Posted by D.A. Edwards on August 18, 2015 at 6:50 PM
I stumbled across this blog post from earlier this year by Sarah Marino that covers a lot of ground but I found it interesting how often she mentions NPN, how great it used to be, how it formed her development as a photographer and then she turns around and laments how it is "continuing to fade." The same sentiment is found in many, many of the comments on the post:
As a relative newbie NPN member of less than a year, although I lurked for several years before hand, it is strange how former members of NPN seem to look back on their experience here with fond memories yet don't return. I've also noticed how many of the photographers whose work I used to enjoy never seem to post much anymore, if at all. Higher profile sites such as 500px and Whytake have their own issues according to Sarah and, like her, I find Flickr and Facebook to be just too much volume without much value. I do very much value my time spent here. I guess I should just ask Sarah Marino why NPN is no longer worthy of her participation!
Anyway, I'm wondering if NPN members have theories as to why this has occurred over the last few years. I know there was a New Year's posting about everyone upping their game here but it either hasn't happened nor has it resulted in an obvious increase in new users.
Comment posted by Sarah Marino on 01/31/14 at 1:01 pm PST
Registered on 11/10/08, 23 Posts, 393 Comments
Dave, this was the only posted info on NPN I could find from the person you've mentioned. If the search engine is working correctly here at NPN then I'm not too clear as to why the member's other posts and comments did not show. However, that could be in the fact that there is a purge date on the system or maybe the recent upgrade did some kind of purge.
Regardless, if the info above is correct on the one comment I did find dated 01/31/14 the activity was very light between 11/10/08 to 01/31/14.I will say the persons C/P ratio was excellent, it is just the total activity for the number of years involved that is hard to figure out. Again, records might not be accurate and I can't say I recognize the person's name at all.
As far as the overall NPN site activity no doubt it is not the same it was years ago. With that also said NPN just hit 15 years on the air so to speak. So, there is still a draw for certain enthusiasts. I know I've been active over the years, but I have also been involved with an all ANALOG site in recent years as I'm one of the last hold outs here at NPN shooting nothing but film. So not an excuse, just splitting some time in another camp so to speak.
Hopefully others will see your post and comment as well. Sadly, that is another item that has dwindled over time as many folks these days ONLY post images and fail to aid in commenting as well as never visiting ANY of the forums. Without them doing that they will never even see your informative post here.
I am one of those who has been on here for longer than seems apparent, as I actually changed accounts way back when, when NPN made some changes. I honestly cannot even remember what year that was.
If you look through the photography magazines, you will see the names of people who used to be here on NPN. Over the years we truly have had some talented folks on here, and they contributed much time and expertise. I suspect some of them went on to have such full time photography careers that they cannot fit this in. It's too bad, as I can still remember getting a particularly good critique from Guy Tal many years ago. I have never forgotten his advice. It shows the true value of commenting.
My own participation has changed as my lifestyle/job has changed over the last 8-10 years. For quite a while, I had the time to fully partcipate. I posted and commented several times a week. A job change happened, though, and between traveling and location, I have barely participated at all over the last several years. I get on here frequently and read the forums, and make as many comments as I have time for. Someday, I will have more time to get involved again. Yes NPN has changed in some ways, but the same intent is still here, and I still think it's a top notch site for those wanting to learn and hone their skills!
Posted by Steve Kennedy on August 19, 2015 at 12:46 AM
I will second what Genny said. My participation over the last couple years has been very low, also resulting from lifestyle/job changes. I've stayed involved in the PNW forum, though activity there has also dropped dramatically. I'm trying to spend more time on the site now, and pick up my camera more. I am still a big fan of the site and the willingness of people here to help others learn. I've been talking to others that have let their membership lapse and they say they are going to return. I hope so.
