Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Has it Changed
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2
Message
Posted
Hi folks. Do you thing the way the website is used by yourself or others using the site has changed since the new upgrade??? thanks.No. Only the "for sale" option, which I would like to see in a separate gallery. It needs a good clean-up. For example, there are posts on this Forum going back ELEVEN years. Who's going to read those? Also, the gallery upload questions take an age to go through. Is anyone doing “Fat over lean”, “Sfumato”, “Encaustic”? I have no idea, even after 32 years teaching art. And aren’t “Hyperrealism & Photorealism” basically the same? As with “Representational & figurative”, or “Pastel & pastel pencil”? As for “Loose” and “Gestural”, well…
Edited
by Ian Gordon Craig
Posted
We all have different views of course, but over all I think there have been some very good improvement indeed. Like for example I just got a notification from this forum post. There are lots of other good little and welcome changes as well. As for the Art for Sale it is a very good business move on behalf of the website owners. It encourages more traffic to the website. POL is free but I like it so much I would pay to be a member, but I am not interested in selling from POL.
Posted
It hasn't changed much for me and my uses. For the most part I think it's better. Clearly there are minor niggles here and there, I haven't experienced most of the problems reported by others...maybe because I'm using a PC...many of the hiccups seem based around the i-phone, i-tablet style gizmos. A couple of things I like are the improved image quality, and the addition of views to each image in my gallery going right back to when I started here (about 3 years ago). The Forum seems less effective than it was, unless I'm imagining things, but it works. My worst fears about the addition of a 'for sale' aspect haven't materialized. I don't bother with sales, but most do, and it all seems to be ticking along nicely.
I'm just glad POL are prepared to run the site as they do, I think it's pretty unique.
I find the addition of 'the number of views' to each image an extra interest. Admittedly not important, but certainly interesting, especially on the older pictures. They must still be getting some attention, you get a vague idea which of your work appeals. Vague because you only know they've been viewed, not what the viewer thought. It's interesting that often the pictures that get the most views aren't what I consider my better stuff.
And then the usual oddities...I've been doing a cartoon series about a couple on a naff cruise-ship. Six pages done so far. For late comments, I use the google-search suggested by someone on the forum as a quicker way to access the picture commented on. These are all in a folder in my gallery, I noticed that, thus far, most of these have received 'about' 100 views each. (Which is very nice). But one of the pages has over 800 views (??). A mistake? If not, probably viewed on social media...I don't use social media...I had a look on POLs facebook page and my cartoon wasn't on it. The minute you put something online who knows what happens to it?
So it's pretty good, and they do seem open to suggestions about improvement. So keep making the suggestions.
Posted
Just a couple of niggles for me. Firstly on the Gallery if I want to flip back to say page 10 I have to to flick thriugh every page to get there. It would br so much better if the last 10 or so pages were identified seperately at the bottom so I could click straight on them individually as before (as happens with a Google search for example).
My other gripe is that in the forum the latest posts are resticted to the last 5 - If I only look in once a day or less I am likely to have to scroll down each media forum to see if there are any posts I am likelly to have missed - hence less activity as Lewis mentions.
Posted
The forum I'm not quite comfortable with yet, the rest, yes, it's much easier to get around. I can't quite put my finger on it but the forum is not as clearcut as before. Now, questions get lost within a heading, the overview isn't as clear as before. Obviously, we must give it time but , at the moment, I prefer the old format of the forum.
Posted
Just a couple of niggles for me. Firstly on the Gallery if I want to flip back to say page 10 I have to to flick thriugh every page to get there. It would br so much better if the last 10 or so pages were identified seperately at the bottom so I could click straight on them individually as before (as happens with a Google search for example). My other gripe is that in the forum the latest posts are resticted to the last 5 - If I only look in once a day or less I am likely to have to scroll down each media forum to see if there are any posts I am likelly to have missed - hence less activity as Lewis mentions.I agree with Michael about the page numbering on the gallery. The old system worked better, where you could choose a page number, rather than the slow process of having to backtrack one by one.
Posted
Following on from Ian's comment about ticking the upload boxes, I've tried an experiment. I do tick the relevant boxes, something like 90% of my work is 'illustration' style, so I tick that box. If they had one for 'cartoons' I'd be ticking that. So within my own gallery I did a search for 'illustrations'...about 20 images came up. There are 500 pictures in my gallery - most ticked as 'illustration.' Clearly these boxes have no function. Perhaps a revamp of the upload boxes is needed, but they don't appear to be using this information.
I see this as a very minor thing, but maybe it's something they'll get round to.
Posted
I definitely agree on the point re page numbering. I would think it’s straightforward to enable the viewer to skip to page 10 for example. The same applies on the Art For Sale section. I decided to add a handful of paintings to the Sale section as a trial but because they were older posts I had to scroll individually through about 10 pages to find them! If you paint in oils you can’t offer brand new work for sale because the paint will still be wet.
Re the banner, Lesley, I find that if someone has posted a non standard shape painting the thumbnail will often chop a head off! I’m viewing from an iPad so not sure if that’s the reason.
Posted
Also, the gallery upload questions take an age to go through. Is anyone doing “Fat over lean”, “Sfumato”, “Encaustic”? I have no idea, even after 32 years teaching art.
And aren’t “Hyperrealism & Photorealism” basically the same? As with “Representational & figurative”, or “Pastel & pastel pencil”?
As for “Loose” and “Gestural”, well.
Ian there are lots of differences eg hyper realism...over realistic and exaggerated, photo realism as per photo. I still do fat over lean , all of your examples are used even 11 years later. Fascinating that some posts go back so far. I must have a look .
Edited
by Sylvia Evans
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2