The Online Photographer

Check out our new site at www.theonlinephotographer.com!

Sunday, January 21, 2007

Please Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood

Regarding the post "Do Photography Websites Need to Grow Up?", below, I should probably add that I'm only talking in the abstract. I'm not even remotely considering trying such a thing myself. I could never in a million years pull it off, and besides, the more I think about it, the more I like T.O.P. just as it is. I think it could be slightly improved in terms of its interface, and I might take a stab at that some day, but otherwise the only major change it could undergo would be if someone were to offer me a real job and I'd no longer have time for it. But that's all. For the foreseeable future, I suspect it will go merrily on just as it has been—free, and rather easy.

Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON

11 Comments:

Blogger Phojo Nick said...

This is the sound a huge sigh of relief makes on the internet

...

Didn't you hear it? ;;)

8:57 PM  
Blogger stanco said...

In this homogenized, oversized McWalbucks world, I'll take small and idiosyncratic everytime...

10:26 PM  
Blogger Robin P said...

Hooray!
Thanks for the reassurance Mike.

Cheers, Robin

2:49 AM  
Blogger Bryce said...

A good choice on your part!

And a good feeling is felt here too.

7:38 AM  
Blogger Bryce said...

Thank You

Your clarification helps considerably!

7:40 AM  
Blogger Player said...

Mike, I was going to post this on your editorial blog about websites needing to grow up, but I ended up deleting it. The gist of it is that I, like lots of people here I'm sure, need another bill to pay like we need a proverbial hole in our heads.

One of the major things I've always appreciated about the Internet is that it's one of the last fun things you can do without dropping a lot of cash. Especially as photographers, with a never-ending list of equipment, software, computer, and travel expenses, I think most of us would be resistant to paying a fee to access a site. I know the view from your side of the fence is different, but to make this a pay site, even with much more content, I think you'd lose quite a few readers in the process.

I'm not so sure about the "solo practitioner" versus a corporate approach, but it seems that your site is a solo enterprise, but with a galaxy of photographic stars contributing, which separates your site from the prototypical individual run site, somewhat mirroring your corporate ideas. The best of both worlds perhaps.

8:10 AM  
Blogger tsea said...

So far, TOP and its links out into the rest of Cyberspace has been the single most informative and entertaining source of photography news and oppinions I've found on the net.
In that regards, Thanks!

8:54 AM  
Blogger Michael Canyes said...

What player said . . . A case in point might be Galbraith's old forum. I'm not going to pay them anything since most of the same people post on the free forums. Besides, It doesn't look like the forum is doing all that well - correct me if I'm wrong.

However, TOP has somewhat unique content and it is much more interesting than reading about calibrating a monitor one more time. Hopefully the adds, prints, etc. will keep TOP going, but I would not be averse to a PayPal contribution button or something like that.

9:16 AM  
Blogger Ken Tanaka said...

Indeed, the former Rob Galbraith forum site, now known as ProPhotoHome, has become a sleepy place since it changed to a subscription model. There are just too many free photo yak sites out there to make such a subscription model remotely viable. I supported Drew (the new owner) but I don't see subscriptions as a future model for any of these enthusiast sites.

My personal resolution this year is to spend far less time looking at / participating in any photo sites. TOP often makes for interesting reading but I'm largely done spending much time on most other personal blogs and photo yak fora. They're wastes of time. It's far more productive and enjoyable to actually spend the time -DOING- photography and other photo-related activities.

12:46 PM  
Blogger David Emerick said...

Are you familiar with

d

1:55 PM  
Blogger Daniel Sroka said...

Consolidation into professional associations works when the professionals are all performing the same activity, and are relativiely interchangeable. You may prefer one doctor's personality over another, but if he's not available on the day you visit, you won't turn down seeing his partner. But I believe that consolidating photography websites couldn't work as well. The world of "photography" is just too diverse: there are too many styles, uses, methods, and attitudes out there. Every attempt I've seen to make a unified photographic resource (such as the national photography magazines) usually end up being too bland and generic, because they have to take the middle road.

The wonderful thing about small, idiosyncratic photo sites (like this one) is that they reflect both the personality of the author(s) and their specific style/taste in photography. This lets readers explore the web until they find a site that best matches their own tastes and style.

9:02 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home