<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for FlixelPix</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.flixelpix.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.flixelpix.com</link>
	<description>Reportage Photography</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 19:32:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on TWENTY by David</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/blog/twenty/#comment-14234</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 19:32:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=6209#comment-14234</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you, I am glad you enjoyed the exhibition. Thanks for taking the time to call in. The X20 was used for a few of the shots, it is a great little camera.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, I am glad you enjoyed the exhibition. Thanks for taking the time to call in. The X20 was used for a few of the shots, it is a great little camera.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on TWENTY by Leslie Ashe</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/blog/twenty/#comment-14233</link>
		<dc:creator>Leslie Ashe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 19:22:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=6209#comment-14233</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[David

Called in to see the exhibition today.  Lovely work and good to see them well lit and a reasonable size.  Favourite picture was No 1 the waterfall.  It has a luminosity that just jumps out of the print.  I kept going back to it.  

Interesting to see that some were done with the X20 - very impressive.  I bought one myself about 4 weeks ago and love using it although I haven&#039;t tried doing anything serious with it yet.  As a carry around camera it&#039;s great and is a lot easier to carry than a D300!  A small selection of my test pictures is on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29093195@N06/sets/72157633336786111/

Look forward to seeing your continuing work.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David</p>
<p>Called in to see the exhibition today.  Lovely work and good to see them well lit and a reasonable size.  Favourite picture was No 1 the waterfall.  It has a luminosity that just jumps out of the print.  I kept going back to it.  </p>
<p>Interesting to see that some were done with the X20 &#8211; very impressive.  I bought one myself about 4 weeks ago and love using it although I haven&#8217;t tried doing anything serious with it yet.  As a carry around camera it&#8217;s great and is a lot easier to carry than a D300!  A small selection of my test pictures is on Flickr<br />
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/29093195@N06/sets/72157633336786111/" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/photos/29093195@N06/sets/72157633336786111/</a></p>
<p>Look forward to seeing your continuing work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Flickr changes, what do you think? by Martin Connolly</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/blog/the-flickr-changes-what-do-you-think/#comment-14225</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Connolly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 12:35:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=6345#comment-14225</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The new design is too heavy on bandwidth. If you go to the home page then the photos just never stop loading. I do actually quite like the way the photostream is displayed but viewing an individual photo looks ugly - a weird combination of old and new styles. Overall it looks half-baked and it&#039;s too slow. I&#039;m investigating ipernity.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The new design is too heavy on bandwidth. If you go to the home page then the photos just never stop loading. I do actually quite like the way the photostream is displayed but viewing an individual photo looks ugly &#8211; a weird combination of old and new styles. Overall it looks half-baked and it&#8217;s too slow. I&#8217;m investigating ipernity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Flickr changes, what do you think? by scurvy_knaves</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/blog/the-flickr-changes-what-do-you-think/#comment-14209</link>
		<dc:creator>scurvy_knaves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 19:16:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=6345#comment-14209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The old flickr, although dated, had a well developed community of photographers. And the old layout was far from perfect but it offered a much cleaner look and the screen was not so busy. Now, this new look with black box and pictures crammed against each other is far from an improvement. If anything it looks like a pale copy of some competitive sites and a bad copy at it. The visuals alone are not the only turn-offs. I think that the deeper problem has to do with new pricing and ad policies. I posted my pictures on flickr in order to share with others. Now, someone has to pay to see my pics w/o adds? c&#039;mon! I&#039;m disappointed in Yahoo&#039;s approach. Complete lack of consideration for long-time users. They could have at least try to ask us to evaluate new changes before they dumped them on everyone. I&#039;m going to phase out of flickr and move to ipernity.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The old flickr, although dated, had a well developed community of photographers. And the old layout was far from perfect but it offered a much cleaner look and the screen was not so busy. Now, this new look with black box and pictures crammed against each other is far from an improvement. If anything it looks like a pale copy of some competitive sites and a bad copy at it. The visuals alone are not the only turn-offs. I think that the deeper problem has to do with new pricing and ad policies. I posted my pictures on flickr in order to share with others. Now, someone has to pay to see my pics w/o adds? c&#8217;mon! I&#8217;m disappointed in Yahoo&#8217;s approach. Complete lack of consideration for long-time users. They could have at least try to ask us to evaluate new changes before they dumped them on everyone. I&#8217;m going to phase out of flickr and move to ipernity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Flickr changes, what do you think? by Paul C</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/blog/the-flickr-changes-what-do-you-think/#comment-14205</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=6345#comment-14205</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As a Pro member of Flickr for the last 3 years, I am disappointed with the changes. There is functionality missing or if it is still there they have done a very good job of hiding it, the photostream page is confusing and my photo views have dropped considerably since Monday suggesting other people do not like looking now either.  What is so fustrating is that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of comments on their pages regarding these changes with seemingly no response from Flickr. Many people beleive they do not care - and they are doing nothing about disabusing them of that belief.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a Pro member of Flickr for the last 3 years, I am disappointed with the changes. There is functionality missing or if it is still there they have done a very good job of hiding it, the photostream page is confusing and my photo views have dropped considerably since Monday suggesting other people do not like looking now either.  What is so fustrating is that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of comments on their pages regarding these changes with seemingly no response from Flickr. Many people beleive they do not care &#8211; and they are doing nothing about disabusing them of that belief.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Flickr changes, what do you think? by ottomate</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/blog/the-flickr-changes-what-do-you-think/#comment-14193</link>
		<dc:creator>ottomate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 08:33:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=6345#comment-14193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Long overdue! Looks great (like all the other these days). 1TB is huge.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Long overdue! Looks great (like all the other these days). 1TB is huge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Flickr changes, what do you think? by Matthew Dodwell</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/blog/the-flickr-changes-what-do-you-think/#comment-14192</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dodwell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 07:40:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=6345#comment-14192</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think that in general a refresh is a good thing, but my problem with what Yahoo has done is that they are trying too much to be like other sites. Flickr for its good and bad, offered something different, something a lot of people liked. OK, I agree some of it wasn&#039;t great and was a little dated, so the upgrade to full page, high res image are a much improved, and removing a lot of waste white space was a good idea, but in my view they have gone to far with it. But, what Flickr had was that they were different.

