Upcoming forum changes: investing in our community's future

MAC said:

Sagittarius said:

jjbinx said:

If you can do it, DISABLE threaded view just for this thread and then let’s see how well YOU can work with it.

Or better still, disable threaded view for all of the forums for 48 hours and see how well it goes

Click to expand...

I do not use threaded view ever (for 20 years) and it goes quite well.

Click to expand...

Well, the voting thread shows up to 60% of the community is looking at leaving over this.

Click to expand...

ahaslett said:

Mathew Anderson said:

BryanHL said:

Mathew Anderson said:

It would likely have split into multiple separate actual topic threads long ago in that view, instead of remaining as a growing conglomerate here.

Click to expand...

With all due respect Mathew, yes there will be those with consideration / comprehension who create new threads but there are many who just blaze away and reply to the original. Those are the very posts that Threaded View make it easy to ignore. But even then, you will have heaps of new threads, all relating in some way to the original, but are separate...

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater...

Click to expand...

You make a valid point!

Click to expand...

You are always going to get people using Flat View who respond directly to the OP with “I haven’t read the posts, but…”

If they get upvoted, they are worth a look, otherwise usually not.

You could force people to only respond to the OP, so the discussion is flat. Then you could allow people to start a new thread by responding to the OP with a change of title. You would need to be able to navigate back through threads by using links.

That would increase the number of threads on front pages and add texture to titles. A sophisticated approach would be to mark new parent posts as original and new daughters as responses spawned by title changes.

Discussions are trees unless you want everything to be flat. It all depends what kind of discussions and what kind of content you are trying to encourage.

Andrew

Click to expand...

grsnovi said:

anotherMike said:

But for the love of the holy, please be consistent and please think long and hard about looking at moderator decisions and root out the bias. I could name a couple who have absolutely no business being moderators,

Click to expand...

One in particular, no point in suggesting which forum...

Click to expand...

Ralf B said:

Having posted in this thread has resulted in notifications galore, which often show one point for improvement: A single notification informing about multiple responses to a thread leads to only one of these responses when clicking it. Hence, finding the next new response isn't supported by the notification as of now. In a thread as busy as this, that is lost information.

Maybe have separate links to all new responses in a notification about them?
Cheers,
Ralf

Click to expand...

Bill Ferris said:

BryanHL said:

I can understand your motivations for making a change.

However:

It is such a backwards step to go to FLAT VIEW ONLY.

Threaded view is imperative in threads that have lots of responses and where sub-threads about certain points evolve.

With Flat View IT IS IMPOSSIBLE to follow the conversation without wasting heaps of time scrolling up and down trying to work out who replied to what comment. And then there are those that make comments without quoting - to which post were they referring??? With threaded view it is clear. Flat view it just becomes a jumbled mess!!!

Click to expand...

Hi Bryan, I can certainly understand your concern over the default flat view display of XenForo forums. I've been on DPR since 2013 and am personally a fan of the threaded display option here.

That said, I'm a dedicated wildlife and bird photographer. For about 6 months, I've been active on Steve Perry's (the wildlife photog; not the rock vocalist) Backcountry Gallery forum, which is built on the XenForo platform.

It did take some time for me to adjust to a flat view thread display. However, now that I'm used to it, flat view doesn't prevent me from following discussions, their evolution, and staying involved in the topics that interest me. Obviously, I don't speak for anybody other than myself. However, I would encourage you to take Dale's ask to heart: give the new site a try when it goes public, see what you think, and most definitely offer your feedback on the user experience once you've had some time to test drive it.

I'm a co-mod in the Fujifilm X System forum and, along with the other forum moderators and DPR staff, have been exploring and kicking the tires on a test environment version of the new DPR site. I find the overall design, organization, and user interface to be very familiar.

Some of the new features that I like include group chat, more options for filtering displayed messages, and more emoji options when reacting to a message.

I know Dale and the DPR team want to create more platforms for featuring member content. Moderators will have the ability to pin posts atop a forum page. There are also built-in tools on a XenForo site making it easy for a member to peruse recently uploaded images, to react and comment on those images. This is something I really like about the Backcountry Gallery forums and is a feature I believe will add a nice element of member interactivity to the DPR experience.

Bill Ferris said:

When DPR was going to close, I joined one of the new emergent forums. It didn't use Xenforo but was similarly Flat View only. All the users continually complained - "We need Threaded View".

Max image size: Xenforo has a max image size of 1600 x 1600 px. Not being able to view an image in its native size means you just can't see the detail in those really good images. Then you might as well have just used a smartphone. What's the point of having a good capable camera when you can't showcase the quality of your images???

Click to expand...

