Upcoming forum changes: investing in our community's future

tbcass said:

BryanHL said:

This is all about conversation. There will never be anything static about a discussion and new sub-topics will naturally occur.

The fact that in this forum we can change the title is irrelevant. Even if the title couldn't be changed people will still bring up new points.

Another example might be where someone posts an exceptional pic. All sorts of discussion follows and some may be about SS and motion blur. Another sub-thread will be about fstop and DoF. Someone else will discuss ISO and noise.

The whole point about Threaded View is that those sub-topics are kept grouped together for easy on-topic perusal. Would it be silly to suggest people create new threads re SS, fstop and ISO? Should they then re-post the OP's pic for reference? It's just the same here in this thread. All discussion (well the vast majority of it) is relevant to the OP. So it is on topic and logically belongs to this thread.

I get that some are happy in flat view if at least because they don't have to wait for page re-loads.

But there is seriously no logic to suggest a whole bunch of new threads when they are in essence still pertinent to the OP.

And the people (many - currently > 50% in the poll) who use the utility of Threaded view are quite correct to voice their concerns. I don't think those concerns can be argued against in any logical way.

If they are ignored - well there may be a shell left, but it won't be in anyway the same place...

Click to expand...

I suspect people that prefer Flat view haven't used threaded view enough to realize the advantages. As some have said, most forums use only flat mode so it stands to reason many people simply aren't used to threaded and are put off by it when they see it. I have seen some say they tried threaded, didn't like it and switched back without really giving it a chance. I myself have posted in forums with both over the years and have enough experience to see the advantages and disadvantages of each. Threaded mode encourages further discussion between people while flat mode is more about someone simply giving their opinion and moving on.

Click to expand...

I grew up with Threaded View. My first experience was the Usenet Groups in the mid '90s. The interface was the best implementation I have seen with collapsible / expandable view. For years I used Thunderbird as my email client and it was the same. I was forced to use microsoft mail in one office I worked in and the default was flat. They didn't even group replies (apparently because too many couldn't understand nested replies - seriously!) and it was my first experience of flat view - fortunately there was a Threaded option buried in the settings.

Threaded Mode certainly encourages discussion and flat mode certainly discourages discussion.

And here is the kicker. DPR is supposedly a "Gear" site - and what do people like to do with posts about their gear? They Discuss it - if sometimes ad nauseam...

On the other hand it seems on Photo sites people are happier to just showcase their photos with the odd comment - unless it is Comment & Critique, not much is said.

So on photo sites, Flat view has no issue because it is mostly linear posting. The opposite is the case on Discussion sites such as here - there are many replies that branch off the OP - as it should be...

Mathew Anderson said:

Ozzie SD said:

This is post 500! Am I famous now? Does anyone want to have my autograph? :-D

Click to expand...

Congrats on being the one! Sure, I'll take it .

Click to expand...

Hehe lol ...

Did you see this thread? I created it for you and I'm looking forward to your answers!

Thanks for your reply. I had read "every" reply from DPR staff in this thread yesterday. (Using the thread view, it was quick and easy btw.)

I get the impression the main project was in the works, then this thread was started to get input to help in refining the process.

Will any old software be used on going in the new version of DPR?

Good luck I wish you success.

Why even post this here?

Obviously, nothing that your users post here is going to affect your decision to do this switch, so why bother? I mean, you already knew this was going to compromise a major functional aspect of the interface, and yet you went forward with the decision already.

Just do it, and you will either retain your users or not.

Just remember, the people who you lose are going to be your most frequent and dedicated users. Yes you will replace some of them with new users, but there will no longer be anything distinctive or unique about DPR that will make it a place for users to congregate repeatedly. It will become a place for gear stats and reviews, and that will be that.

But, since this is a done deal, so be it. I wish you well. Of course I will try your new site, but if it's like every other site by the folks you are going to use, I expect it will be cookie-cutter in layout and design, and unusable in forum navigation. And I will get just as bored, and frustrated, with it as I have with all of their other sites, and just taper off my visits from daily to maybe weekly, or less.

It is what it is.

Just one question, though: Will the past forum content be migrated over, or will all of that be lost also? And, how would that be accessed since the threading structure is gone, if it is still available? (If you do lose all prior forum activity, then this is a really, really, stupid move, by the way).

-J

jalywol said:

Why even post this here?

