Board index PBase Feature Requests Please remove nudes in Popular Gallaries Thumbnails

Feature Requests

Please remove nudes in Popular Gallaries Thumbnails

Request changes or modifications.
lazmiuk
 
Posts: 3

just pathetic....

Post Thu Sep 14, 2006 12:11 pm


This is a pathetic argument. It just makes me sick of how people want to censor other people. I am an American who has moved to the UK. It is so much more free here compared to the prudish US. It seems to me that hmetal is never going to get that point across to anyone. I admire his effort.

You say your children are getting interested in photography? Your 12 year old son will start looking for pictures of women (nude or not). If he is a male he will. Nothing will stop him. So be prepared.

As for the word 'slit' I feel you crossed the line there. You play yourself up to be some holier than thou and you use that kind of language. I do not what you call your womanhood. Not much catches me off guard. But when I read that I was truly shocked. Get off your high horse.

Some American need to quit being such prudes and open their eyes to the real world. If you children grow up bad, it is not a naked woman’s fault.

I will be posting my art very soon. Keep an eye out for it in the popular galleries.

:D

louloubelle
 
Posts: 138

Re: just pathetic....

Post Thu Sep 14, 2006 12:47 pm


lazmiuk wrote:You say your children are getting interested in photography? Your 12 year old son will start looking for pictures of women (nude or not). If he is a male he will. Nothing will stop him. So be prepared.


*pedantic mode*

I think that's a bit of an assumption
He may be more interested in men than women
It happens

Not having a go at you, just wanting to suggest that making assumptions about people's sexuality might not be helpful, especially when he's only 12 years old, who knows what kind of man he will become. Only he knows that and he might not even yet know it himself

*end pedantic mode*



:wink:

lazmiuk
 
Posts: 3


Post Thu Sep 14, 2006 7:14 pm


you are right louloubelle. I did assume he would start looking at women. The thought that he would start looking at nude men never crossed my mind. Like you say. I would be his choice. Thanks for pointing that out.

455rocket
 
Posts: 732

Re: just pathetic....

Post Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:16 pm


louloubelle wrote:I think that's a bit of an assumption
He may be more interested in men than women
It happens


I think that's a bit of an assumption too restricting the possibilities to living male/female humans he could be interested in trans-sexuals, animals, dead things, inanimate objects, children or even be asexual ......
It happens. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

nickdemarco
 
Posts: 789


Post Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:03 am


I don't like to argue with fellow pbasers but I really hope those running this site pay little attention to the cranky calls to ban certain galleries because they feature nudes.

Rarely have a read such prurient and puritanical claptrap. Such nonsense should be kept for cranky Christian sites not artistic ones. As someone else said, would these same cranks ban Michealangelo, Titian and so many of the great artists who celebrated the human body by depicting it in its full nakedness. This tradition in art is as established as is the depiction of characters from the various religous myths.

Nude photography has been an important part of the form for many years. I do not have any nudes on my site, I have never taken any. I am even sometimes a bit irritated that any pictures I have featuring females without that much clothing get more hits than clearly better pictures - and I question whether that is anything to do with art. But I recognise that there are some very artistic and high quality examples of nude photography on pbase and if it is popular it should remain in the popular galleries.

Of course a line will be drawn on a site such as this. Defining pornography is very difficult and whilst I am not for censorship at all, I can see the strength in the argument that pbase should not be used to publish pornography - there are plenty of other websites that do that. But this argument started with an attack on all 'nude' photography. Well that is just extremely stupid.

andrys
 
Posts: 2701


Post Sat Sep 16, 2006 10:11 pm


nickdemarco wrote:I don't like to argue with fellow pbasers but I really hope those running this site pay little attention to the cranky calls to ban certain galleries because they feature nudes.


While Trinko seems to actually favor an exclusion from 'Popular Galleries'
feature (which Slug apparently already has as a policy for, though it
seems applied only if a gallery is noticed), Trinko proposes the
identification and category scheme most of us think is worth supporting
and this would include nudes for audiences that select an option that
includes that.

This is somewhat tricky to program well and the bandwidth that would
ensue for the nudes would be somewhat costly as we all know, which
*in other public galleries is offset by a lot of advertising* on the top of
those galleries and to the side of them. Many of us are here due to the
lack of ads that pay for such things.

Question becomes, do photographers and audience want to pay for that
bandwidth? Some, like Ray, say they'd pay a premium. As for the
audience, hard to say what the revenue necessary would be.

