Bear Sh*t

mwriston: This is probably my biggest complaint about the new Flickr layout. Above, you see what I see when I log in to my Flickr account. That’s Thomas Hawk’s latest photograph. And it’s the only photograph I can see when I log in. When I resize my browser, the photo resizes with it. Which means the only photo I see on my feed is Mr. Hawk’s. Don’t get me wrong. I think Mr. Hawk is a talented, influential photographer whose photographs are more often than not enviable examples of the medium. However, I also follow many other inspiring photographers, like Patrick Joust, or Amy Fichter, or Mando Alvarez, or Josh Sinn, all of whom have uploaded new work at about the same time Mr. Hawk did—but his newest photo demands all the attention. Meanwhile, the sidebar shows me some groups I belong to (not new work from those groups, just randomly selected links), some photos from Explore (which is nice, but not really my cup of tea), a link to the fairly static Flickr blog (which updates sporadically and usually with posts of little noteworthiness), and a list of people whose work I may be interested in (perhaps the most useful feature on the sidebar, and it’s buried down at the bottom). This opening page shows me very little of what I really want to see. Yes, I like Mr. Hawk’s photograph. No, it’s not the only photo I want to see. Yes, I want to find other photographers whose work I might enjoy. No, I don’t care what groups I belong to, what flower photo is getting the most sparkly GIF awards, or what the Flickr blog has to say. This is probably overly harsh, and I don’t mean it to be. I appreciate what the Flickr team has put into this. But I’d like the front page to show me the work and photographers that I follow, the photographers I should be following, and the activity on my own work that other photographers have shared with me. View Larger

mwriston:

This is probably my biggest complaint about the new Flickr layout. Above, you see what I see when I log in to my Flickr account. That’s Thomas Hawk’s latest photograph. And it’s the only photograph I can see when I log in. When I resize my browser, the photo resizes with it. Which means the only photo I see on my feed is Mr. Hawk’s.

Don’t get me wrong. I think Mr. Hawk is a talented, influential photographer whose photographs are more often than not enviable examples of the medium. However, I also follow many other inspiring photographers, like Patrick Joust, or Amy Fichter, or Mando Alvarez, or Josh Sinn, all of whom have uploaded new work at about the same time Mr. Hawk did—but his newest photo demands all the attention.

Meanwhile, the sidebar shows me some groups I belong to (not new work from those groups, just randomly selected links), some photos from Explore (which is nice, but not really my cup of tea), a link to the fairly static Flickr blog (which updates sporadically and usually with posts of little noteworthiness), and a list of people whose work I may be interested in (perhaps the most useful feature on the sidebar, and it’s buried down at the bottom).

This opening page shows me very little of what I really want to see. Yes, I like Mr. Hawk’s photograph. No, it’s not the only photo I want to see. Yes, I want to find other photographers whose work I might enjoy. No, I don’t care what groups I belong to, what flower photo is getting the most sparkly GIF awards, or what the Flickr blog has to say.

This is probably overly harsh, and I don’t mean it to be. I appreciate what the Flickr team has put into this. But I’d like the front page to show me the work and photographers that I follow, the photographers I should be following, and the activity on my own work that other photographers have shared with me.

