# 500px rubbish?



## BrickHouse (Apr 4, 2014)

I am astounded at the dramatic quality difference of photos that people load to 500px. The large majority of the photos on there are pretty incredible. They are very obviously taken by a professional or very talented hobbyists. What amazing though is the absolute utter rubbish that people will load up thinking that they can hang. I like to peruse the "fresh" section and I just don't understand how people think their photos are even in the same class of most of what's there. It's one thing to post to flickr for your family/friends to view or a forum to get C&C, but completely different to post to a place like 500px. Anyway, my observation for the day.  [/rant]


----------



## Braineack (Apr 4, 2014)

I only post my best work on 500px and it still never holds a whistle.

but some people use it as a general photo sharing site and I don't find that's the purpose of it.  

I dont like how now 500px tries to get you to purchase framed photos that are posted on it now.


----------



## runnah (Apr 4, 2014)

500px is a very mixed bag. I think they greatly favor the over saturated UWA shots and heavily composite shots over a well done simple shot.


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 4, 2014)

Yeah, but even just the amount of out-of-focus, poorly composed, poorly exposed pictures. I can give leeway for things that just aren't my personal style, ok the overdone HDR, the photoshopped to hell, the whatever. Ok, not my style, no prob. Some of it though, looks like it came out of a 2-year-old that stole dad's camera and started clicking.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Apr 4, 2014)

500px is growing.  More people from all across the photography spectrum posting there is a part of that growth.  With every redesign at Flickr 500px sees a surge of new users.:mrgreen::lmao:  If you really want to view quality work swing by 1x.  That site is curated so only approved photos make it to the generally viewable pages.   Anyone can start a portfolio there, but if your work doesn't get approved no one will see it.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Apr 4, 2014)

BrickHouse said:


> Yeah, but even just the amount of out-of-focus, poorly composed, poorly exposed pictures. I can give leeway for things that just aren't my personal style, ok the overdone HDR, the photoshopped to hell, the whatever. Ok, not my style, no prob. Some of it though, looks like it came out of a 2-year-old that stole dad's camera and started clicking.



Hey now, I've seen some two year olds do good work...









No chance in hell am I starting a 500px now. I'm not anywhere near where I'd want to be-I don't wanna be the guy that posts a ton of crap and never gets anywhere. I know, it's gotta be hard to hang with the real good stuff, but someday I'll give it a try.


----------



## leeroix (Apr 4, 2014)

what the hell is 500px?


----------



## SamSpade1941 (Apr 4, 2014)

leeroix said:


> what the hell is 500px?




Online Photography Community.


----------



## Trblmkr (Apr 4, 2014)

I post some of my pictures there, about as many as I post here. And even I think my pictures aren't worthy of being on there compared to others.


----------



## Braineack (Apr 4, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> 500px is growing.  More people from all across the photography spectrum posting there is a part of that growth.  With every redesign at Flickr 500px sees a surge of new users.:mrgreen::lmao:  If you really want to view quality work swing by 1x.  That site is curated so only approved photos make it to the generally viewable pages.   Anyone can start a portfolio there, but if your work doesn't get approved no one will see it.



I have about ten shots there that hit 90 points and made it to like page 10.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 4, 2014)

I'm on there... Am I rubbish? (Seriously I would like to know)

http://500px.com/StoneNYC

I agree, the site favors HDR and over saturation and heavy PS work.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Apr 4, 2014)

StoneNYC said:


> I'm on there... Am I rubbish? (Seriously I would like to know)
> 
> 500px / Stone NYC
> 
> I agree, the site favors HDR and over saturation and heavy PS work.


  Absolute junk.  Horrible.  










  Actually, I couldn't get any of your images to load.  I get the Adult Content warning, but when I click on it nothing loads.    I did however get a kick out of the Exif on the one photo I tried to load.   Lens: 90mm, Focal length: 135mm.


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 4, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> StoneNYC said:
> 
> 
> > I'm on there... Am I rubbish? (Seriously I would like to know)
> ...



Haha, I can't say what the lens focal length data says, some of my work is film, maybe it got confused with whatever the scanner put in the metadata?

Are you a member? 

I payed for a subscription before, but then didn't renew it as I didn't know what I was paying for... 

Is there a way to turn the adult thing off?

They are all nudes, but tasteful (I hope).