Obviously, nothing that your users post here is going to affect your decision to do this switch, so why bother? I mean, you already knew this was going to compromise a major functional aspect of the interface, and yet you went forward with the decision already.

Just do it, and you will either retain your users or not.

Just remember, the people who you lose are going to be your most frequent and dedicated users. Yes you will replace some of them with new users, but there will no longer be anything distinctive or unique about DPR that will make it a place for users to congregate repeatedly. It will become a place for gear stats and reviews, and that will be that.

But, since this is a done deal, so be it. I wish you well. Of course I will try your new site, but if it's like every other site by the folks you are going to use, I expect it will be cookie-cutter in layout and design, and unusable in forum navigation. And I will get just as bored, and frustrated, with it as I have with all of their other sites, and just taper off my visits from daily to maybe weekly, or less.

It is what it is.

Just one question, though: Will the past forum content be migrated over, or will all of that be lost also? And, how would that be accessed since the threading structure is gone, if it is still available? (If you do lose all prior forum activity, then this is a really, really, stupid move, by the way).

-J

Click to expand...

I created a new thread and looking forward to answers from DPReview Dale and Mathew.

jalywol said:

Why even post this here?

Obviously, nothing that your users post here is going to affect your decision to do this switch, so why bother? I mean, you already knew this was going to compromise a major functional aspect of the interface, and yet you went forward with the decision already.

Just do it, and you will either retain your users or not.

Just remember, the people who you lose are going to be your most frequent and dedicated users. Yes you will replace some of them with new users, but there will no longer be anything distinctive or unique about DPR that will make it a place for users to congregate repeatedly. It will become a place for gear stats and reviews, and that will be that.

But, since this is a done deal, so be it. I wish you well. Of course I will try your new site, but if it's like every other site by the folks you are going to use, I expect it will be cookie-cutter in layout and design, and unusable in forum navigation. And I will get just as bored, and frustrated, with it as I have with all of their other sites, and just taper off my visits from daily to maybe weekly, or less.

It is what it is.

Just one question, though: Will the past forum content be migrated over, or will all of that be lost also? And, how would that be accessed since the threading structure is gone, if it is still available? (If you do lose all prior forum activity, then this is a really, really, stupid move, by the way).

-J

Click to expand...

Change management practise would suggest you give people time to move through the stages of grief, so preannouncing gets a lot of heat out before people then react to the reality of the change as experienced.

At least that's my take on why.

A

ahaslett said:

Change management practise would suggest you give people time to move through the stages of grief, so preannouncing gets a lot of heat out before people then react to the reality of the change as experienced.

At least that's my take on why.

A

Click to expand...

The thing is, they asked for feedback, in the initial post. If there's no chance of a change in response, really, why bother?

-J

PieterB said:

Change is a constant and inevitable. So roll it out.

Click to expand...

Change for change sake imposed without proper consideration and consultation is a constant. The resultant deterioration in user experience is inevitable.

jalywol said:

Just one question, though: Will the past forum content be migrated over, or will all of that be lost also? And, how would that be accessed since the threading structure is gone, if it is still available? (If you do lose all prior forum activity, then this is a really, really, stupid move, by the way).

Click to expand...

They probably use the flat view from the past content and convert that to something the new platform can use. I don't think losing the past content is an option, but what do I know.

jalywol said:

ahaslett said:

Change management practise would suggest you give people time to move through the stages of grief, so preannouncing gets a lot of heat out before people then react to the reality of the change as experienced.

At least that's my take on why.

A

Click to expand...

The thing is, they asked for feedback, in the initial post. If there's no chance of a change in response, really, why bother?

-J

Click to expand...

Hope is one way of coping. If they can make people hope that things may not be as bad as they thought, it might soften the blow - even if the reality is no different.

Mark Ransom said:

jalywol said:

ahaslett said:

Change management practise would suggest you give people time to move through the stages of grief, so preannouncing gets a lot of heat out before people then react to the reality of the change as experienced.

At least that's my take on why.

A

Click to expand...

The thing is, they asked for feedback, in the initial post. If there's no chance of a change in response, really, why bother?

-Je

Click to expand...

Hope is one way of coping. If they can make people hope that things may not be as bad as they thought, it might soften the blow - even if the reality is no different.

Click to expand...

Better to rip the bandaid off all at once, rather than slowly. Less painful after the initial experience that way.

