11 February, 2005

AW Space Savers

After just reading that AW is going limit free members to 3 posting a month. I said..OK.

But if you really want to save space, eliminate members who haven't been active in a year.

Limit "Premium" members to 10 post a months..maxium.

These 15 to 35 post a day by one person is absurd!

Restrict the size of ALL portfolio's to 100 150 images per year.

Most members have an e-mail or their own site where they can be contacted.

There is no need to have 200, 300, 400 pictures in one portfolio.

I manage a couple of sites, and once a member is not active, posting on the boards or their portfolio, they get eliminated, but they can still reapply to join back.

No need to keep dead weight around if you're trying to save space and the member(s) aren't participating is there?

Just a few suggestion from this "Freebie" until you change your policies.

Reply

13 Comments

Andrew Liberto 11 Feb 2005

As a paying member, I agree with RQ. Dead weight and over stuffed portfolios have to be taking up some space. Limit everyone.

Also, whenever I sell my art, It's gone. I don't have it in my 'real life' portfolio. I'm sure that's not the case with online portfolios. Maybe a periodic cleaning of older images is needed to trim the fat even more.

Christina Toews 11 Feb 2005

I agree. Capping all portfolios is a great idea. Of course, you can't really expect to go back and tell someone to *delete* most of their portfolio, if they already have, say... 300 images in there. It would be great to have an "effective today" policy, stating the current cap per month or year or whatever.

Still, if we're going to limit premier memberships even further, we run into the whole issue in a previous post. Go read "I know I'll get slammed for this one..." by me. :) We're trying to generate more premium memberships for AW, not make people think there's even *less* to get as a premium member.

Going and deleting old accounts - EXCELLENT idea! A year though? That's too long... this is a very active site, with a lot of us active every day or every other day. A lot of sites (Hotmail for example) will shut down your account after 30 days of no activity. If we could find a reasonable time frame (3 months?) and make a policy that you have to have logged into your memeber's area at least once every 3 months... then AW would be able to free up a LOT of bandwidth by deleting these accounts that people have obviously posted and forgot about.

I'm interested to see what AW has to say about this one... seems like a GREAT idea to me. :)

sher richardson 11 Feb 2005

..we have people that post regularly nearly 10 images daily, RQ.. : )

There would be an all out riot if a cap of 10 a month or even 20 a month...

i'm lucky to get 10 a month of anything out..so i dont have a problem with it... i'd support a cap but i think it wont happen....i believe AW addressed that once before...

Its gonna get real interesting once the membership hits 20,000... i think AW said they are at 15,000 members? even though it doesnt show up as that...

RQ Trietsch 11 Feb 2005

Just curious...how many are Premium members from the PG schools? Or how much do the schools pay to be a member? Is each kid a free account or a premium account or is it group rate?

Who monitors the school kids and their veiwing and postings? Is this an art site in schools to be accessed for a learning vessels...for the mentors of their pupils and if so at what grade level are they?

Why haven't we heard any feed back from the "mentors" from the schools on the boards about how much or little this site has enlightened and helped in the ongoing learning of the arts?

It appears to me it's just an open posting with know supervision from the "art" teachers, but just click onto this site and post away.

Just curious questions, and thinking about wasted space and lack of participation from those whom seem to hold AW by the Cahoonies!

RQ Trietsch 11 Feb 2005

I really don't have a rebuttal Sher, except, how many shots are on a roll of film, and how many pictures can you save on a digital card, and think they are all worth posting?

I think most people would only present their best works if they were limited.

Yes I know there are some artist out there that think they can mass produce in an hour or two, but I say...yup...an hour or two, it shows.

Gayla Drummond 11 Feb 2005

Uh uh....take away my unlimited uploads, and I'm out of here. That was the first attractor to this site for me....I wanted to try it out (for like 3 days) before I started paying for it.

I don't upload daily, and I like having the freedom not to do so...to be able to upload 5 images when I have 5 images done.

Or to be able to change my mind and upload 2 a day for a while, if I want to.

Additionally, putting a cap on the number of images per portfolio is just an open invitation for every member to manipulate their average artist rating, because who's going to leave any of their lower rated images in their portfolio with something like that in effect?

RQ Trietsch 11 Feb 2005

At least it's not 10 or 20 at a time Gayla.

I understand and appreciate what you are saying but some just abuse it with showings of nothing but old works or 4 or 5 different color variations of the same post.

If anyone really thinks they have that many that are art worthy of posting in one day on a daily basis then i think they have an insecurity problem.

I would just like to see more post of quality than quanity...and i sure don't want to hear it only took me an hour or so to create this masterpiece!

But it was just a suggestion thrown out there for AW to consider, so I doubt if anything will change in the near future, except for people getting fed up with the process and bailing as some have already done.

I don't think ratings should be a major protocol, or anyones major emphasis to showing their works.

It's all about showing your talents or lack of and learning from others what they do or don't like, and expanding your horizons.

But if it's a popularity contest you want...Welcome to AW

Andrew Liberto 11 Feb 2005

That was my thought exactly RQ. Quality over quantity. Why would anyone think that by loading 300 pieces of art on here, they have a better chance of selling their art or advance their career or probability of getting into art school, etc. Most buyers, collectors, galleries, art schools, whatever, will judge you on the first 10 pieces they see in a portfolio. I really think this site is better served for all, if we keep our art current and to a minimum. It will force most to put up their best and encourage even more to produce their best. I could load hundreds of drawings here tomorrow if I wanted. What good does that do to the site or to me? It really doesn't help anyone at all.

Gayla Drummond 11 Feb 2005

RQ, you reminded me of something that happened to me right after the ratings system was reactivated.

Like I said, unlimited uploads and portfolio images attracted me to AW in the first place, and I candidly admit I went overboard for about a month after that. I had several older images, in addition to the new work I was doing, and I uploaded many and often.

I started getting gobsmacked with low ratings...and at that time, I was getting a lot of Top Ten placements (because I was uploading so many at a time). I ran a little test...uploaded not more than 3 images a day a few times...no low ratings. Uploaded 9 one day, had 2s, 3s, & 4s coming out my ears.

I changed my uploading habits, because I didn't want ratings based on people being pissed I was uploading so many at a time.

Something for those who get several low ratings to consider if they also upload a lot of images at a time.

As for portfolio limits, I'd made the decision a long time ago to not have more than 300 images in my portfolio at a time, and to select those to be removed based on the number of views they were getting. Highly viewed ones stay, lower viewed ones go. I pull a few every three months or so, and haven't yet hit that 300 mark I set for myself.

My concern is more for those who've been members here for years, that have built up their portfolios to amazing proportions. Your portfolio can sort of tell a story of your improvement as time goes by, after all.

Perhaps it might be ridiculous to some for a portfolio to have 300 images, or 700 images...but it might not be ridiculous to that particular portfolio owner, who paid for the privilege of being able to have as many as they wanted.

BTW, and I know this wasn't necessarily directed at me or any particular person, but I do not upload every single piece I finish to here. Some don't get uploaded anywhere because I think they suck, some are for specific usage, some are just for my website,etc. I probably upload maybe 35% of my work here. =)

"Going and deleting old accounts - EXCELLENT idea!" That, I fully agree with. Abandoned portfolios are dead weight.

Andrew Liberto 12 Feb 2005

Gayla, Hi, I think even those people who have built their portfolios to amazing proportions would agree to let a few older images go for the sake of conserving space on the site and therefore make it more affordable for everyone as time goes by and costs rise. It would also increase the quality of the art posted. It's better for everyone, kiddies and pro's alike.

N. Michael Bryant 12 Feb 2005

RQ, you raised a good point about the school supervision getting involved when children form classes observe the site. I have wondered that same question and would be interested in knowing if any stats were available. Also, I was wondering if there was a will-and-a-way to tapping into the Art classrooms in schools. Where teachers and students could actually communicate with Artists on the site. This could promote the site and generate much interest in the art field if Teachers and Students knew they could network with us all. Just a thought.


ArtWanted.com Staff 12 Feb 2005

Thanks for the suggestions everyone, your ideas will get some good consideration.

Removing inactive members is a good idea. On one hand, the more members and images a site has, the better it is, but on the other, it is taking up room that can be given to other members. We will think about a time frame and let everyone know.

As our goal is to increase premium membership, we don't feel putting limits on what is uploaded will help us in that direction. Because these members are paying for images & bandwith with their account, we have no need to limit them, because they are the ones that are supporting the site and paying for what they use.

As far as school go, we don't have any automated tracking on schools and what is being done to their accounts. We get e-mails all the time from teachers saying that they are promoting our site in their classes, but we don't record which accounts are school accounts and which are not. Something to be considered.

Thanks again for your suggestions, keep them coming.

Maggi Carstairs 13 Feb 2005

As a teacher, I think giving teachers a spot to promote student work would be a good idea, but keep it as a student and teacher site only. Maybe a separate area like the 'Critiques or art discusson area where teachers cxan post student wotk for anyone to critique or comment on.

Reply