How about a Kid's Section

[ScubaGuy19]

Just as the title says.

It may just be me, but I get tired of clicking on a thread just to have it be a little kid or baby (no offense to those who take photos of their kids).

Perhaps having a section like this will organize the clutter in the "People" section.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

No offense to them either, but I got so tired of looking at everyone's babies, I just stopped going into the people section. I've found that G&N, urban life, travel, etc. all have great people shots, and almost never a baby. :-)

[jcw122]

I strongly agree that we could use a Kids Section....like Ronald said, no offense to the photographers but I'm tired of children photos.

For me it's just a matter of interest, I'm more interested in photos of teens and adults. First off for more interesting poses/candids, but also for more interesting expressions and stories behind them.

[tommykjensen]

Not going to happen. Kids are people too.

If you are tired of kid photos then don't look.

[condyk]

We need a 'KID' warning on such shots, if only to avoid the snot and sticky fingers.

Nice Leotard avatarTommy, sorry Leopard

[tommykjensen]

I don't think a warning is necesary. I think that is a sad evolution if that is needed.

A better title might be in order in some cases. For example instead of a title only consisting of the kids name could be changed to something like "My son running on the playground" or whatever.

[Skip Souza]

____________

New rule that to be posted in People you must be taller than this. :rolleyes:

[Stefan A]

FWIW - I agree. I don't have a huge desire to see pictures of kids. I like to see how photographers handle adult pictures. But the titles in the people section usually don't make it clear. Anyway - the moderators already spoke. But I still wanted to post my opinion.

Stefan

[cdifoto]

Not going to happen. Kids are people too.

If you are tired of kid photos then don't look.

I didn't know this was your forum...



I agree with the others. There should be subsections by age group or some such thing. I love to photograph my nephew as much as the next uncle, but I don't always want to see baby after baby after baby. If I knew what threads were gonna be what, I'd be able to click more wisely. It's not much different from the marketplace. I know by going into the SELL section, I can post something for sale or see things for sale. I won't have to sift through things that people want to BUY. And those titles are even more descriptive than those in the People section. ;)

I wouldn't feel offended if I had to post pics of my nephew in one subsection and Maranda in another, as Tommy's first reply seemed to indicate. I don't think the babies would be offended either. :)

[tommykjensen]

I didn't know this was your forum...



I agree with the others. There should be subsections by age group or some such thing.

No it is Pekka's forum and he has said previously that this kind of division is not going to happen.

[cdifoto]

No it is Pekka's forum and he has said previously that this kind of division is not going to happen.

Ooooo I musta missed or forgot about that. I don't recall seeing him say that.

Either way, we can b1tch if we wanna. :D

[tommykjensen]

Just because Pekka has not said so in public does not mean he has not said it.

If you have further arguments on this I suggest you take it to PM.

[cdifoto]

I'm just having a little discussion, ie offering up my point of view, on this discussion forum. Not arguing at all. :)

[bauerman]

Its funny how different the perspectives can be on something - I want to post more kid pictures in the People forum but I won't because of all the veiled G&N stuff that is in there at any given time.

And then you have these other perspectives that are completely the opposite - the are sick of kid photos, period. Classic.

I'll take a nice photo of a beautiful child shot by a loving parent any day of the week...

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Not going to happen. Kids are people too.

If you are tired of kid photos then don't look.

I agree. As I said, I now don't. No one's forcing people to look in the people section.

[Belmondo]

It's interesting that most requests we get for specific forums are a result of people having a specific interest (i.e. birds, macro, motorsport, black and white, etc). This is something of a twist; a kids forum is being proposed so someone doesn't have to look at pictures of children.

This is not without precedent. The Glamour/Nude forum was created for exactly the same reason, i.e. some people were offended by 'adult' content, so we segregated those images. The Transportation forum was created for similar reasons; the motorsport purists were becoming annoyed with all the "Here's My Mazda' threads.

While I understand the motorsport concerns, I must confess to having a little trouble seeing how people can be offended by pictures of children. Are children not people too?

On a practical note, we simply cannot create special forums for every special interest, nor can we create them to segregate every type of image a person might not want to see. This is a balancing act between having a logical structure that allows reasonable compartmentalization of subjects without being unwieldy.

We are always looking at possible changes and ways to improve, and all such suggestions are noted. One thing to bear in mind, however...when we add a new category, it not only means all applicable threads in the future will go there, it also means that someone has to go through all the previous threads and decide which ones should be moved to the new forum. It is a daunting task, and one usually not considered by members when new forums are proposed.

