let's vet the photos first

[stevemacdonald]

Did you see all the new pics of Hayley this past week? Oodles and oodles of them! My download time for the "last 50 posts" is staggering nowadays. And let's be brutally honest: at least three quarters of them were redundant and mediocre at best, even though the subject was our beloved Hayley.

I'm reaching burn-out over all these pics that everyone just has to post, only a small fraction of which do Hayley any justice. On rarest occasion someone will shoot a masterpiece like that one-in-a-million pic Steve H took a while back.

What I propose won't be immediately popular and it may indeed provoke some anger, but I think it will serve to improve things dramatically: Let's take time to vet the pics before posting. Make sure what you have to post is compelling and original. Don't water down the visual library of Hayley images with yet another shot of Hayley in the exact same pose we saw someone else post earlier.

Obviously all such judgements are subjective, but someone with a good eye for photography should act as a gatekeeper. Send your pics to that person and get the approval first. What we'll see over time is a much better flow to the forum with higher quality pictures of a highest quality performer.

Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes with this post, but the frustration factor was getting out of hand this past week. Keep the great photos coming

[Joe]

Hi Steve,

I agree with you somewhat. I wouldn't call the photos mediocre...more like amazing! True, there has been a lot of photos posted this week...some are a little redundant. I could scroll up and down the page and almost make a movie.

We have tried to control the size and quantity of the posted photos; members have done well on this. We will work to see how we can further manage this issue. I don't think members comparing photos amongst themselves before posting them wouldn't work out.

Keep in mind that some members have travelled hundreds of miles to see Hayley. They take a lot of care and effort to share these photos with us...especially those of us in the USA. To them I say "thanks".

Joe

[Karsten]

Hi Steve,

I'm fully aware of the mediocrity of my efforts, lastly at Lincoln Castle. I suppose you refer to that event (perhaps amongst others), if you mention the oodles of pictures.

I'm also fully aware that I can't compete with our professional photographers, in particular with Steve H and Stuart H.
As you mentioned, masterpieces are seldom - but to my mind the implementation of a censor would at first be time-consuming for this person and cause at least a bit of frustration on side of the photographers, if their pictures would be dismissed.

Having in mind that the next concert will take place not until 11 September I suppose that there will be no oodles of pictures in the meantime.

I've to beg your pardon for the annoyance caused by my efforts.

Karsten

[grant]

Hi Karsten

You have no need to apologise for your photo's,( they are superb by the way) just because someone feels inclined to be a little selfish this morning (Yes Steve, I do mean you! ).

The greater proportion of members and visitors will probably rarely, if ever, get to see Hayley perform and to them the pictures are important, even if they do get 'samey' from time to time.

I think it is also very unfair to criticise fans with less complex compact cameras, they want to contribute too and they should be free to do so without deregatory remarks being directed at them.

I understand the frustration over download times when lots of pictures have been posted over a short period of time which is why I try to stagger mine throughout the day. Maybe the answer would be to have an agreed time delay between posts containing pictures.

Best wishes
Grant

[comet]

Aggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sure Grant and Karsten and Steve and Stuart would enjoy Hayley's concerts far more if they were not taking pictures.

Of course there is going to be a deluge of pictures in the few days after a concert, that is what the forum is here for,
A historic record from many different points of view.

I have logged on each morning to view and download the pictures,


THANK YOU EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU
who made the effort to bring us these pictures, for the time it takes and your own loss of simply enjoying the Hayley concert,
for the effort it takes
and the potential risk of hassle and embarrassment with camera police and bouncers.

I'm sure it would be far easier to leave the camera at home and just enjoy the concert as so many of the other fans do !

I'm sure many people now and in the future will be grateful for each and every picture that is here on the forum.
Each one of them is special to someone.

[Jeff]

I agree. How can you have too many photos of Hayley ? It just means when I'm looking at them I don't get much else done !!

[Tin]

HI Karsten,

Please, please don't feel baffled. Not all of us have the chance to see Hayley and these pictures are the only way for us to keep up with the ongoings of Hayley's career. I don't need those so-called masterpieces; all I want is to see Hayley in photos- candid shots of her contemplating, laughing or talking all reminds me this lady is real and out there singing for people who adore her talent.

Moreover, it IS these non-masterpieces that make me feel Hayley is a real person. It is those trivial mannerisms of hers seen in the so-called mediocre shots that help to form a vague image in my mind of what kind of person Hayley is supposed to be.