The tricky aspects are the programming and then how much is needed
from photogs and audience to make it feasible.

nickdemarco wrote:Rarely have a read such prurient and puritanical claptrap. Such nonsense should be kept for cranky Christian sites not artistic ones. As someone else said, would these same cranks ban Michealangelo, Titian and so many of the great artists who celebrated the human body by depicting it in its full nakedness.


Apparently some of them would ban even those, as this shot below and
the entire subgallery it was in (mainly tourist shots of Florence) was not
included in Search here for a long time until I requested pbase investigate
why.

Image

It wasn't because it takes awhile for these things to show up, since
my newer galleries were already in the search engine but not this one
which had gone up earlier.

They've fixed that (maybe until the next complaint).

At any rate, these threads are dominated, actually, by those who
want nude subgalleries re-included in the Popular Galleries
features after mgmt apparently took them out. And those affected
rightfully want consistent application of any such policy, if the
policy must exist.

If mgmt is watching, maybe eventuallly we will get what most ask for,
some kind of tagging system and then will come some way for pbase
to recoup the bandwidth costs this would entail for those who would like
to enjoy presenting and exploring various nude galleries, whether
artistic or not (since that is in the eye and mind of beholders and
impossible for any mgmt to decide with much validity).

hmetal
 
Posts: 246


Post Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:50 am


andrys wrote:...
While Trinko seems to actually favor an exclusion from 'Popular Galleries'
feature (which Slug apparently already has as a policy for, though it
seems applied only if a gallery is noticed), Trinko proposes the
identification and category scheme most of us think is worth supporting
and this would include nudes for audiences that select an option that
includes that.

This is somewhat tricky to program well
...


Since I've already commented on the other points you brought up in other posts, I just wanted to comment on this one..

I am a web services developer with a small corporation with 6 years of practical experience in PHP. I can absolutely assure you that this is by no means a "tricky" nor a difficult thing to program, neither on the PHP side nor the SQL side. All you need is a couple of normalized tables, the backend PHP code and the HTML to support the feature.

For a someone "green" to PHP and SQL this might be difficult, but for a developer of the caliber that PBase should (and, I believe, does) have, it shouldn't take anything but some time to implement, test (including a run through QA, if they have a QA person) and release such a feature.

PHP is not rocket science. PHP is basically C (and it inherits much of C's functionality) without the programmer needing to worry about garbage collection and memory management. Much of the work required to support this feature can actually be done directly in the SQL query or queries.
Ray A. Akey
http://luminescentmemories.com - Luminescent Memories Photography
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hmetal - My Flickr
http://www.pbase.com/hmetal/pad - My PAD
http://codemain.com - A small portfolio

andrys
 
Posts: 2701


Post Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:27 am


Hi, Ray,
Considering they are making changes all the
time and finding unexpected results because of
the very dynamic nature of the coding and all
the various relationships and virtual file locations
etc., I think that doing this kind of filtering
that depends on both the photographer tag
(which won't always be honest/accurate) and
the audience filter (which will be changing
depending on who is in the room with them ;-) )
it might not be as easy as it is in a simpler
application.

Otherwise, I sure agree with you.

avsphotos
 
Posts: 70


Post Thu Sep 28, 2006 3:03 pm


I had started a similar discussion some time back and like this one, it did not get past moral issues or who is right or who is wrong etc....There is no right or wrong answer in this one...But some amicable solution needs to be found for this...so why don't we all work towards that and then provide it to Pbase to see if they will acknowledge it? Also, NO solution will be PERFECT...so both sides need to agree on that...both sodes will have to give up a bit to get this everlasting issue resolved...

There could be miultiple ways of handling this and to me one possible solution to this may be to require categorization of both photos and popular galleries...like...

1. Nature
2. Landscapes
3. Wildlife
4. Artistic Nudes
5. Glamour
6. Fashion
7. Travel
8. Architecture etc...

photo.net has this and in my mind that works most of the time...obviously the onus of categorizing the image is on the person who owns it but that helps everyone in the content that they prefer to see without removing, deleting or offending anyone else...

Also, a couple of other things that could be done:

1. You should be able to choose (multiple) categories that you want to set for yourself as default...that way you can see all the content you want or filter for your ownself things that you do not wish you see...

2. A photo could be set for multiple categories as it is seen fit...So a photos could both be a natrure and a wildlife photo etc...

