Development of the Group

I've been thinking for some time about the future of We have come quite some way since I took over more than 3 years ago. Nearly 700 members, a few thousand submissions, about 120 (!) Journals/Features, some fruitful discussions, many experimental and reference submissions and so on. Mostly, the Group runs smoothly with the semi-open policy that I instituted; submissions from regular members have a 1 vote acceptance of submissions - more to do with category errors than quality issues; those members who submit quality work on a regular basis are invited to become Expert Members with a 10 submission auto acceptance limit. To broaden the nature of the Extra-Visible aspect of the Group I introduced the Exposure Technique category for mainly HDR and long exposure work.  People come and go but we have many continuing members, some of whose work is outstanding by any photographic criteria. Help is given mainly to the compilation of the "Best of..." monthly feature.

Yet, recently, I have felt that the Group is drifting. In part, indeed in large part, I feel this is because I have been busy behind the scenes with a number of other projects, and because I have been unsuccessful in projecting the worth of the Group in other arenas. Hence, I feel it is time to reassess what the Group should be doing, and who should be doing it. I should like all members to consider the following ideas and give feedback, either as comments, raising a thread in the Admin area, or as personal notes, or all of those.

Future Direction

Should the Group continue? If so, in what form? Options are: to run it as at present; or to make it an open Group, like Infrared-Anonymous; or to make it a curated group like r72, that is, have a stricter submission policy; or to have some other editorial policy that I haven't yet thought of.

As the Group is about extra-visible imaging, not simply IR photography, should we launch further submission areas such as a Monochrome (BW) folder? There is a fairly strong case in that good old black and white photography is a form of extra-visible imaging - we do not see the world that way, and there are surprisingly few good BW Groups in DA. Or, should we push one or more of the present folders more vigorously, such as the scientific aspects of the Group? Or, do both?

Who should run the Group?

Groups should be run by their members via feedback, but in reality most Groups run through the Founder and some small number of co-founders (Associates) and contributors (Expert Members). In this Group, notwithstanding the monthly contributions to the Best of....Feature, it's mainly me who writes, organises and promotes where I can! There is a sore need for fresh blood in running this Group, and I am happy to step aside as the Founder if anyone else fancies the role (subject to my approval of course!!) There is a need for at least one active Associate who can deputise for me, and a need for other admins who will take on development roles - for example, updating our resources files, and promoting the Group through Affiliates. There is a need for others to write Features and Journals, and/or to contribute ideas (see below). In our Admin area there are many resources to help anyone who wishes to take on these tasks.

Feedbck

One very particular area that I tried to promote when I took over, and tried to do myself, for a while at least, is giving feedback on submissions. Do members feel that it is worth submitting images to the Group? Do you get any tangible feedback or evidence that submitting work gets your work noticed, or that you are getting help to develop your work? What I would like to see is that everyone who submits an image looking at and commenting helpfully upon at least one other image by another member.  I know from looking through the submissions that some members do this, but not all. Yet, this is an excellent way to develop friendships and expertise. Are there things that you want to know about IR or HDR or exposure techniques? There are extensive files and references in the various folders, but please ask if you want to know how to do something, use particular software or wish some tips on how to improve your images.

Features/Journals

I want to return the issue of Features or Journals. Over the last 12 months, we have published 18 Features. They have generated a staggering 20852 views! Comments average about 30 per Feature and faves about 8 per Feature. In marketing terms, posting Features gets us noticed, although personal returns in terms of faves are disappointing. During my recent extensive excursions into features and pushing for new ways of collaboration in the writing of features with TandemFeatures I was struck by the same point - features are very popular on DA, and they get Groups as well as people noticed. I have had the view that one or two features per month was a good number, but my recent experience shows that one per week is not too much in promoting a Group. Consequently, to have our Group recognised as a or preferably the leading Group in this area we need to write and post more features. I cannot write them all, but I am willing to help others who would like to try their hand. A feature can be simple and short, provocative, detailed, a compilation, a technical treatise....anything at all, while focussed on the Group. There are some guidelines in the admin area, but the easiest way to get started is to use the Sta.sh system to generate a draft document. I can give guidance on content and editing by being given the Sta.sh code and adding comments to the draft. Why not give it a try?... "My Top Ten IR Photos by ..." "White Balance in IR Photography"....The Use of Nik Silver Efex Pro with IR Photographs"..."HDR Tips and Tricks"....


Many Thanks for your attention - comments and notes most welcome. Let's build up our profile on DA, increase your exposure, and move Infrared-Club from good to excellent.

Cheers

David.

CSS Journal Coded by FleX177 editted byOkavanga