The home page is too busy and big for me but I might be able to get used to it, but the part that bugs me on the home page is the right hand side bar. I don&#039;t know, it just isn&#039;t helpful and adds too much noise to one page.

I like the photostream page with the full page of tiled images, but it is not quite slick with the top header. I hate the top image and tool/info bar. It&#039;s too chunky. 

The part I really dislike is the black background when viewing an image it&#039;s horrible, off putting, amateurish and actually kills black and white images for me. B&amp;W images can leak into it, yuck.

They also have only seem to have changed parts of the site as others still have the look of the old format. For example, when you click on Groups from the home page, you just get the old listed format as before. I guess these might come to change later, or is it just a facial upgrade?

They should have not tried to be 500px or some of the other competition. What is the point of trying to look, be like the competition, how are they going to win people back or away from them when they are offering something that isn&#039;t as slick? They should have tried to be Flickr and come up with something new/better. If they had just taken a bit of the $1.1bn they have wasted on Tumblr and put it into some better designers........then maybe, just maybe.

In my view it is a fail. It has some good points and some hideous points. They have moved way to close the the competitions look and feel and offer very little to differentiate themselves from a busy market place.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that in general a refresh is a good thing, but my problem with what Yahoo has done is that they are trying too much to be like other sites. Flickr for its good and bad, offered something different, something a lot of people liked. OK, I agree some of it wasn&#8217;t great and was a little dated, so the upgrade to full page, high res image are a much improved, and removing a lot of waste white space was a good idea, but in my view they have gone to far with it. But, what Flickr had was that they were different.</p>
<p>The home page is too busy and big for me but I might be able to get used to it, but the part that bugs me on the home page is the right hand side bar. I don&#8217;t know, it just isn&#8217;t helpful and adds too much noise to one page.</p>
<p>I like the photostream page with the full page of tiled images, but it is not quite slick with the top header. I hate the top image and tool/info bar. It&#8217;s too chunky. </p>
<p>The part I really dislike is the black background when viewing an image it&#8217;s horrible, off putting, amateurish and actually kills black and white images for me. B&amp;W images can leak into it, yuck.</p>
<p>They also have only seem to have changed parts of the site as others still have the look of the old format. For example, when you click on Groups from the home page, you just get the old listed format as before. I guess these might come to change later, or is it just a facial upgrade?</p>
<p>They should have not tried to be 500px or some of the other competition. What is the point of trying to look, be like the competition, how are they going to win people back or away from them when they are offering something that isn&#8217;t as slick? They should have tried to be Flickr and come up with something new/better. If they had just taken a bit of the $1.1bn they have wasted on Tumblr and put it into some better designers&#8230;&#8230;..then maybe, just maybe.</p>
<p>In my view it is a fail. It has some good points and some hideous points. They have moved way to close the the competitions look and feel and offer very little to differentiate themselves from a busy market place.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Flickr changes, what do you think? by Ian Carroll</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/blog/the-flickr-changes-what-do-you-think/#comment-14191</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Carroll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 07:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=6345#comment-14191</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Like the look of it more now, and images appear far better now than they did.  Much slower though as a result, but nothing I can&#039;t live with.  For me the functionality that is still lacking is in the group mechanics, where I want a means of reviewing all comments made by group members on group images allowing for better critique discussions, perhaps &quot;flag&quot; codes that you put in your comments that make them group specific.  