Posted by Basil Greber on August 19, 2015 at 1:36 AM
When I started using 500px, I was impressed by the exposure one could get - my best viewed photo on there has about 3000 views (ya, I'm not very good :) ), compared to maybe 300 here (confirming that I'm not very good :) ). But at some point, you realize that the people having a look at your photos here are actually interested in them (and you get useful comments), while on 500px, you get a lot of views and likes from people who actually don't care, but simply hope to attract you to their own photos. There are people who obviously go through dozens of photos and post the same comment about "great light... great composition... well done" to all of them, just to attract views to their pictures. So, well, I guess both sites have their place, one gives you more exposure, the other one gives you a more attentive audience and much, much more useful comments. YMMV.
That said, I agree that the days when I could look at Guy Tal's or Marc Adamus' photos here and even get a comment from them occasionally were nice. But NPN still has something to offer, so I just renewed my membership a few days ago.
Posted by Basil Greber on August 19, 2015 at 10:42 AM
This is currently on the 500px front page. Just sayin'...
If you have enough friends, you don't need quality.
Posted by scott lanz on August 19, 2015 at 11:55 AM
Interesting blog post, including the author's and the responders' comments re NPN. I've been a member here since 2003. The loss of many of our most talented memebers is certainly unfortunate. I think it was due to several factors. First, as NPN members became successful pros, they did not need the exposure here, especially with the availability of other options. Two, they did not need and/or perhaps even want critiques of their work, particularly from others less qualified. Three, they understandably did not want to provide their uncompensated valuable time and instruction to others less able and/or willing to offer anything of value in return. With little to be gained, their time is better spent elsewhere.
All of this is perfectly understanable. What is unfortunate, however, is that the void created by departing pros has not been filled with up and comers. It takes time to thoughtfully analyze a photograph, and even more time and effort to write a meaningful, articulate, and tactful comment. In the day and age of instant everything, I guess it is easier to post away at sites that don't expect anything, except maybe mutual accolades or likes, in return.
I agree, Dave, that despite the many excellent changes that have been made to the site recently, I have not seen any increase in participation, at least in the galleries to which I pay the most attention. I am still hopeful that the changes will prove effective.
I read the comments on Sarah's post. What struck me was the number of names I recognized who were former NPN members. The other thing that struck me was the fondness they expressed for NPN.
When I started here just over 13 years ago, my images got thrashed by Guy Tal, Michael Gordon, and a few others. Sure, it was a little painful to read their comments, but I took their comments to heart and worked hard to put their ideas into practice. I think my work has made great strides due to those comments, and I continue to learn from the comments posted to my images here up to the present day.
In general, I think exposure is a good thing, but there is not a lot of learning going on. I have looked at 500px a few times (I've never posted there), and what I see is a lot of copy-cat work that Sarah alludes to in her article. It takes effort to really 'see' and to develop one's unique vision that carries across a body of work. Copying the style of another rings hollow to me. Sure, the work looks nice, and may receive lots of oohs and ahhs, but the photographer isn't living up to their own potential.
I think that a vast majority of people today want the instant gratification of "Great shot!". They don't really have a desire to be educated and develop their vision. Nor, do they want to take the time and effort to say something meaningful about an image created by someone else: It's real easy to say, "Great shot!" and then move on. It takes a great deal of effort to really 'see' an image for what it is and to write a critique that will be helpful.
With regard to NPN, we have all seen the exodus of members over the last few years. There are probably as many reasons why they left as there are individuals, but I think there are three main reasons. First, people want views and exposure. Second, I think many feel they have progressed beyond the critique stage of their work. Third, folks left NPN because the site's design and image size limits were lacking compared to other sites.
So, how do we recruit former members to return? How do we recruit new members? How, do we guarantee a return on their investment of their membership fee?
Dave, the thread you mentioned ("Stepping Up the Game") in your original post was started by me. I was upset by the number of views vs. lack of any comments on an image I had posted, as well as for the Landscape gallery in general. Unfortunately, that thread went away after the 35 day time limit, but it received a huge number of comments and ideas that were ultimately the catalyst for the redesign of NPN.
