Now I am REALLY depressed!

G

For a while I tried my best to look at every new picture in the Gallery. But it was like wading through treacle - or worse! Perhaps if I took a short break, say ten years, I might be able to come back with fresh eyes and hope in my heart.

Irony is lost on a lot of people, especially those who takes themselves very seriously, as some people from Somerset seem to.

I was hoping you might detect a little irony in the new one too!

Cheers

G

I think you are being a little disingenuous here, Thoramay. Somebody who had never seen a Lakeland photograph before would not be able to say "Not ANOTHER!".

Indeed, it would be perverse to make such an exclamation if the viewer had not seen a great many before. As I have, unfortunately.

Now it is possible that some there are who have seen many thousands of Lakeland pictures, and still have an unassuaged appetite for more. I, however, am speaking for those whose appetites for such delights are finite.

Mr Storm has paid his £9.99, and is determined to uphold his right, as he sees it, to post as many pictures as possible.

But other people have rights, too. One is to say that they don't think much of flooding the Gallery with pictures of indifferent quality. And the second is that they don't have to, AND DON'T, visit the Gallery very often.

I HASTEN to add that not all Mr Storm's pictures are of indifferent quality. Some are very good. Unfortunately, though, quality is not Mr Storm's game. Pile 'em high and sell 'em cheap is his motto.

But he is only one example. If the Gallery is ever going to be worth anything, it is going to have to introduce a selection policy. Until it does, it will continue to be little visited, except by the existing hard core of gushers and squealers.

G

You can tell when a Lakeland picture is hackneyed when the only response it produces is a tired "Oh, God, not another boring Lakes picture".

There is only so much chocolate you can eat, and only so many minor variations on picture-postcard Lakeland views that you can look at.

The plethora of not-very-good pictures in it is one of the reasons why so few people visit the Gallery.

By all mean take as many pictures as you like, but don't assume that everybody wants to see your entire output. Because they don't.

Since digital photography took off (pretty much in parallel with the rise in popularity of the internet) the world has become awash with digital images. So let's not add to the huge and growing mountain of not-especially-good images.

G

9 and 8.

G

Just spotted this. Both attractive pictures of attractive girls, but I agree with Yves about the backgrounds. You may not know this, but a wider aperture will reduce the depth of field, and throw the background out of focus.

Just one question. Which is Melissa, and which is Melissa?

G

I think the purpose of the Gallery is suggested in its name. Otherwise it might have been called the Surgery, or the Workshop, or something similar.

I am not advocating any particular course of action, such as a limit, but why would a limit make the PU lose members? If people want to post lots of images in order to get feedback, then the place to do so is the Your Photos section, as stated earlier. The quality of feedback there is generally rather higher than in the Gallery, so I am surprised that you, given your stated reason for posting, seldom avail yourself of this valuable resource.

My suspicion is that your real reason for posting in the Gallery is a hunger for the often uncritical praise that you can count on from the Gallery regulars.

But having said that, some of your recent shots are not at all bad. I enjoyed the Cotehele kitchen and the Polperro portrait, to mention just two.

Just remember the old rule about quality and quantity.

G

Stan,

It seems that some people are posting images to the gallery in order to get constructive feedback rather than because they consider the images to be worthy of "hanging on the gallery wall".

As a consequence, the gallery contains a lot of images that belong properly in the "Your Photos" section, and as a consequence of that, the gallery doesn't attract a lot of visitors.

The most popular image in the gallery at the moment, excluding "glamour" pictures" (most of which are quite appallingly bad), has only attracted 442 views. That's the MOST popular. The average viewing number is 36. Yes, 36!

I would suggest that a massive cull would make the gallery worth visiting. At the moment it would appear to serve little purpose.

G

Really? You're meant to leave a comment. For instance: "Superb", "Brill", "Fantastic", "Great stuff".

Anything but the truth, in fact. That's how it works in the gallery.



Cheers

G:

I believe it is auto-focus only on the Pentax ME-F body. On other bodies it is manual-focus.

G