I can share that the test environment allows much larger images than 1600 x 1600 pixels to be uploaded. I've personally uploaded a 13986 x 4847 pixel JPEG of a stitched pano. The file is 21.3MB in size. I've also test uploaded an 8256 x 5504 JPEG (9.3MB) from a processed Z9 file. The image quality at screen resolution is very good. Viewed at 100%, the images display at about 80% of the quality I see when viewing photos at 100% in LrC.

Bill Ferris said:

The Xenforo maintainers have a really stubborn attitude to this max image size. They speak as if "Who would want more than 1MP"? Well Bill Gates once said "Who needs more than 640KB"? Look at windows now. 16GB minimum.

This may be a gear oriented site but there are still many who like to showcase their results. I am also on a Xenforo site. I find myself sometimes cropping in really tight so that people can see the detail - makes a mockery of composition when you have to cut out most of the background.

I am rather surprised that the decision was made without forum member input. I know there will always be some dissatisfied no matter what choice you make. But I would have thought getting a consensus first would have been the smarter move....

Not happy jan...

Click to expand...

It can be easy to think of Dale, Scott, Mathew and DPR staff only as administrators of the site. As Dale mentioned in a recent post, he was a member long before he joined the professional staff at DPR. Mathew applied for and came to DPR, in part, because of his experience as a member. Working with them on this project, I have come to appreciate their commitment to making DPR better prepared for a future it has the potential to enjoy.

Yes, the first 25+ years for DPR have been remarkable. This site is among the most trusted sources on the web. Digital photography has undergone so much change over the last decade, as have the practitioners of this medium. When Dale says the forums need a new platform to enable new content and user experiences, I believe him.

Click to expand...

Bill Ferris said:

The new site will take some getting used to, but it will also open new doors to how members are able to interact with the site and each other.

Click to expand...

Bill Ferris said:

I'm gonna make the same ask as Dale. Let's give the new site a chance, test drive it for a bit, and offer candid & constructive feedback on how it can be better. If we come together to help make this migration a success, that will be something we all can take pride in.

Click to expand...

Mathew Anderson said:

Rodenmg said:

Will this upgrade include in-forum advertisements that users will need to subscribe/pay to get rid of?

Click to expand...

Great question! The ad system will work like it currently does.

Click to expand...

sludge21017 said:

tbcass said:

Dale Baskin said:

sludge21017 said:

I checked out the two links. They both appear to be "flat" style forums. DPR's threaded view is very powerful - it allows you to work through sub threads and asides that develop organically within larger threads while ignoring other side branches you are not interested in; and it quickly allows you to see new posts in those side branches. Flat forums are ok sometimes for rapidly scanning posts without the need to click but very unwieldy in large threads. Not a lot of modern forums pay attention to threaded views, it's one of the best features of DPR.

One change that I would like to see is the ability to preview and edit a post before posting. With DPR I often find myself in the middle of re-editing a live post, then finding it blocked because someone beat me to it and responded before I completed my edits. I'd also like to be able to select and embed multiple images in one go rather than one at a time.

Click to expand...

For a long time, our forums have provided two views: threaded view and flat view. We completely understand how valuable the current threaded view has been, and we know many of you have grown used to navigating conversations that way. In fact, I prefer the threaded view myself.

Interesting fact: The majority of DPReview forum users actually use the flat view. I realize that's not helpful to those who prefer threaded view, but I want to provide that perspective.

Click to expand...

Since the default DPR view is flat it's likely that many users don't even know there is a threaded view. For that reason the fact that most users use flat view is misleading.

Click to expand...

I just tried threaded. I've seen it before via google search and perhaps not being logged in. YUCK.

Back to flat for me!

Click to expand...

Sagittarius said:

tbcass said:

mfinley said:

tbcass said:

While I may not quit altogether my participation will surely diminish with flat view

Click to expand...

For someone with 64,000 posts, I'll put that statement in the I'll believe it when I see it box.

Click to expand...

Believe it. Remember it took me 20 years to get those 64000 posts so it's not that many per day.

Sagittarius said:

Nobody offers threaded view anymore. It was nice when gas was .29 cents a gallon but things move on.

Click to expand...

Very often the old way is the best.

Click to expand...

With this philosophy progress would never happen. :-(

Click to expand...

Ralf B said:

Greg. said:

if it ain't broke, don't fix it

Anywho… if you are determined to mess with these boards, you should employ web designers who can implement the Threaded View feature, as it has always been an important part of these forums since day one. The vast majority of members here use desktop computers.

Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing this AI search result which - tah dah - implies that yes, XenForo CAN indeed support threaded view. And also supports that "threaded" view enhances - tah dah- readability. Who would have thunk?

Here is wondering how much research effort was spent at DPR core staff when deciding which features to offer in the new format:

• Is it the extra cost somewhere caused by adding on an add-on which would enable threaded view (due to more server/cloud bandwidth/storage or whatever needed, I have no idea) so that flat-view-only limit was based on a consciously made commercial decison to save costs?
• or just lazyness along something like "Let's pick XenForo as everbody does it"?