At this juncture, I believe that previous members are unaware that NPN has been redesigned for the better. To me, at least, apart from the educational value of NPN, that is a major marketing point that needs to be taken advantage of.
Paul makes an excellent point about folks not reading the posts, or making posts in the discussion forums. Photography is about much more that just posting an image for exposure.
So, it appears that we do indeed need to "Step Up the Game" in terms of really utilizing the incredible potential that NPN has to offer!
--P
Posted by D.A. Edwards on August 19, 2015 at 4:59 PM
Hi Preston, your suggestion via e-mail that this discussion be moved by Jim to the General forum pages for wider participation is worthwhile. It was my thought when I posted that this conversation may be disconcerting to non-members who may be debating whether to join. I recall right after I joined that a long-time member posted how they were seriously considering letting their membership lapse and I wondered if I had just jumped onto a sinking ship! That member ultimately decided to stay... can't recall who it was at this moment. So that was the reason why I stuck this in the Members Only forum.
I concur that the migration away is most often people out growing their need for the site and its feedback. Like I said, I lurked here for many years honing my abilities and absorbing information from the members so that when I did finally join I felt like I could fully participate. I would have been extremely reticent, early on, to criticize images by full-time nature photographer professionals that were beyond anything I could do.
The downside I suppose is that I've probably become consciously and/or sub-consciously part of the NPN "style," whatever that may be. For me I mostly see "honest" straight up photography with a throttle on the manipulation in processing; e.g., critiques will often mention when an image feels over-saturated to the point of being unnatural. Also there is not a lot of over-the-top HDR photography. This fits with how I perceive nature photography should be done. YMMV of course and I actually don't mind seeing people pushing the envelope if that is where their artistic vision is taking them. Perhaps that is why the site is struggling to attract new members because, as most of us have seen, that is where nature photography seems to have gone. A budding photographer and potential NPN member may not be seeing the kind of images that are currently in vogue elsewhere.
Anyway I guess Jim or other higher up can make that call whether to move this thread.
Dave, your thought about keeping this discussion in the Lounge is a good one. So, keeping it here works for me.
Now, this is just my personal opinion, but I think feedback, regardless of the photographic skill set of the person providing it, is valuable. So, a person who leaves because they feel they no longer need critiques is disallowing themselves the opportunity for further reflection about their work and the continued growth of it. Sure, I can look at my own work and see where I'm falling short in some aspect of a particular image, but my self-critique is not infallible, so I seek the help of others so that I can learn. There is no one among us who should ever stop learning by saying, "Good enough." We should be asking, "How can this be better?"
I agree that there is a trend toward HDR and hyper-saturated images such as the one Basil linked to above. I've been doing photography for a long time--my fingernails still show the effects of fixer. Photography is by it's nature a "departure from reality", as Ansel Adams put it, but I think there's a tendency to stretch images beyond believability in some circles. Yes, there is an ethos here at NPN that encourages 'believability'. NPN is a sort of cross between journalistic photography and fine art photography, so heavily manipulated images get commented upon in a negative fashion. Our PhotoArt gallery was created for those images that exceed 'believability'.
Perhaps NPN needs a paradigm shift regarding HDR and more heavily manipulated images being more acceptable in the main critique galleries? I am not advocating such a change. I only bring it up as a point for discussion.
I hope other members will see this thread and add their comments.
--P
Posted by Basil Greber on August 19, 2015 at 8:41 PM
Preston - I think NPN used to be "more saturated" than it currently is. I've just checked the current crop of landscape photos, and yes, I really do think it used to be punchier. I remember discussions about the pros and cons of it in the "old" (not so old) days. However, I've rarely seen too much negativity here regarding punchy photos, so I don't think we need to worry.
Just for the record - I don't think that saturation is the problem of that other photo I linked to. ;-)
Posted by D.A. Edwards on August 19, 2015 at 9:02 PM
Basil - it should be noted that the image you linked to is pretty much the only landscape I saw from him. The bulk of his images were labelled "Adult Content" so I can see how his interpretation of Horseshoe Bend might tend towards the, um, racy.
