Steve K Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 I have been posting in Prototypes - not Model section and trying to add captions. A few questions if you don't mind posted "in Topic" rather than message - they may be of help to others if viewed as part of this healthy discussion... If you're posting in a thread, I don't think anyone's looking to delete your photos. This topic is concerned with those photos uploaded to the Gallery, and addressed at anyone who hasn't understood the distinction. I've uploaded hundreds of photos in threads (some of which threads were started by me, some not), because the thread is where they belong. Obviously, I try to make sure that my photos are as clear as possible, but they're not likely to be considered gallery-worthy, and so the relevant thread is where they belong. I'm sure that the mod team are trying to ensure that the Gallery contains only the cream of attractive or informative pictures, and is not just used as a dumping-ground for any photos which we want to upload. We've seen Gallery photos which are straight copies of images from "Workbench" or even "Classified", and are of no use whatsoever in the Gallery (but very useful in their respective threads...). Personally, I created a couple of tiny galleries when the facility first became available, as much to try out the feature as anything else, but I realised that most, if not all, of my pictures would be better served by being placed in threads, so I've not added anything to the gallery for a long time, and don't expect to any time soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brush47337 Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 Steve K, Thanks for your reply - my images are not in my Topic - they are in the Gallery Section under "Prototype images" - hence my inclusion in this discussion. Stuart Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Stubby47 Posted September 9, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 9, 2010 Most of my Gallery shots are not thread specifc, but more observations of potential scenic or stock modelling references. So, although I have asked this before, it might be posible now... Can we have more main gallery options ? Just having 'Model' or 'Prototype' I think is too great a subject area in each case. What I'd propose would be 'Model Rolling Stock', 'Model Locomotives', 'Model Lineside' and 'Model Scenics' and a similar set of four for the Prototypes. Stu Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold DaveF Posted September 9, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 9, 2010 I am delighted to see the change in emphasis in the galleries, and am working through my images to try to add more details (and fill in the copyright box). BUT I frequently don't have any more details than place, train/loco details, approximate date. Will that be sufficient? Some of mine I put in the gallery after they have been in a thread as I have found that some users look at threads others look at the galleries and make comments in one or other of the areas. Others are photos of mine I think might be of interest to other modellers which I upload only to my gallery. Is what I've been doing OK? David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted September 9, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 9, 2010 Having inadvertantly been made teacher's pet in #2 of this thread, I must say I was a bit apprehensive when my attempt to load that pic met with a warning that it would be subject to mod approval. Had one of my previous uploads contained an image from Wot Japanese Skoolgurls Dun Next? Then I read the thread and understood. Phew! RMWebber Shortliner often uses the expression "Eyecandy" in his links to various online finds he thinks wil be of interest. My impression is that this was Andy Y's original aim, as has been said several times today, and the fact is that in a real-world, bricks & mortar gallery, one finds quality images or sculptures, but not the preparatory sketches - unless they are by Leonardo! Thus, IMHO, learned discourses on checkrails should be in a thread, because while totally valid in that environment, few of us will consider them "Eyecandy" in the Gallery. Similarly, IMHO the model gallery should contain images of layouts or models that are in the final stages of completion. Step-by-step baseboard and track construction should be in their own threads, so we ignorant peasants can follow along and understand how it came to look that good. That should not happen in the gallery. When a fine model has its own thread, e.g. Torrington or Kylesku (two layouts that are my era and a style I would love to emulate) then it is entirely right that a selection of the pics should appear in the Gallery as well. Obviously the same applies to fine loco or vehicle construction - let's see heaps of Coachmann's coaches, as well as completed models from the many other worthy constructors. The need for, and style of, captions has already been well-rehearsed here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 Steve K,Thanks for your reply - my images are not in my Topic - they are in the Gallery Section under "Prototype images" - hence my inclusion in this discussion. Stuart Ah, fair enough - I'll shut up, then! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 RMWebber Shortliner often uses the expression "Eyecandy" in his links to various online finds he thinks wil be of interest. My impression is that this was Andy Y's original aim, as has been said several times today, and the fact is that in a real-world, bricks & mortar gallery, one finds quality images or sculptures, but not the preparatory sketches - unless they are by Leonardo! Thus, IMHO, learned discourses on checkrails should be in a thread, because while totally valid in that environment, few of us will consider them "Eyecandy" in the Gallery. Similarly, IMHO the model gallery should contain images of layouts or models that are in the final stages of completion. Step-by-step baseboard and track construction should be in their own threads, so we ignorant peasants can follow along and understand how it came to look that good. That should not happen in the gallery. I disagree with the 'eyecandy' idea, though some of these pictures are nice to look at I prefer the more useful galleries of detail shots such as the two Pinkmouse discussed earlier 211713[/snapback]. This gallery of mine is certainly now 'Eyecandy' but I think its useful for members of rmweb http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/gallery/album/174/436-rail-chair-pictures/ . edit: Actually i've just noted a highly useful comment from Martin on this one http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/gallery/image/8940-br-w-2-bolt-chair-with-broken-ears/ ! Maybe we need separate galleries for 'arty' prototype stuff and more detailed 'for modelling' resources though it would be tricky to decide which is which! It would be nice to have layout pictures separate from models though and I agree that progress shots are best kept in a thread or blog. The concept of 'unknown pictures' is an awkward one, a lot of 'where is this?' threads might be worse than a gallery with question marked titles that people comment on and resolve the details of the picture which can then be updated. The track pictures in my above gallery had their descriptions altered in reference to updated info given in responses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted September 9, 2010 Author Share Posted September 9, 2010 Is this a satisfactory alternative to a detailed description for the purpose of the new rules? I see the point but it would at least be helpful to have a description which prompts the user to use the mouseover function as we may not realise in the moderator preview section. Hi Andy, I have been posting in Prototypes - not Model section and trying to add captions. A few questions if you don't mind posted "in Topic" rather than message - they may be of help to others if viewed as part of this healthy discussion. 1. My photos tend to be scruffy scanned prints from 30 years ago. Is that OK and covered by your "vintage but poor quality is OK" stance? 2. Do you have plans to reinstate the recently uploaded images banner? 3. Is it possible to have a "fancy schmancy button" added, or is there already a way, to tell what the most recent comment has been? 1. Yes, as long as some information is in the description. 2. It should be there at the the www.rmweb.co.uk/community index page, if not clear temp files, cookies and refresh the page. 3. Martin's covered that one a little later. Can we have more main gallery options ? Just having 'Model' or 'Prototype' I think is too great a subject area in each case. What I'd propose would be 'Model Rolling Stock', 'Model Locomotives', 'Model Lineside' and 'Model Scenics' and a similar set of four for the Prototypes. If we can get some good work underway in basic improvements I'm happy to review it but not to get too fragmented. I frequently don't have any more details than place, train/loco details, approximate date. Will that be sufficient? Knowing what you do post the answer's yes. Shortliner often uses the expression "Eyecandy" in his links to various online finds he thinks wil be of interest. My impression is that this was Andy Y's original aim, as has been said several times today, and the fact is that in a real-world, bricks & mortar gallery, one finds quality images or sculptures, but not the preparatory sketches - unless they are by Leonardo! There were some lovely sketches up last night but not in the 'here's a plan I might do sometime' vein. The 'eyecandy' concept is a good one; these images feature very prominently and it doesn't do anyone any favours if they're erm.. low standard. Maybe we need separate galleries for 'arty' prototype stuff and more detailed 'for modelling' resources though it would be tricky to decide which is which! It would be nice to have layout pictures separate from models though and I agree that progress shots are best kept in a thread or blog. That's a possible if the classification is properly thought through and people use it in the right way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony_S Posted September 9, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 9, 2010 Retrospective selection would be time consuming although Im sooo tempted to blitz some. ... I decided to see how well my contribution to the prototype galleries matched the new criteria. I was OK on photography (Canon cameras are very clever) and I had explained what and where but I suspect the subject matter failed on "interesting" and probably would have been better in an overseas prototype thread. Should anyone express a desire to see photographs of bio-diesels from Mt Washington I'll put them in an