Cheers,
Ralf

Click to expand...

Ken53 said:

Life is too short to waste time with the ball and chain effect of using the flat view. Less screen time, more time to spend in the field.

Click to expand...

Billiam29 said:

Would I be correct in assuming that with the move to XenForo we will have at least some support for UBB code formatting of our posts?

In particular, if you have a choice on which UBB code tags to support and which to omit, I would like to humbly request that

Code:

 and [ICODE] be supported. They may not seem like something necessary for a photo-centric forum but they would likely be quite useful in the computing forums.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, XenForo supports BB code (aka UBB code). I just checked, and it looks like both of those tags are currently enabled on our staging site.

Click to expand...

MAC said:

Sagittarius said:

jjbinx said:

If you can do it, DISABLE threaded view just for this thread and then let’s see how well YOU can work with it.

Or better still, disable threaded view for all of the forums for 48 hours and see how well it goes

Click to expand...

I do not use threaded view ever (for 20 years) and it goes quite well.

Click to expand...

Well, the voting thread shows up to 60% of the community is looking at leaving over this.

They seem to have already sunk their future on this change.

I wonder if they've alerted the parent company on potential substantial loss of site hits and revenue

If it were my company, I'd tell the new site developers that until we have threaded view, we're not implementing, versus telling us they've asked that it be a future option - well future implementation doesn't generate site hits and revenues needed now.

Click to expand...

jjbinx said:

If you can do it, DISABLE threaded view just for this thread and then let’s see how well YOU can work with it.

Or better still, disable threaded view for all of the forums for 48 hours and see how well it goes

Click to expand...

Bill Ferris said:

I can share that the test environment allows much larger images than 1600 x 1600 pixels to be uploaded. I've personally uploaded a 13986 x 4847 pixel JPEG of a stitched pano. The file is 21.3MB in size. I've also test uploaded an 8256 x 5504 JPEG (9.3MB) from a processed Z9 file. The image quality at screen resolution is very good. Viewed at 100%, the images display at about 80% of the quality I see when viewing photos at 100% in LrC.

Click to expand...

Mathew Anderson said:

ahaslett said:

Mathew Anderson said:

BryanHL said:

Mathew Anderson said:

It would likely have split into multiple separate actual topic threads long ago in that view, instead of remaining as a growing conglomerate here.

Click to expand...

With all due respect Mathew, yes there will be those with consideration / comprehension who create new threads but there are many who just blaze away and reply to the original. Those are the very posts that Threaded View make it easy to ignore. But even then, you will have heaps of new threads, all relating in some way to the original, but are separate...

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater...

Click to expand...

You make a valid point!

Click to expand...

You are always going to get people using Flat View who respond directly to the OP with “I haven’t read the posts, but…”

If they get upvoted, they are worth a look, otherwise usually not.

You could force people to only respond to the OP, so the discussion is flat. Then you could allow people to start a new thread by responding to the OP with a change of title. You would need to be able to navigate back through threads by using links.

That would increase the number of threads on front pages and add texture to titles. A sophisticated approach would be to mark new parent posts as original and new daughters as responses spawned by title changes.

Discussions are trees unless you want everything to be flat. It all depends what kind of discussions and what kind of content you are trying to encourage.

Andrew

Click to expand...

It would help if everyone retitled their sub-topics each time something split. I personally have a difficult time navigating a thread such as this one, because I have to click on every post anyway to see what it's all about. That's my problem though.

If everything were labeled differently, that'd help, but then we're back to having separate threads in part anyway, just meshed into one massive thread like this one has become. Useful in some ways, but essentially its own forum at this point.

Click to expand...

Scottelly said:

Have you all considered what the change will do to your rankings on search engines? Currentky DPR is the highest ranked forum in search engines almost every time I search for something related to photography or photographic equipment. It would be a shame to lose that status.

Click to expand...

ishwanu said:

Bill Ferris said:

I can share that the test environment allows much larger images than 1600 x 1600 pixels to be uploaded. I've personally uploaded a 13986 x 4847 pixel JPEG of a stitched pano. The file is 21.3MB in size. I've also test uploaded an 8256 x 5504 JPEG (9.3MB) from a processed Z9 file. The image quality at screen resolution is very good. Viewed at 100%, the images display at about 80% of the quality I see when viewing photos at 100% in LrC.

Click to expand...

How about an explanation of that? Is it about compression? Does it mean all files will be further compressed when they're uploaded, or only some files will be further compressed based on dimensions and/or file size?

Click to expand...

ishwanu said:

Can some examples be shown to all members so we can see whether 80% is good enough or not?

Click to expand...