Posted by Basil Greber on August 19, 2015 at 10:55 PM
I think you made a great observation that NPN's images tended to greater saturation than is the case today. But, I do recall some negative comments on certain images that went past some arbitrary limit, and in one case, the person actually left NPN because of it. I wonder if potential new members looking at the more recent images posted in the Landscape gallery feel that their style doesn't fit and/or their work will receive negative comments? One could also ask the same question regarding folks who have left NPN?
I just looked at Marc's image, but couldn't see any comments. If the comments are on FaceBook, I can't see them because I don't use FB. Yes, it is a pity that many look back with fondness for NPN and don't return.
Given all of this, I return to my original question: "Perhaps NPN needs a paradigm shift regarding HDR and more heavily manipulated images being more acceptable in the main critique galleries?" If there were such a shift, would folks who left come back? I don't know.
I wish I had a solution to the recruitment issue. I just looked at the Landscape gallery. An image I posted two weeks ago is still on the first page. That is not a good sign. Ideas regarding recruitment are welcome, and I will pass them on to Jim so that he can develop a plan that we can help implement.
Years ago, I stopped by my math professor's office speak with him. He had a poster on his wall that said, "Mathematics is not a spectator sport." Neither is NPN.
That said, I agree that the days when I could look at Guy Tal's or Marc Adamus' photos here and even get a comment from them occasionally were nice. But NPN still has something to offer, so I just renewed my membership a few days ago.
@ Basil, I've met both Marc and Guy in person at one time or another. Two extremely talented artists and also very personable individuals who were always willing to help out. Both have helped me on line with certain aspects of improving my own usage of PS early on. To date I still very much use a couple of their very willingly offered shared PS processes.
Your last sentence basically outlines where things are at this date and that is NPN still has something to offer.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on August 21, 2015 at 9:16 PM
Great thread, my thanks to Dave for starting it and to all for posting your thoughts.
I don't have much to add to the already excellent observations, other than to say that certain things run in cycles and sometimes what was old becomes new again. We'll keep looking for ways to make that happen for NPN.
Discussion
15 repliesI stumbled across this blog post from earlier this year by Sarah Marino that covers a lot of ground but I found it interesting how often she mentions NPN, how great it used to be, how it formed her development as a photographer and then she turns around and laments how it is "continuing to fade." The same sentiment is found in many, many of the comments on the post:
http://www.naturephotoguides.com/blog/photo-consumption-conformity
As a relative newbie NPN member of less than a year, although I lurked for several years before hand, it is strange how former members of NPN seem to look back on their experience here with fond memories yet don't return. I've also noticed how many of the photographers whose work I used to enjoy never seem to post much anymore, if at all. Higher profile sites such as 500px and Whytake have their own issues according to Sarah and, like her, I find Flickr and Facebook to be just too much volume without much value. I do very much value my time spent here. I guess I should just ask Sarah Marino why NPN is no longer worthy of her participation!
Anyway, I'm wondering if NPN members have theories as to why this has occurred over the last few years. I know there was a New Year's posting about everyone upping their game here but it either hasn't happened nor has it resulted in an obvious increase in new users.
Feel free to discuss...
Dave
Comment posted by Sarah Marino on 01/31/14 at 1:01 pm PST
Registered on 11/10/08, 23 Posts, 393 Comments
Dave, this was the only posted info on NPN I could find from the person you've mentioned. If the search engine is working correctly here at NPN then I'm not too clear as to why the member's other posts and comments did not show. However, that could be in the fact that there is a purge date on the system or maybe the recent upgrade did some kind of purge.
Regardless, if the info above is correct on the one comment I did find dated 01/31/14 the activity was very light between 11/10/08 to 01/31/14. I will say the persons C/P ratio was excellent, it is just the total activity for the number of years involved that is hard to figure out. Again, records might not be accurate and I can't say I recognize the person's name at all.