Karsten your apology is not accepted by me because there is NO need for you to apologise. I support your posting of all the photos you take, even if it means slowing down loading things a bit. Moreover, I do not find loading speed reduced significantly by your photos.

I know that it is rather troublesome to upload so many photos and even so you still endeavour. I guess I owe you a big THANK YOU

I look forward to seeing the many pictures you take when 11th September comes.

Tin

[Joe]

Aug 28, 2008 9:18:03 GMT comet said:

...and the potential risk of hassle and embarrassment with camera police and bouncers.

I'm sure it would be far easier to leave the camera at home and just enjoy the concert as so many of the other fans do !

Hi Comet,

Well said. Plus our travellers have to contend with increasing airline and train issues such as baggage size restrictions etc. Those cameras and accessories take up a lot of luggage space.

I also am reminded of the photos before and after concerts. The high streets, city centres, historical landmarks etc.

We never have to ask for these photos either. They are by us...for us.

Thanks again,
Joe

PS...what did the air hostess say to the photographer...

Carry on, cameras!

[Mark]

Hi everyone

I must admit that I usually shy away from commenting on threads where the topic is somewhat controversial but, on this occasion, I feel I should comment.

Speaking as someone who does only have a small compact camera with very limited capability and whose photography shall we say, is worse than mediocre, if photos to be posted were to be vetted first, I am almost certain that none of my shots would ever be seen on this forum.

This would sadden me, because there have been a number of occasions when those members with more professional cameras have not been present at a concert perhaps, or were not in the right place at the right time and my photos may be all there is for members to see. Even when there are others taking high quality photos, I may well have a shot that no-one else has and poor quality though it may be, I get alot of enjoyment from being able to share it with my fellow fans.

As you say Tin, the off stage photos (which tends to be most of mine) often tell a story, making Hayley 'real' to those who were not able to be at the concert, or who have never met Hayley in person. Trying to vet photo's before being posted would just not work and would potentially cause a good deal of ill feeling amongst members.

Finally, when it comes down to it, the only slightly negative result of having so many photos is the slightly slower download speed, which is only really slowed down when an entire page has nothing but photo's on it. As you say Grant, I think most of us if possible upload a few at a time to in the main avoid this. Even so, I for one am more than willing to wait a few seconds to have the privilege of viewing photo's of Hayley's concerts, often just hours after they have finished. Many thanks to Grant Karsten in particular for the stunning array of photo's from Lincoln Castle.

As an old friend of mine once said " If it isn't broken, don't try to fix it"

Best regards

Mark

[stevemacdonald]

I'm not sure if you're getting my point.

There is a happy medium we can strive for. The superabundance of Hayley pics following a gig is not a bad thing in itself; it's just a nuisance to download each and every one of them when redundancy sets in, which is typically by the tenth post.

Is it really asking too much to consider other members feeling numbed by all this repetition?

And Grant, I find irony in your "selfish" remark, since I rarely get to Hayley concerts anymore, the vast majority of which are essentially in your backyard.

[milewalker]

I am inclined to agree with Steve in principle about this. I love Hayley pics. I also like ice cream. That doesnt mean I have any desire to eat gallons of it at a time.

Speaking from my own personal perspective, reading about concert coverage of Hayley is a mixed blessing at best. It is good to stay informed, and hear the fan reviews, check out the set list, and yes, see the photos - but all of these are only pleasing up to a point. At some point, one picture looks pretty much the same as the next, and the twelvth varient of how great she was (at a concert done in yet another far away venue) becomes, as Steve said "numbing". When all of those pics continue to turn up in such "numb"ers on the 50 posts link in fact it begins to become somewhat uncomfortable.

It is like wanting very much to go to the best social events in college and never getting invited. Except that it is more than that because for whatever reason most of your friends are getting invited, and then going on to insist that they tell you ad nauseum how great the parties are. The word that comes to mind is "bittersweet". In the beginning it is much more sweet than bitter - but the longer it goes on, the worse it tastes

If only shared vicariously, at some point joy stops becoming joy.

Jon

[roger]

First of all, I would like to say a sincere thank you to everyone who has ever posted photographs to this forum. Without your efforts and your commitment, the success and popularity of the forum would be significantly reduced. It is a public forum run by the fans for the fans and contributions are very welcome from all members.