-J

Or anesthesia and amputation

jalywol said:

ahaslett said:

Change management practise would suggest you give people time to move through the stages of grief, so preannouncing gets a lot of heat out before people then react to the reality of the change as experienced.

At least that's my take on why.

A

Click to expand...

The thing is, they asked for feedback, in the initial post. If there's no chance of a change in response, really, why bother?

-J

Click to expand...

They need input to develop the communication “lines” for the rollout, and of course they may change implementation based on feedback. It’s gathered material to review.

Item - the costs and risks of maintaining the existing platform are too high (I believe that- I once led a review that junked something for which I had been the lead developer/user 15 years earlier).

Item - we have a new community engagement staff member who is starting threads based on issues for someone near the beginning of their photography journey.

Conclusion - DPR have had a strategy review and are setting a new direction for the future.

A

Mathew Anderson said:

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...

If you have a concern with the moderation of these forums, bring it to me in DM, thank you.

Click to expand...

Mathew is on the ball regarding these things.
I recently joined DPReview and began posting pics which apparently rubbed a fellow forum member the wrong way.
*I am not new to photography web forums and the antics of disagreeable fellow members and (sometimes) their favourite moderators.
I was unable to resolve the issue with the particular forum member and so I contacted both the mod and Mathew.

The issue was very quickly resolved to my satisfaction. No ‘bad’ things happened to any parties involved.

RemoteHorizons said:

In my experience, forums changing their user interface usually coincides with the death of the forum, and I’m sure this isn’t a coincidence.

DPReview has, by far, the nicest forum interface of all of the photography sites and to change it would be a huge mistake.

Click to expand...

Agree 100% ... since joining in 2016, I haven't wanted to even look elsewhere. I will keep an optimistic outlook, and trust DPR will pull this off successfully. ... Arnold

RemoteHorizons said:

Please reconsider.

Click to expand...

Nikon DX SLR (D40-D90, D3000-D7500) Talk .... 226,839 threads

The Micro Four Thirds Forum has 172,466 threads …..

...... & some people believe all that can be easily reviewed in Flat View. ;-)

Bob A L said:

Dale Baskin said:

DavidMillier said:

Mathew Anderson said:

drynn said:

"While not every feature could be carried over..."

Would be useful to be told which features will not be carried over.

Click to expand...

It’s mostly changes to how posts and forum sections are organized. For example, how posts are viewed in a thread is more consistent and simplified between all users. The majority of other changes are either entirely new features or improvements on existing ones.

Visit sites like bcgforums.com and macrumors.com to get a rough idea of how the forum layout works before you can see how we’ve implemented it.

Click to expand...

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.

When we evaluated new platforms, we looked for options that would provide a similar view, but unfortunately, none of the commercially viable solutions that could meet our other technical, financial and long-term needs offered an exact equivalent, and we had to balance that against the sustainability of the forums. That said, we recognize the importance of the threaded view to many of you, and we will continue to explore options for supporting it.

Posts may be displayed differently than you're used to in XenForo, and it may not be as ideal in some ways. We get it. However, XenForo will also allow us to add many features we couldn't implement with our current, antiquated software, including a more robust gallery system that puts photography more front and center.

All we ask is that you give the new platform a chance and work with us to improve it. Even after it goes live, we'll continue refining it in response to community feedback. I can't promise we'll be able to implement every suggestion, but we'll do our damnedest.

If you want to know more about why we're making this change, please read my post here:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68444678

Click to expand...

Well that helps a lot in deciding what this means to me and makes the decision easy. No threaded view = No view at all. Thanks for the past 20 or so years, and have a great day.

Click to expand...

I'd agree, Bob. I'm very comfortable with the threaded view, and dislike the flat view immensely, but where are we gonna go? ... Arnold

Mathew Anderson said:

knickerhawk said:

Bill Ferris said:

knickerhawk said:

ishwanu said:

Bill Ferris said:

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...

All good questions. It's a ballpark estimate based on a comparison of browser window and LrC Library module 100% displays. In short, it's the eye test.

Click to expand...

Oh. Browser displays of web files often do their own weird things when compared to local app displays of local files. That already happens now. I interpreted it as meaning that files will be stored on DPR servers in a way that reduces their quality - which I hope is incorrect.

Click to expand...

Bill, if you're not sure what if any destructive storage compression is being applied, please download some sample images from the test site and apply a difference filter between them and the originals in Photoshop. That will tell you the extent of any added lossy compression.