Let me know what you think...

avsphotos
 
Posts: 70


Post Thu Sep 28, 2006 3:06 pm


Sorry...just saw something similar is already being discussed and I fully support such a move...

reub2000
 
Posts: 32


Post Fri Sep 29, 2006 8:55 am


The solution is to browse pbase after you put the kids to bed, and then bookmark galleries that you want to show to your kids.

hmetal wrote:Since I've already commented on the other points you brought up in other posts, I just wanted to comment on this one..

I am a web services developer with a small corporation with 6 years of practical experience in PHP. I can absolutely assure you that this is by no means a "tricky" nor a difficult thing to program, neither on the PHP side nor the SQL side. All you need is a couple of normalized tables, the backend PHP code and the HTML to support the feature.

For a someone "green" to PHP and SQL this might be difficult, but for a developer of the caliber that PBase should (and, I believe, does) have, it shouldn't take anything but some time to implement, test (including a run through QA, if they have a QA person) and release such a feature.

PHP is not rocket science. PHP is basically C (and it inherits much of C's functionality) without the programmer needing to worry about garbage collection and memory management. Much of the work required to support this feature can actually be done directly in the SQL query or queries.
Jeeze, your making it sound like rocket science. All that would be needed is a content column in the photos table. Then just exclude the photo's that you don't want shown in the WHERE part of the SQL statement.

louloubelle wrote:*pedantic mode*

I think that's a bit of an assumption
He may be more interested in men than women
It happens

Not having a go at you, just wanting to suggest that making assumptions about people's sexuality might not be helpful, especially when he's only 12 years old, who knows what kind of man he will become. Only he knows that and he might not even yet know it himself

*end pedantic mode*



:wink:
To some people in the US (especially in the south) that would be considered worse. Just goes to show the prude and intolerant additude here in the US.

hmetal
 
Posts: 246


Post Fri Sep 29, 2006 9:23 am


reub2000 wrote:Jeeze, your making it sound like rocket science. All that would be needed is a content column in the photos table. Then just exclude the photo's that you don't want shown in the WHERE part of the SQL statement.


Nothing that I suggested is rocket science. I implement exactly the kind of functionality that I noted, in my last reply, on a daily basis. It is by no means rocket science, no matter how it is described and/or implemented.

Also, while not difficult, it has to be a bit more complex than one column in the images table. PBase needs to normalize this using a categories table at minimum.. Then they could have a choice of using a third table with a 1-1 relation between image and the categories the photographer/uploader has chosen (as one should be able to choose more than a single category). Optionally, the relation from image to category could be as simple as creating a CSV string by imploding the IDs of the categories and insert that string into the record you mentioned, in the images table. So, you're partly right, but it will require more than just a single value in the images table. Still, none of that is hard using JOINs in the SQL query.

However, I would have to agree in part with Andrys when she says it would be tough to do this on a live system. Implementations of ANY new feature should always be done on a testbed system and, when tested and deemed stable, moved to the production system.
Ray A. Akey
http://luminescentmemories.com - Luminescent Memories Photography
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hmetal - My Flickr
http://www.pbase.com/hmetal/pad - My PAD
http://codemain.com - A small portfolio

reub2000
 
Posts: 32


Post Fri Sep 29, 2006 9:19 pm


I was thinking of just ENUM ('nude','notnude') for the content column. However, it's kind of hard to plan pbase's database without knowing pbase's database.

hmetal
 
Posts: 246


Post Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:31 am


reub2000 wrote:I was thinking of just ENUM ('nude','notnude') for the content column. However, it's kind of hard to plan pbase's database without knowing pbase's database.


Last I heard, they wanted to create a full content rating system. I'm not sure if this include categories or just something like G, PG, R, X etc or whatever.

Me, I would be happy with just having a tag with 2 states; "general audience" and "adult/mature content," which could indeed be an ENUM or even an sql SET.

However they implement it, I hope they start soon! :)
Ray A. Akey
http://luminescentmemories.com - Luminescent Memories Photography
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hmetal - My Flickr
http://www.pbase.com/hmetal/pad - My PAD
http://codemain.com - A small portfolio

gummyb
 
Posts: 210


Post Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:22 pm


PBASE is not Saturday morning cartoons. So, if people are worried about this, they should not have kids with them when they look at pbase. I personally don't have any of those pictures in my gallaries, but if we start here...we'll eventually get to the guns and violence.

Its the same people who buy M rated games for the kids and then complain about the violence. My kids don't watch R rated movies, but if you let your kids watch...don't complain about it.

PreviousNext

Board index PBase Feature Requests Please remove nudes in Popular Gallaries Thumbnails

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests