New Digest Layout: Not a fan of this.

KTJohnson Loc: Northern Michigan

Not a fan of this.

AirWalter Loc: Tipp City, Ohio

KTJohnson wrote:

Not a fan of this.

Not at all!

williejoha

Not at all happy with this
WJH

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Me either

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Tucker Loc: Derry, NH

I agree, not a fan of this.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Tucker wrote:

I agree, not a fan of this.

KTJohnson Loc: Northern Michigan

Admin moved my post to “ General Chit Chat”, (non photography talk). It should not be here.

This whole site is about photography, and my comment is about the way things on this site are presented.

I just thought Admin should know that at least some of us here think this new direction is a bad move.

Of course, that is only my personal opinion, for whatever that’s worth.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

KTJohnson wrote:

Admin moved my post to “ General Chit Chat”, (non photography talk). It should not be here.

This whole site is about photography, and my comment is about the way things on this site are presented.

I just thought Admin should know that at least some of us here think this new direction is a bad move.

Of course, that is only my personal opinion, for whatever that’s worth.

Your opinion is related to personal viewing preferences. The sections themselves haven't changed.

If it makes you feel any better, there are now at least 14 topics about the digest changes as I write this. All are in chit-chat.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Linda From Maine wrote:

Your opinion is related to personal viewing preferences. The sections themselves haven't changed.

If it makes you feel any better, there are now at least 14 topics about the digest changes as I write this. All are in chit-chat.

Well, I guess that’s one way to generate posts. I do get from admin’s explanation that he is trying to move this site to a younger audience that glance at their phones periodically as opposed to those that have the time to sit and read the morning paper. That may have unintended consequences. I don’t have the data to support my supposition, but my guess is that younger audiences tend to buy cellphones, not cameras. So if the goal is to have lots of images taken by cellphones, then maybe a win, but if you want a site that focuses on photographic skills and technical expertise, populated by a cohort that has the time (and money) to focus on expensive photography gear, then maybe not a winning strategy. We’ll see.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

TriX wrote:

Well, I guess that’s one way to generate posts. I ... (show quote)

Maybe the goal is to have more young people do photography. I did presentations at school Monday and yesterday and had four kids say they wanted to learn how...

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

larryepage wrote:

Maybe the goal is to have more young people do photography. I did presentations at school Monday and yesterday and had four kids say they wanted to learn how...

Maybe. My son teaches HS graphics and photography and runs the yearbook, and he is busy growing photographers that know how to use cameras. The proceeds from the yearbook (which the students produce, supervised by him) goes to buy new equipment. They have a lab with 25 shiny new macs and maybe a dozen cameras for the students to use - everything from FF Canons to Fujis. His classes are full. Their current graphic project is producing posters for a national band. The classes lead to Adobe certifications, and every year some of his students are accepted to nationally known design schools, so there’s hope.