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 4, 2014)

Well, I know there's som weird anti-nude thing so I'm not sure if I can post this? It's a "preview" and if it's not ok tell me or have a mod delete it, I get confused between forums what's ok and what's not.



Again this isn't because I want "attention" I am trying to ascertain what is considered "bad" and nothing better than ones own images.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 4, 2014)

I like some of it.. some seem really good.  But I don't know nothn


----------



## bribrius (Apr 4, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> 500px is growing. More people from all across the photography spectrum posting there is a part of that growth. With every redesign at Flickr 500px sees a surge of new users.:mrgreen::lmao: If you really want to view quality work swing by 1x. That site is curated so only approved photos make it to the generally viewable pages. Anyone can start a portfolio there, but if your work doesn't get approved no one will see it.


have you guys many any money on there or is it pretty much a waste of time?


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 4, 2014)

StoneNYC said:


> I'm on there... Am I rubbish? (Seriously I would like to know)
> 
> 500px / Stone NYC
> 
> I agree, the site favors HDR and over saturation and heavy PS work.



Not at all. Very beautiful work with light. Very sensual.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Apr 4, 2014)

bribrius said:


> Scatterbrained said:
> 
> 
> > 500px is growing. More people from all across the photography spectrum posting there is a part of that growth. With every redesign at Flickr 500px sees a surge of new users.:mrgreen::lmao: If you really want to view quality work swing by 1x. That site is curated so only approved photos make it to the generally viewable pages. Anyone can start a portfolio there, but if your work doesn't get approved no one will see it.
> ...


Well, let's put it this way, with the $50 minimum for withdrawal, at my rate my kids will be in high school before I can take any money out.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 4, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > Scatterbrained said:
> ...


whats the point then? why even bother signing up? I don't get it.
sorry, im new, and haven't submitted anything anywhere except to a getty image stock site and I haven't made a dime...


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 4, 2014)

That's what I didn't get, why I didn't renew. What's the point?


----------



## Scatterbrained (Apr 4, 2014)

Meh, for me it's just another place to share my images.


----------



## trojancast (Apr 4, 2014)

Stone NYC, great work.  I see a iota of creativity in your work.  Good job.


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 5, 2014)

trojancast said:


> Stone NYC, great work.  I see a iota of creativity in your work.  Good job.



Thanks, I'm more curios about the OP's opinion, just since he has see. A lot of junk on 500PX, I haven explored it but only saw the popular images... Knowing my work isn't typical HDR the site favors, I wondered if he thought work like mine was rubbish, just ok, pretty great,AMAZING and then based on that I'll look at the site more to see how I think about the place and if posting is worth it.

Thanks.


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 5, 2014)

No, I think you've got some great stuff and that it definitely has a place on 500px. I'm talking more about stuff like this: 500px / octopus by Kelly MJC. Don't get me wrong, there's some incredible stuff on there, perhaps most of it. I just have seen a lot more poor photos show up. I am a hobbyist and brand new, so you know what? I post to places like this to get better, not to 500px to "showcase" my rubbish. It was mostly an observation and subsequent rant anyway.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Apr 5, 2014)

I've mentioned that there's a lot of narcissism in artistic circles. This allows me to really make my point. Some people are so blinded by their self love, they'll claim anything they do is art and people should buy it, completely overlooking the fact that the focus is wrong and the colors are washed and there's motion blur and the light's too harsh and it's horribly grainy and the popup flash was used... etc.

Here's an example. For now, I'll play the part of the narcissist. I'm so full of myself that I believe everything I do is gold and should net me massive money. I've been doing this for years. I have to be a pro. I even use film. This is my photo, look at how great it is. Why won't anyone buy it? I don't see what's wrong with it.





Obviously, that's a cell phone snap through a REALLY dirty lens. You guys get the idea. They're out there... and it's hilarious to watch them suddenly realize that they're not as great as they thought. I have seen some folks improve DRAMATICALLY after they are brought back to reality, though.


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 5, 2014)

BrickHouse said:


> No, I think you've got some great stuff and that it definitely has a place on 500px. I'm talking more about stuff like this: 500px / octopus by Kelly MJC. Don't get me wrong, there's some incredible stuff on there, perhaps most of it. I just have seen a lot more poor photos show up. I am a hobbyist and brand new, so you know what? I post to places like this to get better, not to 500px to "showcase" my rubbish. It was mostly an observation and subsequent rant anyway.