CDI....go ahead and bitch if you must. I really don't think you have a clue just how much work goes into running this forum. The simple fact is, this is Pekka's forum. It is not a democracy or a republic. The moderators are aware of this, and when we say something is or is not going to be a certain way, we're speaking on behalf of Pekka. These are usually issues that have been discussed before among the moderators and administrators, and we are aware of his attitudes on these things.

You are more than welcome to make suggestions. You are even allowed to express your dissatisfaction with things as they are currently run. Say it once and move on to a new topic. Public mocking of a moderator who is just doing his job won't be tolerated.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

If a separate section were to be created, I'd think it would be called something like "family" or "snapshots" instead. I don't know exactly what I expect to see in the people section, other than just that...people.

As for having to move threads...gimme mod power over the people forum for a week, and I'll gladly do it. I've got nothin' but time. :-) I already know how it's done, so that's not a problem. I'm a supermod on another vbulletin site.

[neil_r]

I've found that G&N all have great people shots, and almost never a baby. :-)

That is a relief !

[cdifoto]

It's interesting that most requests we get for specific forums are a result of people having a specific interest (i.e. birds, macro, motorsport, black and white, etc). This is something of a twist; a kids forum is being proposed so someone doesn't have to look at pictures of children.

This is not without precedent. The Glamour/Nude forum was created for exactly the same reason, i.e. some people were offended by 'adult' content, so we segregated those images. The Transportation forum was created for similar reasons; the motorsport purists were becoming annoyed with all the "Here's My Mazda' threads.

While I understand the motorsport concerns, I must confess to having a little trouble seeing how people can be offended by pictures of children. Are children not people too?

On a practical note, we simply cannot create special forums for every special interest, nor can we create them to segregate every type of image a person might not want to see. This is a balancing act between having a logical structure that allows reasonable compartmentalization of subjects without being unwieldy.

We are always looking at possible changes and ways to improve, and all such suggestions are noted. One thing to bear in mind, however...when we add a new category, it not only means all applicable threads in the future will go there, it also means that someone has to go through all the previous threads and decide which ones should be moved to the new forum. It is a daunting task, and one usually not considered by members when new forums are proposed.

CDI....go ahead and bitch if you must. I really don't think you have a clue just how much work goes into running this forum. The simple fact is, this is Pekka's forum. It is not a democracy or a republic. The moderators are aware of this, and when we say something is or is not going to be a certain way, we're speaking on behalf of Pekka. These are usually issues that have been discussed before among the moderators and administrators, and we are aware of his attitudes on these things.

You are more than welcome to make suggestions. You are even allowed to express your dissatisfaction with things as they are currently run. Say it once and move on to a new topic. Public mocking of a moderator who is just doing his job won't be tolerated.

I'll only say this:

I was only defending my position, and nothing more. I'm not saying it will be divided or that this forum is a democracy at all. Just saying it would be nice to have a split. Not sure why my comments were read into that deeply. Perhaps my wording was poor.

I wasn't mocking tommy. Period. If you saw it that way, fine. But it certainly wasn't a comment directed at a moderator but at a fellow member.

Just for the record. :) (genuine)

[Belmondo]

I didn't know this was your forum...

Ooooo I musta missed or forgot about that. I don't recall seeing him say that.

Either way, we can b1tch if we wanna. :D

I'll only say this:

I was only defending my position, and nothing more. I'm not saying it will be divided or that this forum is a democracy at all. Just saying it would be nice to have a split. Not sure why my comments were read into that deeply. Perhaps my wording was poor.

I wasn't mocking tommy. Period. If you saw it that way, fine. But it certainly wasn't a comment directed at a moderator but at a fellow member.

Just for the record. :) (genuine)

And how long have you been suffering from short-term memory loss?

[cdifoto]

And how long have you been suffering from short-term memory loss?

I was trying to be a little sarcastic there. Whether tommy was a mod or not or if anyone else had said it, I woulda been a smartass and replied the same. That's just me. I guess the sarcasm didn't translate. I said the same thing to a photog at a dirt track a couple years ago when he made a "decision" type thing like that. I asked him when he took over ownership of the track. Not really mockery, just smartin' off. To my mind there's a difference.

[Belmondo]

I was trying to be a little sarcastic there. Whether tommy was a mod or not, I woulda been smartass and replied the same. That's me. I guess the sarcasm didn't translate.Guess not. I'd suggest you try harder in the future, but that might be a recipe for disaster.

[cdifoto]

Guess not. I'd suggest you try harder in the future, but that might be a recipe for disaster.

Hah ok I'll try to throw a more obvious spin on it. If I can. Typed words just don't work as well as spoken ones. I sometimes forget that people on the other end can't actually see my expressions.

[neil_r]

Sarcasm (noun) : The use of irony to mock or convey contempt...

Go figure :-)

[cdifoto]

Sarcasm (noun) : The use of irony to mock or convey contempt...

Go figure :-)

:mad: Yer not helping. Dictionaries are wrong I tell ya, wrong! :mad:

Let's say it was light-hearted sarcasm then. :p

[neil_r]

I was being ironic :lol:

[cdifoto]

I still vote for a kids' section.

*plays dead in peaceful protest.*

:p

[bauerman]

I still vote for a kids' section.

:p

So do I - but for very different reasons than you. You want it to avoid them and I want it to view and add to them. Now that's ironic.

[cdifoto]

So do I - but for very different reasons than you. You want it to avoid them and I want it to view and add to them. Now that's ironic.

Both reasons work for me. I'm just a fan of filtering. :)

[Stefan A]

I am not offended by pictures of kids and I certainly agree that kids are people too. I think photographers on this forum, in general, tend to take pictures of kids differently than adults. Many of the kid pictures tend to be snapshots that anyone can take. That's fine - I am sure we have all done that. I would prefer to see the types of pictures that are taken of adults. And of course there are plenty of "snapshot" style pictures of adults. But it seems more adult shots (and I will include senior pictures here) are taken with more care.

Anyway, that's why I agree with having the subsection.

Stefan

[jcw122]

I'd still like a Kids/Family section, but I think I might just backout of my support for such a section. I'll still make some comments.

I realize I'm looking in the People section for more specific images that seem to be hard for me to find in the first place, photos of young adults (17-21?).

**The following is simply discussion on my adventures in the People section, I'm not trying to start stuff**

Searching through tons of thread not knowing if they will be baby/kid threads can be annoying. Reason I'm always searching (manually, not the search feature) is to find inspiration or poses and locations that might be useful in the kind of photography of my peers that I want to start doing. Baby/Kid poses, emotions, and sourrounding almost never coincide with what I'm looking for.

Overall, I think people's biggest issue with Kid/Baby photos is because alot of the time there are more snapshot type photos of kids in the People section rather than well done photos. This gets tiresome. I have to admit, it is sometimes nice to see a well done Baby/Kid photo, although they are usually studio.

Alot of the time kid/baby threads are titled so that I might not realize they are kid threads. I don't think having people note in their thread titles that they contain kid photos is right though. Some people do do it though and it makes life a bit easier in my search.

I don't really look in the G+N section for adult photos, because I'm neither looking for Adult Glamour photos nor Adult Nude photos....I just want "normal" Adult photos lol.



But in the end, if we did break down People, I think either subforum would get a lot less viewing...so, it might be good to keep them together. Hehehe.

[Maureen Souza]

Personally, I'd rather look at kid's photos than some of the more outlandish shots...like the guy lying on the floor reaching for his dismembered arm or the guy hanging from a noose. I mean. why don't we have a Gross People or Ugly People section?

Of course I am not being serious.....I just think you should look at the photos you want and move past the ones you don't.

[Belmondo]

Personally, I'd rather look at kid's photos than some of the more outlandish shots...like the guy lying on the floor reaching for his dismembered arm or the guy hanging from a noose. I mean. why don't we have a Gross People or Ugly People section?

Of course I am not being serious.....I just think you should look at the photos you want and move past the ones you don't.The one thing that would really, really help would be clearer labeling of the thread. Just adding one or two words in parentheses would help a lot.

A thread titled "Lulu in the bathtub" would create very different expectations if it had '(child)' attached to it.

[condyk]

...gimme mod power over the people forum for a week, and I'll gladly do it. I've got nothin' but time. :-) I already know how it's done, so that's not a problem. I'm a supermod on another vbulletin site.

I think that would be just one of the problems ... :lol: :lol: :lol:

Anyway, not sure Modding ronlovesron.com is necessarily a good preparation for real responsibility :p

Pullin' yer chain son ;-)

A thread titled "Lulu in the bathtub" would create very different expectations if it had '(child)' attached to it.

Yeah, invasion of the child molester crowd I reckon! :confused:

[marie]

Originally Posted by Ronald S. Jr. View Post
I've found that G&N all have great people shots, and almost never a baby.


That is a relief !


http://www.PhotoShare.co.nz/PhotoShareGallery1/100543/104697/cid_000501c56eabbb1fbed06401a8c0Hewi3758.gif