", causes so many people so many headaches, we really shouldn't cause anyone so much grief and seize doing this immediately.

For the time being, I'll abstain from further using the feature, and I'll no longer react on nominations. Make up your minds first.

M.

I apologize if my contribution to the discussion has led to your feelings that the task is burdensome.

I find the way the Featured Images section is used to be among the top things I appreciate about this forum. I would hate to see it be discontinued. I also appreciate your work, Matt, in making sure that it gets populated appropriately and would really hate to see you change what you've been doing.

My modest suggestions of ideas for improvements are just ideas (perhaps not even good ones) and shouldn't be taken as an advocacy for throwing the baby out with the bath water.

- K

 

[MoonMind]

We'll see. At the moment, my incentive to further participate in the whole "Featuring" process is exactly zero, and stable.

M.

 

[Kevin]

{catches up reading thread ... }

 

[John King]

We'll see. At the moment, my incentive to further participate in the whole "Featuring" process is exactly zero, and stable.

M.

Matt, I, for one, appreciate the process and what you are currently doing very much.

Keep up the good work, exactly as you have been doing it.

 

[Kevin]

For now the method of featuring images will remain the same, with the majority coming from member nominations and a few mods' team (and your local friendly admin') selections at their own discretion. I think it makes a good balance of member direct input and mods' team guidance.

Feedback on the topic has been interesting and is always welcomed. I think one thing I do need to do is to make it easier for folks to find the 'nominate threads' to give their input. I just need to ponder how to do that. Hhmmmm ...

 

[Kevin]

Feedback on the topic has been interesting and is always welcomed. I think one thing I do need to do is to make it easier for folks to find the 'nominate threads' to give their input. I just need to ponder how to do that. Hhmmmm ...

Thoughts on a new button at the bottom? The "Submit Nomination" button is a direct link to the 'nominate an image' thread.

 

[wee-pics]

We're gaining in members and we've been having discussions about discoverability of photographs, among other topics. We have tangented the topic of featured images section on our front page already. I would like to voice out a, well it may not be a concern but let's call it that, for a lack of a milder word:

The selection process is not very transparent. What pic gets there, what doesn't. We have that stickied thread where anyone can make a suggestion and then a moderator judges the suggestion either way. But how I see it, the majority of featured content comes from an opaque machine from the moderators.

Moderators, in plural or is it just Matt busy there?

Seriously, no offense to Matt. Thanks to his background, he's probably the most qualified one as a curator. But anyone, qualified or not, is just a one individual making the choices. And it's not like photography can be measured objectively anyway. There's always individual taste present in curation.

I hope this will not be a touchy subject but it's something I wanted to open a discussion about. Can we democratize and open up the process?

I don't really see where your problem is, Mike.

All of us, including *you*, can suggest a photo for the front page. When I come across a photo I find just stunning, I make this suggestion. And I rely on the moderators to judge if it's just a matter of my personal taste or if there is a broader agreement on this choice. And several times so far I was taken by surprise to see that one of my posts made it there. And I can assure you it were not those I would have expected to see there ... which shows that others see your photos in a different way than you see them yourself. For me this was an interesting learning process. Realizing that it's that "something special" about a photo, that je ne sais quoi that touches in a very special way.

Up to now I haven't had any problem with the selection of the moderators nor with the process. Why complicate the procedure with what you call "transparency"? Do we really need a set of fixed rules, a nailed-down procedure for this?
Your call for transparency is imho unfair to the moderators since it's us cam people (and that includes the mods) who make the suggestions. You're free to add your own suggestions and share the happiness with the one whose excellent post you helped to give this little more attention.

 

[wee-pics]

Thoughts on a new button at the bottom? The "Submit Nomination" button is a direct link to the 'nominate an image' thread.

View attachment 308311

This button would simplify the procedure, but ... it would still make me have to go to the "nominate" page in addition because I've always liked to add some remarks showing why I think the photo ought to show up on the front page.
I do appreciate when people who suggest a photo give their reasons for the choice.