Zoophoria

Arizona Docent said:
Just one more piece of constructive criticism; I hope you don't mind. As a photographer this is something I notice. Each photo should have small type in the corner (either on the photo or underneath) listing the photographer name (eg copyright Nick Nichols) or photo source (eg courtesy Phoenix Zoo). Not only is this common courtesy, in some cases it is a legal requirement. In fact you really cannot repost any photo without first getting direct permission (unless it is specifically listed as public domain). In the age of the internet few follow this law (and it is a law) and it is extremely unlikely that any zoo will go after you for using their photo on a blog that is promoting them. But at the very least you should name the source.
Click to expand...
I did credit them in the picture. I restricted myself to only using pictures used by the zoo, my own or ones I had gotten permission to use.
 
jayjds2 said:
It is visible when you scroll over the photo (a dialogue pops up that says, for example, (c) Kansas City Zoo, or Public Domain). That being said, I agree that there should be text on the page itself.
Click to expand...
What type of text do you mean?
 
Arizona Docent said:
I will disagree with the poster above regarding new posts on this thread. I have no problem with you using this thread to update us on new blog posts.
Click to expand...

I think you are misunderstanding what I said. There is no intent for me to prevent Grayson to provide updates on his blog, in fact I encourage more people to post about their experiences and thoughts on various threads. But the comments that were posted to the uploaded pictures is uncalled for since they provide little context except to direct people to the blog (similar to advertising or spamming).
 
Falcosparverius said:
I think you are misunderstanding what I said. There is no intent for me to prevent Grayson to provide updates on his blog, in fact I encourage more people to post about their experiences and thoughts on various threads. But the comments that were posted to the uploaded pictures is uncalled for since they provide little context except to direct people to the blog (similar to advertising or spamming).
Click to expand...
I have not seen the photos you mention.
 
A few thoughts:

1) Copyright - I read a few posts back how you're doing this and it does work; but honestly I would suggest simply putting a notation in text under each picture to denote who took it/owns copyright. A clear visual display that doesn't require hovering over (not everyone will think to do that) and that doesn't require you to spend ages editing photos*
You can also use this as a chance to put a link to the photographer/copyright holders web-page if you so choose/if one is online.

2) Remove any links/tabs or disable them from working on the page until you've content in those sections to show. In general its bad practice on any website to show links to items that don't exist. It leads people to think the site has failed/isn't being updated/has errors etc...
"Coming soon" is also really annoying if several tabs have it up so again dump them until you've got the content to show.

3) From a photography standpoint consider trawling flickr/500pixs/zoochat and inviting photographers to allow you to show their photos. This will allow you to achieve a higher overall standard as at present the site has a lot of variety from some photos looking good to others looking pretty bad. That's poor advertising for the zoo (which honestly IS your intent per species); and for the site itself; suggesting that you're not really that "serious" about it (some might also question your rights to even share when the image variety is so varied).
Note also that bad photos might well advertise a zoo as "bad" for photographers (because you; the author, didn't find anything better htan the poorer photo - suggesting difficult conditions).

4) Slow down with updates - one or two a week on set days at set times is better than all at once; otherwise you run the risk of losing you audience.

*technically even if you've permission to share you won't have permission to edit so you'd have to seek that as well even if you were simply putting text onto the photo. Thus text underneath works well
 
overread said:
A few thoughts:

1) Copyright - I read a few posts back how you're doing this and it does work; but honestly I would suggest simply putting a notation in text under each picture to denote who took it/owns copyright. A clear visual display that doesn't require hovering over (not everyone will think to do that) and that doesn't require you to spend ages editing photos*
You can also use this as a chance to put a link to the photographer/copyright holders web-page if you so choose/if one is online.

2) Remove any links/tabs or disable them from working on the page until you've content in those sections to show. In general its bad practice on any website to show links to items that don't exist. It leads people to think the site has failed/isn't being updated/has errors etc...
"Coming soon" is also really annoying if several tabs have it up so again dump them until you've got the content to show.

3) From a photography standpoint consider trawling flickr/500pixs/zoochat and inviting photographers to allow you to show their photos. This will allow you to achieve a higher overall standard as at present the site has a lot of variety from some photos looking good to others looking pretty bad. That's poor advertising for the zoo (which honestly IS your intent per species); and for the site itself; suggesting that you're not really that "serious" about it (some might also question your rights to even share when the image variety is so varied).
Note also that bad photos might well advertise a zoo as "bad" for photographers (because you; the author, didn't find anything better htan the poorer photo - suggesting difficult conditions).

4) Slow down with updates - one or two a week on set days at set times is better than all at once; otherwise you run the risk of losing you audience.

*technically even if you've permission to share you won't have permission to edit so you'd have to seek that as well even if you were simply putting text onto the photo. Thus text underneath works well
Click to expand...
Thanks! I would love it if some more zoochatters could give permission for me to use their pictures since finding good ones hasn't always been easy for every exhibit. Also the updates have been so frequent mostly to make it so the site has a lot of content on it since it's new. Pretty soon posts will be biweekly.
 
I've only seen three of the exhibits in the post (St. Louis, Minnesota, and Brookfield). I'm not a huge fan of Minnesota's exhibit, but other than that I agree with most of the other selections based on the photos. Well done!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Grayson the best you can do is simple use the messaging system and ask fellow zoo-chatters. You can also search flickr for creative commons licences images which, whilst still under full copyright, have allowances for certain uses (eg web display for non-profit with a link-back to the creator).

It would be good to set yourself a rough standard and aim to have every photo meet or exceed that standard; but without exceeding too far. That way you achieve a cohesive appearance.

You could reserve those photos that are very high grade and instead of showing them in the articles consider doing interviews of zoo photographers. Invite them to join in and then you can show a selection of their higher grade photos alongside and interview of their experiences, trials, thoughts etc... on zoo photography (esp when you consider that photography is one of the big reasons people will visit the zoo after taking the kids out)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top