appropriate thread! Tony Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod2 Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 I have been using the gallery of late for images that received a positive reaction in my layout topic- a sort of "best of", where they can be seen in isolation, rather than buried amongst pages of a thread that probably few read through from beginning to end. Is this an appropriate use of the gallery, or should I have a seperate blog entry for these pictures? Viewing figures for the gallery in my case aren't massive, but they exceed blog visitors, and seem to be more accessible to casual browsers. A bit of guidance would be helpful. Sorry Richard, this query seems to have been overlooked. Yes, I'd say that's entirely appropriate; I believe it's already been said that the gallery images are often what draws people into the site. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piskey Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 There's also been a lack of suitable captions and descriptions that leave the reader in the dark to the point that it becomes frustrating. Good point. I plead guilty! I tried to go back into the gallery to add descriptions but could only access the "Add comment" boxes or edit the main gallery description, not the individual images. Can image descriptions be added retrospectively? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 I tried to go back into the gallery to add descriptions but could only access the "Add comment" boxes or edit the main gallery description, not the individual images. Can image descriptions be added retrospectively? Yes. Click on Mod Options to the right of your pictures (providing it is not covered by said image) and then click on Edit Image on the dropdown banner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted September 10, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 10, 2010 Good point. I plead guilty! I tried to go back into the gallery to add descriptions but could only access the "Add comment" boxes or edit the main gallery description, not the individual images. Can image descriptions be added retrospectively? Hi Piskey, On each image, click the Mod Options button on the right below the image. You can then click Edit and add the description. regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piskey Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 Yes. Click on Mod Options to the right of your pictures (providing it is not covered by said image) and then click on Edit Image on the dropdown banner. Ah, right, thanks. And to Martin. No, it wasn't completely obscured - maybe I should go to Specsavers? Oh, hang on a mo, I did! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr b Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 as my N gauge Nethertown lay- out is due to re open, does this mean that I can not submit photos of the line and any progress made ? after all if no one was sending in any pictures then there would be no point in having a forum like this, as well as sensoring any pictures for any naughty-ness of whatever kind be it sloppy balasting or lack of loco detail, we all know that some things should not be visable to both young and old , so please let us layout builders show the progress we are making as I'm sure our contributions are well within the viewers limitations. mr B .. modelling Nethertown .. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted September 10, 2010 Author Share Posted September 10, 2010 Please go back and re-read my first post. Show your progress images in a layout topic or a blog, the Gallery is intended for images that catch the eye rather than the mundane. You don't have a Gallery at the moment but you have had layout topics so I honestly can't see what the issue is especially your comment "after all if no one was sending in any pictures then there would be no point in having a forum like this". Nobody is stopping anyone posting images, it's just where images are being posted and the quality of image and/or information. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted September 24, 2010 Author Share Posted September 24, 2010 BUMP.... I've just deleted several images from several users that had no description entered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnteal Posted September 25, 2010 Share Posted September 25, 2010 I do think the gallery is better than it has been for some time, less images but of better quality, by which i mean the information and usefulness is better. I have visited a couple of blogs i wouldn't have due to a link being placed in the picture description. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Vale Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 I've been trying Martin's advice to have a separate forum post as an image holder, and I thought I should report back. It works OK, and the uploads are nice and quick, but it doesn't allow captioning of the images at source. It may also have (a small?) impact on server load since the images are fetched with a script, whereas the gallery uploads look like static URLs (I know they could be served by scripts too, using mod_rewrite magic, but I suspect they aren't.) I also tried the "just avatars" gallery option, but that doesn't hide anything, just uses that gallery to populate my avatar selection box. One option which might work, but I'm not sure if it's really the right thing to do, is to use the "friends only" gallery option - if I tick that, my "construction" gallery content would be out of the public eye but still linkable. Plus my friends could see it in the gallery, but they might not mind? A private gallery would be better, but I can't find an option for this in IPB. A thought occurs: Andy, would it be possible to create a third gallery category after Model + Prototype - "Private" or similar - and put all the work-in-progress pictures in a new gallery with that category? I don't know if you could then stop it from automatically coming up in searches and on the gallery rotation, but it might work? Just to recap - I'm happy with the spirit of the gallery changes, the quality has indeed gone up. I'd just like to have a better means of uploading, labelling, arranging and finding work-in-progress images than as attachments. I could host them externally, but that can cause problems if someone's work blocks the external host. If it's not possible, fair enough, and I'll carry on as now. Semi-relatedly, I really like the IPB upgrade after using it for a while - all the AJAX makes everything feel really snappy, and the new search tools are a big improvement. I don't think the notifications are the holy grail, but it's still good that they're making progress in that area. Just my 2p, thanks for listening! Will Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted October 1, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 1, 2010 The new arrangements were introduced while I was away in connection with the Kernow / YMR Forum show. I have now had a chance to review my own gallery (not including topic-only images) and hope that it meets Andy's current criteria. I am in broad agreement with the separation of what might be termed "exhibition" images and "works in progress" into gallery and topic respectively. There are numerous images in my topics of interest in the context of my own layout which I would not dream of showing outside that context. However there are some which may attract a wider interest and those go in the gallery. I also intentionally change the images I display in the gallery from time to time so as to maintain interest and have a maximum of one page at a time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D869 Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 > If you need to use images for use in forum posts or blog entries there is the facility to upload images from the forum or blog functions without the need to upload them to the Gallery first. I tried reading the help but couldn't see how to do this. The 'insert image' button on the blog editor seems to only accept a URL. Could you please explain how to include photos in blog postings without uploading them to the gallery... or else refer me to the right place in the help. Thx. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted October 1, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 1, 2010 Could you please explain how to include photos in blog postings without uploading them to the gallery... or else refer me to the right place in the help. Hi, See this post in this topic for a suggested solution: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/topic/21472-galleries-the-future/page__view__findpost__p__211785 regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
158722 Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Andy...I hope we are complying with the new guidelines. Was a little taken aback at the Arpley Modeller shot of a bit of an out of focus 66 taken through a bush slightly squint this morning. Images of quality? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted October 9, 2010 Author Share Posted October 9, 2010 Andy...I hope we are complying with the new guidelines. Was a little taken aback at the Arpley Modeller shot of a bit of an out of focus 66 taken through a bush slightly squint this morning. Images of quality? http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/gallery/image/22890-66166/ You're right. The other two shots had items of interest and I hadn't checked all 3 that were uploaded at that time in close detail and on reflection some quality decisions should have been made. It can be difficult to make subjective judgements as what may be of interest to one may not be of interest to the next person let alone applying 'quality of modelling'. I think we should apply the following: Prototype images If an image is not of good photographic quality and is not of historical interest it will be deleted. Modelling images If the image is of untouched RTR stock on an unfinished model (or area of a model) or of a trackplan it will be deleted. These images are more appropriate to a topic or blog and of little or no merit in a Gallery. The admin team are also looking at criteria for the "How realistic?" topic too - fuzzy shots of untouched RTR stock on a train set just ain't going to be realistic. This forum should be about modelling not some kind of box-opening fest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BoD Posted October 9, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 9, 2010 If an image is not of good photographic quality and is not of historical interest it will be deleted. Don't want to sound pedantic but might or be a better option than and. Some useful historical photgraphs are not always of good quality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.