I see what you mean, there was this one image of a blond woman I was horrified, I can see that doesn't really fit anything that would be close to art... 

I was told when you first joined 500px that they had some kind of system where he posted that images you actually be removed from the system entirely and banned, so I'm guessing that that he has changed and or was never truly seriously in effect.

Thanks for sharing, now I understand.


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 5, 2014)

minicoop1985 said:


> I've mentioned that there's a lot of narcissism in artistic circles. This allows me to really make my point. Some people are so blinded by their self love, they'll claim anything they do is art and people should buy it, completely overlooking the fact that the focus is wrong and the colors are washed and there's motion blur and the light's too harsh and it's horribly grainy and the popup flash was used... etc.
> 
> Here's an example. For now, I'll play the part of the narcissist. I'm so full of myself that I believe everything I do is gold and should net me massive money. I've been doing this for years. I have to be a pro. I even use film. This is my photo, look at how great it is. Why won't anyone buy it? I don't see what's wrong with it.
> 
> ...



That was actually kind of why I was asking, because I was worried that I was one of those who didn't realize that the images were horrid lol 

And I know that not all of my images are great, or even decent, but I think I have at least a few that stand out as something to at least take a look at.

Anyway I think that the problem is just that as any company grows, it gets so large that it can't handle things the same way it could when it was smaller, if the quality of images in the beginning was high, as it grows there's niacin many checks and balances you can have with so many images flooding into the system and so you're bound to have more and more images slip through that are not of quality.

So that's probably just what happened here.


----------



## Overread (Apr 5, 2014)

Why the fuss?

500Pix is just an image host with some built in social activities/features. It's just like Flickr in that its just a place people host photos on to show on the web and also talk with other photographers.

It really only gained popularity because a host of "skilled" photographers on flickr got tired of seeing "bad photos" so shifted to a smaller niche-focused site. As the site grows in popularity the range of skills increases as well as does the volume at each skill level. Since there is no examination nor assessment to block people joining, if 500Pix continues to increase in popularity it could well end up identical to flickr's user base overall. 


The only time a community will have a fixed level of skill is when there are barriers/gatekeepers to entry into the community. Even then the barrier is likely to end up more focused on style than skill unless they retain a broad spectrum of moderators approving the content. 



As for nudity on the forums, we do not allow hosting/embedding on the site of nude content. We do allow emedding/hosting in the subscribers NSFW section and we do allow users to link to NSFW content on the open forums, but provided it has a warning above the link to inform that it is linking to NSFW content. 
As a rough guide line we generally accept skimpy clothing akin to what you'd see on a normal beach - anything less and its likely to be removed.


----------



## Clyde141 (Apr 5, 2014)

I'm new to the Photo Forum and just looking around, but I am a member of several other forums. On most there are great differences in the abilities of photographers and knowledge of those who make comments, etc. (I have often wondered how someone can ever have time to go out and take any photos and still post thousands of messages on some forum). As to photographs, on several forums you just have to take the good with the bad and ignore what you don't like. The problems come up when someone sincerely wanting a critique with the intent of improving his/her photo skills posts a photo and asks, "What do you think of this photo?" The problem being that those replying aren't necessarily those who would recognize a good photo, but they still comment on it. So the one who ask for a critique ends up with a lot of bad information and learns nothing.


----------



## Overread (Apr 5, 2014)

Clyde141 said:


> The problem being that those replying aren't necessarily those who would recognize a good photo, but they still comment on it. So the one who ask for a critique ends up with a lot of bad information and learns nothing.



Skill is also not linked to the capacity to impart ones understanding to another. I know a good few people skilled in various fields who can do some great stuff - but they can't teach anyone else to do it to save their lives. In photography many can even work without a full structured understanding of what they are doing - for example they don't know the terminology nor theory to say how they compose a photo - they just do it. They've subconsciously absorbed the key information from viewing other peoples good photos and whilst they are "using" theories they don't know what they are nor how to explain how they use them to other people.

Similarly I know people who are not of a great a level of skill, but who do know a subject well. They might not be all that good, but they know the theory of what they are doing and can explain it to others in a clear and understandable way.


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 5, 2014)

Overread said:


> Why the fuss?
> 
> 500Pix is just an image host with some built in social activities/features. It's just like Flickr in that its just a place people host photos on to show on the web and also talk with other photographers.
> 
> ...