With regard to the number of photographs which are now being posted following each concert, I think we should acknowledge that as the membership of this forum increases, more and more photographers are likely to be present at each event. Naturally, they all want to contribute a reasonable selection of whatever they have taken. I know they are already being selective in what they post because some of them have told me that they have taken 1,000 or more but significantly less than that are ever seen from any one photographer. I don't think it would be fair to restrict our long-standing photographers simply because we now have more members who like to take photographs and share them with us. The point being, as the membership increases, so will all aspects of the coverage from each event – including photographs.

It has been suggested that so many similar photographs can become *numbing*. Okay, I accept that (which is my tacit agreement!) but I have been looking at photographs of Hayley for almost five years. We have new members joining all the time and I have often received comments from them that what attracted them to the forum in the first place is the high number of photographs which appear. To impose any sort of restriction would therefore, I believe, prove detrimental to the overall popularity of the forum.

Having said that, my personal view is that the *story* of an event could be told in twenty to thirty photographs and that it isn’t strictly necessary to include more than that. I am also aware that many members (and presumably guests) genuinely like to see more and more. If that is what people want, then I have no intention of imposing a limit on the number of photographs posted. However, I would ask that all photographers try to be a little more selective before posting quite so many. For example, if five photographs are taken at one second intervals, the chances are that (usually) only one of them needs to be shown. Inevitably, there is an exception. A recent set posted by Grant here shows a delightful sequence. As each picture only averages slightly over 40Kb they are perfectly acceptable.

Although I can see the benefits of vetting all photographs before they are posted, I feel this restriction would be unpopular with many members and impractical for the HWI Team. That is, we could not even begin the selection process until all of them had been received. As a result, it is likely that no photographs would be seen until at least a week after the event. Also, our eventual choice would be subjective which would be unfair on the individual photographers whose opinions are likely to vary.

I am very much aware of the difficulty experienced by those members who have a slow connection speed and, in fairness to them, we must ensure that all pages can be opened within a reasonable timescale. Contrary to the suggestion that download time is only being delayed by a few seconds, I recently looked at the Last 50 and it took over a minute to fully open even though I have 8Mb broadband. Anyone with a slower connection is likely to give up. Such a delay is not acceptable. (This highlights the reason why we were so reluctant to increase the “Last posts” feature from 30 to 50 but did so when other needs demanded.) The difficulty I experienced was not caused by the number of photographs but by the fact that many of them greatly exceeded the 100Kb limit (which Dave has since dealt with – thanks Dave). I therefore underline the need for all members observe those rules. They exist for the benefit of everyone.

I have also noticed that the same photographs are often posted several times because members keep quoting them, often on the same page and in very quick succession. One from Lincoln (127Kb) has already appeared three times which, in effect, makes that photograph 381Kb. If members wish to discuss an earlier picture, please link to the post in which it appears rather than posting it again.

So to summarise, keep the photographs coming but please observe the size limit and please do not duplicate unnecessarily by quoting those previously posted.

Thanks,
Roger

[starbuck]

I agree with Roger way too many quotes with picts and too much of the same but i have links to where these pictures are posted from perhaps a link to an online photo album would work with a teaser in the forum it would speed things up and still allow all of the picts we could ever want lol

Like Roger I have a very fast connection but i have tried to look at this forum at my mom's and she only has dialup(YUK) and it took forever and that was with last 30 and no concert picts.

I also have my own web server and if anyone would like to host picts there send me an email or pm.

it would look something like my brother in laws family picture site.
HEREhome.fnash.com/Photo%20Pages/Nashxmas2007/

Monte

[graemek]

Hi All,
When I first started posting on HWI I learnt from Richard that we could post a small pic (eg 500 x 400 say) & link another underneath of any size, say 1024 x 920 .

This meant that the little pic could display & the person viewing could then click on it & display & download the big high res. one.

This of course gives the photog. more to do (about double) but is easier for the user.

For myself : I download the lot.....

On my hard drive are 8096 pics of Hayley (& related) making up 1.81Gb.
Lincoln Castle to date has produced 222 pics & 31 Mb space with an average size per pic of 139 Kb.

Graeme

[Richard]

Hello Graeme and everybody!

That trick is fine as long as the smaller image is of lower resolution. If you merely reduce the dimensions of the larger image to fit the forum width the file size stays the same.

Richard