For a leading camera comparison site, ANY lossy compression imposed would be an absolute disaster.

Click to expand...

I've done a comparison of how the same JPEG displays on the current DPR platform and on the staging/test site. Viewing the photo at 100% on both platforms, I didn't see a difference in the amount or quality of detail.

Here's the photo I used for the comparison.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the test and response. Please open the JPEG of the above shot on the staging server, save it locally and then upload that local saved version so that we can do an objective comparison.

Click to expand...

Please ensure you're downloading back the original file, not a web browser viewed save or something.

Click to expand...

The foregoing sentence is confusing. Are you referring to something I should be doing now, something Bill should be doing or something that I can be reassured about happening in the future?

(By the way, this is just one example of why in-place hierarchically oriented structuring of discussions is often superior to flat-oriented structuring.)

Mathew Anderson said:

Also, if there's any concerns with the quality somehow being different, let me know and I can check the settings before we form a conclusion.

Click to expand...

Image rendering is a fairly complex topic and one that has given rise to many discussions, much confusion and unproductive skepticism in the DPR forums. Obviously, on a site that's all about camera gear and the quality of images generated by that gear (and related technique and software), it's absolutely vital that all aspects of the image rendering chain has been tested. Has that happened here? Who's done the testing? People who know what they're doing, like Jim Kasson, or someone else who might not be as familiar with the various gotcha's that can crop up?

Forgive me for not being willing to just take your word for it. As best I can tell, your expertise is not photographic-centric and your involvement in this community is limited to a several-month run only, so I have no way of knowing whether you have a complete grasp of the issues. In particular, what isn't clear yet is:

• What, if any, lossy compression is being applied upon image import and how that might be associated with the imported image/file size?
• What image viewer is embedded and how it manages resizing/interpolation?
• What color management capabilities does the viewer have and how does it manage image files with missing tags and color profiles?
• What image rendering functions are handed off to the browser and do they differ from current, familiar DPR viewer behavior?

Thanks to the Threaded View and the typical message preservation behavior many of us cherish , we can easily see above that Bill reported image rendering of about 80% quality compared to the LightRoom viewer. That's a red flag that merits follow-up, especially since Bill's technical and photographic bona fides are sufficiently established here to trust his observations. Something more than just an "ensur[ance]" is called for here.

ahaslett said:

jalywol said:

ahaslett said:

Change management practise would suggest you give people time to move through the stages of grief, so preannouncing gets a lot of heat out before people then react to the reality of the change as experienced.

At least that's my take on why.

A

Click to expand...

The thing is, they asked for feedback, in the initial post. If there's no chance of a change in response, really, why bother?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Sanity checking? Was there anything they missed in the research, analysis, approach to some sort of "inevitable" change." They have a product and the customers have to keep buying it.

I'm not sure how many non U.S. members are aware of this but a rather large restaurant chain, with a distinctive, nostalgic, perhaps quirky, regional, theme and menu, just "modernized," changing logos, decor and maybe menu. The customer base to a huge part, vocally and actually rejected this change.

Ownership/upper management was defensive, perhaps arrogant, and is now backtracking rapidly. I suppose it remains to be seen how big a mistake the change was. Or, what "changes" might be made in the management practices that led to it.

This change seems different. if there is a technical or structural reality that makes this inevitable or non-reversible, when implemented. getting additional customer input seems very important.

ahaslett said:

ahaslett said:

-J

Click to expand...

They need input to develop the communication “lines” for the rollout, and of course they may change implementation based on feedback. It’s gathered material to review.

Item - the costs and risks of maintaining the existing platform are too high (I believe that- I once led a review that junked something for which I had been the lead developer/user 15 years earlier).

Item - we have a new community engagement staff member who is starting threads based on issues for someone near the beginning of their photography journey.

Conclusion - DPR have had a strategy review and are setting a new direction for the future.

A

Click to expand...

martinhb said:

• martinhb wrote:

Nikon DX SLR (D40-D90, D3000-D7500) Talk .... 226,839 threads

The Micro Four Thirds Forum has 172,466 threads …..

...... & some people believe all that can be easily reviewed in Flat View. ;-)

Click to expand...

But, don't you understand? That's all old bickering by Boomer and pre-Boomer dinosaurs. It's boring and utterly irrelevant to the future and the potential future users.

Old knowledge is old news. Streamlining factoids is the new reality, get with the picture!

-J