As far as the overall NPN site activity no doubt it is not the same it was years ago. With that also said NPN just hit 15 years on the air so to speak. So, there is still a draw for certain enthusiasts. I know I've been active over the years, but I have also been involved with an all ANALOG site in recent years as I'm one of the last hold outs here at NPN shooting nothing but film. So not an excuse, just splitting some time in another camp so to speak.
Hopefully others will see your post and comment as well. Sadly, that is another item that has dwindled over time as many folks these days ONLY post images and fail to aid in commenting as well as never visiting ANY of the forums. Without them doing that they will never even see your informative post here.
Dave,
I am one of those who has been on here for longer than seems apparent, as I actually changed accounts way back when, when NPN made some changes. I honestly cannot even remember what year that was.
If you look through the photography magazines, you will see the names of people who used to be here on NPN. Over the years we truly have had some talented folks on here, and they contributed much time and expertise. I suspect some of them went on to have such full time photography careers that they cannot fit this in. It's too bad, as I can still remember getting a particularly good critique from Guy Tal many years ago. I have never forgotten his advice. It shows the true value of commenting.
My own participation has changed as my lifestyle/job has changed over the last 8-10 years. For quite a while, I had the time to fully partcipate. I posted and commented several times a week. A job change happened, though, and between traveling and location, I have barely participated at all over the last several years. I get on here frequently and read the forums, and make as many comments as I have time for. Someday, I will have more time to get involved again. Yes NPN has changed in some ways, but the same intent is still here, and I still think it's a top notch site for those wanting to learn and hone their skills!
I will second what Genny said. My participation over the last couple years has been very low, also resulting from lifestyle/job changes. I've stayed involved in the PNW forum, though activity there has also dropped dramatically. I'm trying to spend more time on the site now, and pick up my camera more. I am still a big fan of the site and the willingness of people here to help others learn. I've been talking to others that have let their membership lapse and they say they are going to return. I hope so.
When I started using 500px, I was impressed by the exposure one could get - my best viewed photo on there has about 3000 views (ya, I'm not very good :) ), compared to maybe 300 here (confirming that I'm not very good :) ). But at some point, you realize that the people having a look at your photos here are actually interested in them (and you get useful comments), while on 500px, you get a lot of views and likes from people who actually don't care, but simply hope to attract you to their own photos. There are people who obviously go through dozens of photos and post the same comment about "great light... great composition... well done" to all of them, just to attract views to their pictures. So, well, I guess both sites have their place, one gives you more exposure, the other one gives you a more attentive audience and much, much more useful comments. YMMV.
That said, I agree that the days when I could look at Guy Tal's or Marc Adamus' photos here and even get a comment from them occasionally were nice. But NPN still has something to offer, so I just renewed my membership a few days ago.
This is currently on the 500px front page. Just sayin'...
https://500px.com/photo/118715925/horseshoe-bend-sunset-by-miki-macovei
If you have enough friends, you don't need quality.
Interesting blog post, including the author's and the responders' comments re NPN. I've been a member here since 2003. The loss of many of our most talented memebers is certainly unfortunate. I think it was due to several factors. First, as NPN members became successful pros, they did not need the exposure here, especially with the availability of other options. Two, they did not need and/or perhaps even want critiques of their work, particularly from others less qualified. Three, they understandably did not want to provide their uncompensated valuable time and instruction to others less able and/or willing to offer anything of value in return. With little to be gained, their time is better spent elsewhere.
All of this is perfectly understanable. What is unfortunate, however, is that the void created by departing pros has not been filled with up and comers. It takes time to thoughtfully analyze a photograph, and even more time and effort to write a meaningful, articulate, and tactful comment. In the day and age of instant everything, I guess it is easier to post away at sites that don't expect anything, except maybe mutual accolades or likes, in return.
I agree, Dave, that despite the many excellent changes that have been made to the site recently, I have not seen any increase in participation, at least in the galleries to which I pay the most attention. I am still hopeful that the changes will prove effective.
