>From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >It is an unfortunate fact that the PUG is slowly dying. One reason is >that some (often good) photographers find the file size limitation too >restrictive, or that the submission process is too much hassle. > >Another is that incompetent people like me miss the deadlines, and >therefore don't contribute (no great loss in my case). > >Others feel that the standard is too low, and it's not worth the bother. > >What is the PUG for? Is it a showcase of the PDML's best work? Or is it >an opportunity to present one's work for peer review and criticism? If >the latter, can't the same be achieved by a PESO? > >If it is meant to be a showcase, why not have a panel of judges to select >the 50 best PAWs and PESOs each month, and then put them into a gallery? >Irfanview can produce a suitable gallery with thumnnails at the press of a >button, so there is little work involved. > >As for file sizes, I would suggest that people submitting PAWs and PESOs >should consciously aim to keep file sizes low (say 150k) in order to make >the images available to the widest audience. But there should not be a >strict size limit. It is surely better to have a large picture which a >few people can't see, than have a picture which nobody can see because the >photographer doesn't submit it. > > >John >
As is often the case, my posts sometimes go ignored... Here's the way I see it and this is just my opinion. If the 'Gallery' is not supposed to represent the best we can do, but is instead a catch-all photo-sharing mechanism, there are plenty of ways to accomplish that. PESO's for one, or make use of any number of photo sharing sites. A Flickr or photo.net account could be opened with a publicly known password and a new themed presentation could be created each month. There would not need to be a deadline as participants could post their photo at any time during the themed month, and no single person would have the burden of maintaining it. If a person posted a photo and then thought better of it, they could remove it, and possibly post another. It would not be static, but one that continually evolves. If one wants to have a photo sharing/commenting/learning experience, that would seem to be much more flexible. (Note: I realize the idea coulld present some security/mischief/nefarious behavior issues). I have always thought that a 'Gallery' was supposed to be something special. I don't presume to speak for, think for, write for, in any way comment for, or influence Adelheid. However a fair amount of time and effort has gone into the PUG both in software and in the monthly effort of maintaining it. If it is not something special, then I question the reason for it being called a gallery and even for having a maintainer. When I first joined the PDML in 1999 (I think my first post was '97/'98) I sort of viewed the gallery as a showcase for what could be created with Pentax equipment. At that time the PUG was loosely linked to the PDML and the PDML had a link on the Pentax website. I generally enjoy the PUG, but more than having a large number of participants, since it's called a gallery, I wish it would be more of a high quality showcase. A lot of high quality photos would be ideal. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
