How many competition threads do there need to be?

[Luca Brazzi]

I'm sure its probably just me having a grumply old git day, but this Forum now shows 7 competition related threads, 5 of which are stickied and therefore always appearing at the top of the page. And now there's June Photoshop competition part II.

While its great to have the competitions, its means that most of the screen is taken up with stickies and 'new competition' threads. Is this all really necessary or am I alone in thinking its a PITA?

June Photoshop Competition - Chat Here
June 2008 - Photo Competition - Official Entries
June 2008 - Photo Competion - Chit Chat Here
June Photoshop Competition - Entries Here
Monthly Competition Posting Guidelines
June Photoshop Competition II - Entries Here
June Photoshop Competition II - Chat Here


LB

[Blukoo]

Well, the first photoshop competition is over. That sticky needs to be removed.

I won that comp, so I started the second photoshop competition of the month as that is what we have decided to do. I'm waiting for that to be stickied.

I certainly don't see the problem with the "Monthly Competition Posting Guidelines" being up there.

Edited by Blukoo on Wednesday 18th June 16:30

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

Perhaps just the entry threads could be stickied - it certainly seems that threads drop off the first page very quickly these days.

[Simpo Two]

The 'picture posting guidelines' sticky was a good idea - something about resizing to 750px wide max I think, but few people seem to have read it and then get upset when you tell them their photos are the size of Bolivia and you can't be arsed to watch 50 Bolivian-sized pictures of cars download, and the moment you try to focus on one of them, the screen jumps down as the next Bolivia downloads, and good heavens, it's another car, and the food's all greasy and yes, I'm a grumpy git too. And another thing, every goddamn thread is about Canon cameras, Canon bodies and Canon lenses. Bah. I guess Nikon users know what they want and can read the instructions... did I mention the food was greasy and by the way, this tea's cold... BAH!

[havoc]

Simpo Two said:

Bah. I guess Nikon users know what they want and can read the instructions... did I mention the food was greasy and by the way, this tea's cold... BAH!

Nikon users are grumpy sods, too!!!

[Andy M]

Simpo Two said:

The 'picture posting guidelines' sticky was a good idea - something about resizing to 750px wide max I think, but few people seem to have read it...

Or quite simply that these people realise that 750px wide is a piss take in this day and age and simply won't go long with such madness...

[Blukoo]

Considdering the forum automatically resizes the images to 758px wide and compromises the image quality I think a maximum of 750px makes perfect sense.

[_dobbo_]

Andy M said:

Simpo Two said:

The 'picture posting guidelines' sticky was a good idea - something about resizing to 750px wide max I think, but few people seem to have read it...

Or quite simply that these people realise that 750px wide is a piss take in this day and age and simply won't go long with such madness...

I post mine at 550px - I guess I must be a right piss taker!

[GetCarter]

I refuse to post at 750 - having been continually surveying, for many of us - that's a postage stamp in the middle of a BIG screen.

99% can view at 970 without the need for a scroll bar - and even 970 is way too small for many of us.

BTW - if you look on my site, I've been running a poll for the past year 'How many are on broadbad?' (96%) 'what size screen do you view?' (99% = 1024 x 768 or bigger). I venture to suggest it'll be 99% 1280+ in the next two years.

750px has well and truly had it's day... like 450 did in the 1990's.

I should of course add that compression still has a place, seeing as a tiny minority have no broadband, and let's face it we all want a fast download.

Edited by GetCarter on Wednesday 18th June 19:03

[Simpo Two]

GetCarter said:

stuff

Very odd, because I have 2Mbit broadband just like most people and I can tell you that when people shove up 20 x 2Mb files, I go away. Plus, a man who likes quality as much as you do ought to be somewhat concerned about the jaggies that PH applies to mash your landscapes into shape. If you want people to look at your work, and if you want it to look at good as possible, then you take the effort to make it as presentable and as easy to view as possible. Well I do, but I believe in going the extra mile, and my experiences to date tells me that the extra attention to detail pays off. Every medium should be optimised to its viewers, whether it's stills, video or sound.

[bulb763]

I'm with LB, 2 or 3 would be fine but any more and threads start dropping off the bottom very quickly, not ideal when you post pics looking for comments.
While it's being discussed, I'd also like to see the resize-er changed to something >800 px wide. Quite right about huge file sizes though, absolutely no need.

just my 2p

[GetCarter]

Simpo Two said:

GetCarter said:

stuff

Other stuff

Very odd, as I don't shove up 20 x 2 mb files, and it's only in here that they are viewed at 750px (as they are taken from my site). I get endless mails asking me to post at bigger size and higher res, but have never, ever, since 1994, had one asking for smaller / worse.

Strange eh?

[Simpo Two]

GetCarter said:

Very odd, as I don't shove up 20 x 2 mb files

I didn't say you did. But what I said is still correct.

[andyquantum]

I threw my toys out about this a while back, and I'm still not entirely over it.

I use Flickr to host my pics, and that usually gives the option of either 500 or 1024 wide depending on whether you choose Medium or Large. I want the hi res pics on there and resizing and rehosting to another site just to post a pic on PH is madness.

500 generally looks crap, 1000 looks better but gets resized. Cant win!

[ThatPhilBrettGuy]

I agree. The forum looks a right mess with so many stickies that they're hard to read. The best solution IMHO is to create a wiki compo thread that points at normal unsticky threads. Sticky the wiki. Sorted.

As for the 750px question....hhmmm, well my normal laptop is 1440px wide, but the browser is probably only 1000px or so of that as I hate full screen windows (only your Mum and Dad and Mac users have full screen windows). But if we assume 1024px available, once you've added all the forum bits around the outside there's no way 1024px pictures are going to be a good fit.

I contest that 1024px doesn't look much better than 750px anyway. Perhaps a solution like DPReview has? If you want to post full res stuff you can without it totally buggering up the page making all the posts one long line of painful scrolling.

[miniman]

I have to say I concur with Luca on the sticky threads comment; I made a similar comment in Website Feedback recently about the P&P which was riddled with stickies. They have less impact if there are lots of them and new ones don't get noticed easily. I like the Wiki idea though.

[havoc]

ThatPhilBrettGuy said:

(only your Mum and Dad and Mac users have full screen windows

Yes Son!

More seriously, the work screen is 1280, the home one is 1024, so by the time you've lost the frames and the LHS poster information, 750 seems like a sensible level. Not everyone on here has the latest kit...

...and if someone has some fantastic work, is it that much extra effort to link to a full-size image hosted somewhere?

[Dogsey]

As far as I can see there is nothing we can do about PH squishing our images to 750px, so as it makes images look awful I personally don't see a problem with posting 750px wide or less.

I've now created a wiki for the competitions, it makes sense just to have one place to look for the competitions. Can a mod sticky the wiki please.

Edited by Dogsey on Thursday 19th June 09:14

[ehasler]

I've stickied the Wiki, and un-stickied the other threads.

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

That looks much better - let's see what others think.