I read the comments on Sarah's post. What struck me was the number of names I recognized who were former NPN members. The other thing that struck me was the fondness they expressed for NPN.
When I started here just over 13 years ago, my images got thrashed by Guy Tal, Michael Gordon, and a few others. Sure, it was a little painful to read their comments, but I took their comments to heart and worked hard to put their ideas into practice. I think my work has made great strides due to those comments, and I continue to learn from the comments posted to my images here up to the present day.
In general, I think exposure is a good thing, but there is not a lot of learning going on. I have looked at 500px a few times (I've never posted there), and what I see is a lot of copy-cat work that Sarah alludes to in her article. It takes effort to really 'see' and to develop one's unique vision that carries across a body of work. Copying the style of another rings hollow to me. Sure, the work looks nice, and may receive lots of oohs and ahhs, but the photographer isn't living up to their own potential.
I think that a vast majority of people today want the instant gratification of "Great shot!". They don't really have a desire to be educated and develop their vision. Nor, do they want to take the time and effort to say something meaningful about an image created by someone else: It's real easy to say, "Great shot!" and then move on. It takes a great deal of effort to really 'see' an image for what it is and to write a critique that will be helpful.
With regard to NPN, we have all seen the exodus of members over the last few years. There are probably as many reasons why they left as there are individuals, but I think there are three main reasons. First, people want views and exposure. Second, I think many feel they have progressed beyond the critique stage of their work. Third, folks left NPN because the site's design and image size limits were lacking compared to other sites.
So, how do we recruit former members to return? How do we recruit new members? How, do we guarantee a return on their investment of their membership fee?
Dave, the thread you mentioned ("Stepping Up the Game") in your original post was started by me. I was upset by the number of views vs. lack of any comments on an image I had posted, as well as for the Landscape gallery in general. Unfortunately, that thread went away after the 35 day time limit, but it received a huge number of comments and ideas that were ultimately the catalyst for the redesign of NPN.
At this juncture, I believe that previous members are unaware that NPN has been redesigned for the better. To me, at least, apart from the educational value of NPN, that is a major marketing point that needs to be taken advantage of.
Paul makes an excellent point about folks not reading the posts, or making posts in the discussion forums. Photography is about much more that just posting an image for exposure.
So, it appears that we do indeed need to "Step Up the Game" in terms of really utilizing the incredible potential that NPN has to offer!
--P
Hi Preston, your suggestion via e-mail that this discussion be moved by Jim to the General forum pages for wider participation is worthwhile. It was my thought when I posted that this conversation may be disconcerting to non-members who may be debating whether to join. I recall right after I joined that a long-time member posted how they were seriously considering letting their membership lapse and I wondered if I had just jumped onto a sinking ship! That member ultimately decided to stay... can't recall who it was at this moment. So that was the reason why I stuck this in the Members Only forum.
I concur that the migration away is most often people out growing their need for the site and its feedback. Like I said, I lurked here for many years honing my abilities and absorbing information from the members so that when I did finally join I felt like I could fully participate. I would have been extremely reticent, early on, to criticize images by full-time nature photographer professionals that were beyond anything I could do.
The downside I suppose is that I've probably become consciously and/or sub-consciously part of the NPN "style," whatever that may be. For me I mostly see "honest" straight up photography with a throttle on the manipulation in processing; e.g., critiques will often mention when an image feels over-saturated to the point of being unnatural. Also there is not a lot of over-the-top HDR photography. This fits with how I perceive nature photography should be done. YMMV of course and I actually don't mind seeing people pushing the envelope if that is where their artistic vision is taking them. Perhaps that is why the site is struggling to attract new members because, as most of us have seen, that is where nature photography seems to have gone. A budding photographer and potential NPN member may not be seeing the kind of images that are currently in vogue elsewhere.
Anyway I guess Jim or other higher up can make that call whether to move this thread.
