Discussion in 'Photographic Discussions' started by abraxas, May 13, 2009.
meh depends on many things;
1) What day - weekends are really bad times to post images - lots get posted and its easy for one to slip through the net
2) What time at least by GMT times posting at 12pm through to around 7am is a bad time to post stuff as have it noticed - no one around then
3) The image itself - strange place to put this you might think but it is the 3rd part of the puzzle in forum things I feel. See the above problems can be countered by bumping the post (After a good amount of time though, not every 10 seconds) to get it noticed again.
However if the image fails to grab attention enough then its going to fail to get comments - this can however be for several reasons and does not nessessarily mean the image itself is bad
a) Its something obscure that has a limited general fanbase to start with - some images or styles only attract few people who like such images.
b) The image is very current - that is to say there is a period of popularity for a type of image, editing style, subject which means that your image is just just "like all the others". Thus it has to really stand out to get the comments/views
c) The image has no faults itself but the member just lacks a fanbase (often combined with the first 2 possible errors in timing as well) Essentaly is not that the image is wrong its just that the person posting is not being watched by many - and thus images slip through the net again.
d) There are flaws with the image in a large number (the terror!). Sadly images that are weaker can also slip through since people feel that to put the amount of time into commenting will take too long - such images then quickly sink.
As one can see both good and bad images can slip through the net - and through no fauly of the photo itself. Of course we all fear that there is some major flaw with out images that results in few/no comments- but I think its important to understand (but not rely) on the other aspects which can cause images to get less comments as well,.
Further I think its important to point out that larger forums and galleries can get oversaturated with images which means images can just slip through because of the volume of image threads posted - again bumping can solve this problem.
I just assume I've left my audience speechless with admiration - I do that a lot... :lmao:
I usually take it to mean no one liked it.
Same - better for my ego if I think I can do no wrong :lmao:
That's happened to most of mine.. I figure nobody's interested, so I just quit posting most of my images here.
I think that it is because the images are neither poor nor excellent. Snapshots, if you will.
Take this thread for instance:
8 images of a local Mardi Gras parade. Although it is probably an interesting subject to most people on this forum, the pictures are of average to below average quality. They are basically "snapshots." And I did a poor job of capturing the essence of a Mardi Gras parade. 155 views, ZERO comments.
I also don't take non-response as a bad thing in and of itself. If I start producing images that I think rival the quality of, say, "Zeckson" or "Lyncca," for example, and nobody responds, I might get a little ticked, but I am not fool enough to think that I could hold their lenscaps yet, so I don't take it personally.
I wonder how many people browse the forums by hitting the 'new posts' button...?
I do. (Usually, I'll go to my User CP, then New Posts.) If it's buried deeper than page 3 of 'new posts', I will likely not see it unless someone bumps it to the top. Even on pages 2 & 3 I might not see it unless I'm bored and don't have anything better to do.
Rarely do I actually go into a specific sub-forum and browse around there. Usually when I do, it's a non-gallery forum anyway - so it doesn't really apply to the topic of this thread.
I think that explains a lot of the unnoticed threads.
I've had a few of my threads go unnoticed. I don't like to bump them either, so that doesn't help. Not that I lay awake at night thinking about it though. I think it mostly means that they either got buried quickly, or aren't interesting.
I just checked - I only have 2 threads with no replies, not as many as I thought.
Both of those are a little boring, so I understand why nobody commented. (One is the moon, the other is a tire.)
First I have a question for you: are you a philosopher? I ask this because I ask the same questions about people because I am curious about the human psyche.
Now here is my answer:
Many times that i've posted a pic it does not get comments...or very few. I believe people either don't reply because of a few reasons:
1. They don't like it, or have no interest in it
2. Don't have any critiques, and it's not interesting enough to comment
3. Lazy or just don't feel like it
How does it make me feel? Slightly disappointed because I post them in hopes of getting actual opinions, or compositional critiques. But I really don't care in the scheme of things. I started taking pictures for my own pleasure...I am the ultimate judge and jury on my own artwork...everyone else will inevitably see it differently.
That it's a technically alright photo that just doesn't have enough interest to get a response.
My reaction to 0-reply posts of mine much depends on the time of the year. In winter times, it affects me much. But that is only so because EVERYTHING affects me more in winter than it would (and does) in the brighter months of the year.
All in all, I get MANY 0-reply posts here (after I posted a photo), or at least hardly ever any 12-reply posts or so, maybe just 1 or 2, that's all (well-meaning friends will reply, which is nice!) - no more.
So I've come to the conclusion that my photography must be far too boring for most to say something about it. Try as I might: I don't get a reaction out of them. (While many, many, maaaany here on TPF get a reaction out of me in return, mind you, but I can't be on here 24/7 and see and comment on just about EVERYTHING).
Separate names with a comma.