Thanks! So my link is safe cause I made a warning, good lol.

And glad we agree, as 500px grows it will get crappy ... Hah!


----------



## Overread (Apr 5, 2014)

StoneNYC said:


> And glad we agree, as 500px grows it will get crappy ... Hah!



And then another niche site will crop up and the "skilled" will flock there until it repeats again!


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 5, 2014)

Overread said:


> StoneNYC said:
> 
> 
> > And glad we agree, as 500px grows it will get crappy ... Hah!
> ...



Yup! Like Friendster to myspace to Facebook to... Well who knows but I hope it happens soon... Lol


----------



## Derrel (Apr 5, 2014)

Well, it's not like every single shooter can be at the top of the heap...500px represents a wide range of skill levels and abilities. It's kind of like a real-life beauty pageant in a way; there are the winners, and then there are the ones who are merely "Kind of cute with good light and good makeup." Those are not the ones that win, but they bulk up the talent pool.


----------



## StoneNYC (Apr 5, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Well, it's not like every single shooter can be at the top of the heap...500px represents a wide range of skill levels and abilities. It's kind of like a real-life beauty pageant in a way; there are the winners, and then there are the ones who are merely "Kind of cute with good light and good makeup." Those are not the ones that win, but they bulk up the talent pool.



But the idea behind 500px is that it's all top of the heap and not "cute"


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 5, 2014)

I think what I'm seeing then is that the problem is mine. I always have had 500px on this pedestal as a showcase of professional photography and this place I can go to see great work and learn from analyzing it. Then over the last year I've seen this infusion of weak material as the site has grown and it put me off. I guess I need to just stay off the fresh tab and stick to the popular and editors picks. Thanks for the great conversation everyone!


----------



## Scatterbrained (Apr 5, 2014)

StoneNYC said:


> BrickHouse said:
> 
> 
> > No, I think you've got some great stuff and that it definitely has a place on 500px. I'm talking more about stuff like this: 500px / octopus by Kelly MJC. Don't get me wrong, there's some incredible stuff on there, perhaps most of it. I just have seen a lot more poor photos show up. I am a hobbyist and brand new, so you know what? I post to places like this to get better, not to 500px to "showcase" my rubbish. It was mostly an observation and subsequent rant anyway.
> ...


Up until very recently you used to be able to down vote images.  If an image received enough down votes it would no longer show up on the public pages (just your own page).  Not everyone had the option to down vote.   I know I did, but I only used it for the obviously egregious images.  Images that were blatantly horrible, yet made it through to popular via the tireless social media promotion of the photographer.   Down voting was a way of letting someone know they still had work to do, but with that gone. . . . . . . 



Overread said:


> StoneNYC said:
> 
> 
> > And glad we agree, as 500px grows it will get crappy ... Hah!
> ...


  It's called 1x.  You have to be quite good to get on there however, as there are only a dozen curators, and it's up to them whether your image makes it through.    Even there you'll see the occasional image that will have you saying "WTF?". 



StoneNYC said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Well, it's not like every single shooter can be at the top of the heap...500px represents a wide range of skill levels and abilities. It's kind of like a real-life beauty pageant in a way; there are the winners, and then there are the ones who are merely "Kind of cute with good light and good makeup." Those are not the ones that win, but they bulk up the talent pool.
> ...


 No, the idea behind "Popular" and "Editors Choice" is that the creme rises to the top.  Their algorithm helps to enforce that as well.  The higher an image score is, the less points it receives for each viewer engagement activity.   If the first person to view your images likes it and  favorites it that might give you over ten points.   By the time you reach  90 points a like and fave might only give you one tenth of  a point.   The theory being that it helps keep the crap from reaching the front page.   There are photographers out there who put way more work into promoting their mediocre images on facebook, G+, Reddit, Pintrest, Stumbleupon, etc.,than they do into honing their craft,  but they are a minority.   



BrickHouse said:


> I think what I'm seeing then is that the problem is mine. I always have had 500px on this pedestal as a showcase of professional photography and this place I can go to see great work and learn from analyzing it. Then over the last year I've seen this infusion of weak material as the site has grown and it put me off. I guess I need to just stay off the fresh tab and stick to the popular and editors picks. Thanks for the great conversation everyone!


  I think the issue is you're spending too much time looking at the rotten work on the fresh page.    If you want top notch work stick to Popular and Editors Choice, or swing by 1x.


----------