Dave, your thought about keeping this discussion in the Lounge is a good one. So, keeping it here works for me.
Now, this is just my personal opinion, but I think feedback, regardless of the photographic skill set of the person providing it, is valuable. So, a person who leaves because they feel they no longer need critiques is disallowing themselves the opportunity for further reflection about their work and the continued growth of it. Sure, I can look at my own work and see where I'm falling short in some aspect of a particular image, but my self-critique is not infallible, so I seek the help of others so that I can learn. There is no one among us who should ever stop learning by saying, "Good enough." We should be asking, "How can this be better?"
I agree that there is a trend toward HDR and hyper-saturated images such as the one Basil linked to above. I've been doing photography for a long time--my fingernails still show the effects of fixer. Photography is by it's nature a "departure from reality", as Ansel Adams put it, but I think there's a tendency to stretch images beyond believability in some circles. Yes, there is an ethos here at NPN that encourages 'believability'. NPN is a sort of cross between journalistic photography and fine art photography, so heavily manipulated images get commented upon in a negative fashion. Our PhotoArt gallery was created for those images that exceed 'believability'.
Perhaps NPN needs a paradigm shift regarding HDR and more heavily manipulated images being more acceptable in the main critique galleries? I am not advocating such a change. I only bring it up as a point for discussion.
I hope other members will see this thread and add their comments.
--P
Preston - I think NPN used to be "more saturated" than it currently is. I've just checked the current crop of landscape photos, and yes, I really do think it used to be punchier. I remember discussions about the pros and cons of it in the "old" (not so old) days. However, I've rarely seen too much negativity here regarding punchy photos, so I don't think we need to worry.
Just for the record - I don't think that saturation is the problem of that other photo I linked to. ;-)
Basil - it should be noted that the image you linked to is pretty much the only landscape I saw from him. The bulk of his images were labelled "Adult Content" so I can see how his interpretation of Horseshoe Bend might tend towards the, um, racy.
While we're at it:
https://500px.com/photo/118579257/four-hundred-layers-by-marc-adamus
Read the comment from Jason Chong (and in particular the replies from Marc and Kory).
It's a pity that so many look back with fond memories, but don't return.
Hi Basil,
I think you made a great observation that NPN's images tended to greater saturation than is the case today. But, I do recall some negative comments on certain images that went past some arbitrary limit, and in one case, the person actually left NPN because of it. I wonder if potential new members looking at the more recent images posted in the Landscape gallery feel that their style doesn't fit and/or their work will receive negative comments? One could also ask the same question regarding folks who have left NPN?
I just looked at Marc's image, but couldn't see any comments. If the comments are on FaceBook, I can't see them because I don't use FB. Yes, it is a pity that many look back with fondness for NPN and don't return.
Given all of this, I return to my original question: "Perhaps NPN needs a paradigm shift regarding HDR and more heavily manipulated images being more acceptable in the main critique galleries?" If there were such a shift, would folks who left come back? I don't know.
I wish I had a solution to the recruitment issue. I just looked at the Landscape gallery. An image I posted two weeks ago is still on the first page. That is not a good sign. Ideas regarding recruitment are welcome, and I will pass them on to Jim so that he can develop a plan that we can help implement.
Years ago, I stopped by my math professor's office speak with him. He had a poster on his wall that said, "Mathematics is not a spectator sport." Neither is NPN.
--P
@ Basil, I've met both Marc and Guy in person at one time or another. Two extremely talented artists and also very personable individuals who were always willing to help out. Both have helped me on line with certain aspects of improving my own usage of PS early on. To date I still very much use a couple of their very willingly offered shared PS processes.
Your last sentence basically outlines where things are at this date and that is NPN still has something to offer.
Great thread, my thanks to Dave for starting it and to all for posting your thoughts.
I don't have much to add to the already excellent observations, other than to say that certain things run in cycles and sometimes what was old becomes new again. We'll keep looking for ways to make that happen for NPN.