Explore needs a major overhaul...can&#039;t believe some of the mundane crap that gets in there over some far more imaginative and technically accomplished work.  It should be somewhere for me to look to find new favourite photographers and images, but it just isn&#039;t.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Like the look of it more now, and images appear far better now than they did.  Much slower though as a result, but nothing I can&#8217;t live with.  For me the functionality that is still lacking is in the group mechanics, where I want a means of reviewing all comments made by group members on group images allowing for better critique discussions, perhaps &#8220;flag&#8221; codes that you put in your comments that make them group specific.  </p>
<p>Explore needs a major overhaul&#8230;can&#8217;t believe some of the mundane crap that gets in there over some far more imaginative and technically accomplished work.  It should be somewhere for me to look to find new favourite photographers and images, but it just isn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Flickr changes, what do you think? by Tom McLaughlan</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/blog/the-flickr-changes-what-do-you-think/#comment-14188</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom McLaughlan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 06:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=6345#comment-14188</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The reaction to the changes would make for a wonderful study in social anthropology, highlighting as it does the glorious contradictions, irrationalities, frustrations, desires, expectations and reactions that make us the animal we are. 

Yes, there are elements of the change that displease me; there are parts I really like; and there are bits I&#039;m still to figure out. But let&#039;s wait and see before rushing to judgement. 

Re the Marissa Meyer quote, I do think she&#039;s been misunderstood there - in part because she expressed herself badly and in part (perhaps the larger part) because yesterday people were content to misunderstand her - it fed their frustrations about the redesign. But she&#039;s apologised on Twitter so let&#039;s move on.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The reaction to the changes would make for a wonderful study in social anthropology, highlighting as it does the glorious contradictions, irrationalities, frustrations, desires, expectations and reactions that make us the animal we are. </p>
<p>Yes, there are elements of the change that displease me; there are parts I really like; and there are bits I&#8217;m still to figure out. But let&#8217;s wait and see before rushing to judgement. </p>
<p>Re the Marissa Meyer quote, I do think she&#8217;s been misunderstood there &#8211; in part because she expressed herself badly and in part (perhaps the larger part) because yesterday people were content to misunderstand her &#8211; it fed their frustrations about the redesign. But she&#8217;s apologised on Twitter so let&#8217;s move on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Hands On : The X100s by Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.flixelpix.com/featured/hands-on-the-x100s/#comment-14187</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 03:48:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flixelpix.com/?p=5911#comment-14187</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I know this discussion is about the x100 and x100s, but I&#039;m curious are you looking forward to the Olympus Pen EP 5 at all?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know this discussion is about the x100 and x100s, but I&#8217;m curious are you looking forward to the Olympus Pen EP 5 at all?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- This Quick Cache file was built for (  www.flixelpix.com/comments/feed/ ) in 0.33122 seconds, on May 24th, 2013 at 11:58 am UTC. -->
<!-- This Quick Cache file will automatically expire ( and be re-built automatically ) on May 24th, 2013 at 3:28 pm UTC -->
<!-- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -->
<!-- Quick Cache Is Fully Functional :-) ... A Quick Cache file was just served for (  www.flixelpix.com/comments/feed/ ) in 0.02934 seconds, on May 24th, 2013 at 1:01 pm UTC. -->