Reblogged 18 hours ago from mwriston 21 notes
ikenbot: Aurora Borealis is an 1865 painting by Frederic Edwin Church of the Aurora Borealis and the arctic expedition of Dr. Isaac Hayes. The painting measures 56 x 83 1/2 in. (142.3 x 212.2 cm) and is now owned by the Smithsonian American Art Museum. The artist (Frederic Edwin Church) had to convey the experience of watching the aurora without having witnessed it himself. Returning to this article because I wanted to add how awesome it is to know whenever one of the very authors, photographers, artists, etc. who’s work you post and source on tumblr give you props for promoting their work rather than rage about it and cry about copyright and “theft” like others tend to do. In this case I would like to return those props and respect to Meghan Ferriter who is an interdisciplinary researcher and anthropologist and the original author of the above Wikipedia article on a 1865 painting by Frederic Edwin Church which is called “Aurora Borealis” and as you can see, is quite stunning. I think I cheese just as much as they do when this happens, it’s a mutual cheesing based on celebrating the sharing of knowledge. Meghan Ferriter writes: This is a fascinating example of cultural heritage content held at a museum being linked (literally) in a central and open access knowledge repository, then accessed and shared in a social networking space: overlapping forms of digital communication. This was a social share of Smithsonian content; by way of an outreach and engagement event that sought to share Smithsonian collections by explaining their context and content through (or on) Wikipedia. Then that content was taken up by a user on a social media network and shared with his followers. Then his followers responded to that content by liking and reblogging and replying to the content. This Smithsonian-housed content was, therefore, literally linked to broader scientific debates via @ikenbot’s page and the Tumblr/social media sharing loop. Also, as a leader in the science Tumblr section, @ikenbot’s decision to reference the Wikipedia article adds authority or credit to the validity of Wikipedia within that particular community of practice on Tumblr (science-focused bloggers). Is this a case of “If you build it, they will share…”? Perhaps not, yet this instance is a powerfully persuasive example, even as a one-off. It demonstrates the realities of sourcing and sharing content in digital spaces; furthermore, it is a testament to the ways Smithsonian Institution and Wikipedia content meshes and unfolds across digital space through social and cultural behaviors in digital spaces. Plus, it was quite cool to have my own words cited and sourced as a part of the summarization of the image. Thank you again Meghan and all other Wikipedia authors who provide worthwhile information for the public to indulge in! View Larger

ikenbot:

Aurora Borealis is an 1865 painting by Frederic Edwin Church of the Aurora Borealis and the arctic expedition of Dr. Isaac Hayes. The painting measures 56 x 83 1/2 in. (142.3 x 212.2 cm) and is now owned by the Smithsonian American Art Museum.

The artist (Frederic Edwin Church) had to convey the experience of watching the aurora without having witnessed it himself.

Returning to this article because I wanted to add how awesome it is to know whenever one of the very authors, photographers, artists, etc. who’s work you post and source on tumblr give you props for promoting their work rather than rage about it and cry about copyright and “theft” like others tend to do.

In this case I would like to return those props and respect to Meghan Ferriter who is an interdisciplinary researcher and anthropologist and the original author of the above Wikipedia article on a 1865 painting by Frederic Edwin Church which is called “Aurora Borealis” and as you can see, is quite stunning. I think I cheese just as much as they do when this happens, it’s a mutual cheesing based on celebrating the sharing of knowledge.

Meghan Ferriter writes:

This is a fascinating example of cultural heritage content held at a museum being linked (literally) in a central and open access knowledge repository, then accessed and shared in a social networking space: overlapping forms of digital communication.

This was a social share of Smithsonian content; by way of an outreach and engagement event that sought to share Smithsonian collections by explaining their context and content through (or on) Wikipedia. Then that content was taken up by a user on a social media network and shared with his followers. Then his followers responded to that content by liking and reblogging and replying to the content. This Smithsonian-housed content was, therefore, literally linked to broader scientific debates via @ikenbot’s page and the Tumblr/social media sharing loop.

Also, as a leader in the science Tumblr section, @ikenbot’s decision to reference the Wikipedia article adds authority or credit to the validity of Wikipedia within that particular community of practice on Tumblr (science-focused bloggers).

Is this a case of “If you build it, they will share…”? Perhaps not, yet this instance is a powerfully persuasive example, even as a one-off. It demonstrates the realities of sourcing and sharing content in digital spaces; furthermore, it is a testament to the ways Smithsonian Institution and Wikipedia content meshes and unfolds across digital space through social and cultural behaviors in digital spaces. Plus, it was quite cool to have my own words cited and sourced as a part of the summarization of the image.

Thank you again Meghan and all other Wikipedia authors who provide worthwhile information for the public to indulge in!

Reblogged 18 hours ago from scinerds (Originally from ikenbot) 1,037 notes