What is Digg?71 Comments
- JonAce, on 10/10/2007, -3/+58I read photography as pornography.
- EXreaction, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14I did too. Got me all excited for nothing. :(
;) - incubusbeatsall, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11I did too, and I went looking at the comments to see if someone else did.
- wisie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7i hear flickr has good photos?
- omarciddo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Did you check the top comment?
- herrdoktorc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Photograhy portfolio web sites in "good photography" shocker!
- matador3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Buried for lack of pornography.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I did too
- Crisender111, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Hey me tooo!!! Was gonna post a comment to that effect & saw I am not alone with that thing going in my head 24x7. Ah! Boys! ;-)
- MasterThief117, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Not that it would stop you from clicking it.
- MasterSharma, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4me too. extremely disappointed.
- rcd19, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4so did i . i only came to comments to see if anyone else did
- Micktion, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I also read pornography and not photography.
Perhaps we all have a dirty mind, or we're just surprised by any topic that we see on the net that's not related to pornography. - gavincato, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4The flash interfaces on those sites are very frustrating and slow to navigate
- WalkThePlank, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4As did I!
- borninda818, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Shame on you. What would your mother say?
- dmightx, on 09/21/2008, -0/+3Doesn't matter...!
- plagiats, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I personally think you over use the settings of Automatix. Maybe you should try less agressive HDR.
And about the article: putting a picture taken by a professional on half of your webpage doesn't make it "great". If the pictures is pointless on the site, then it might just disturb users. - esbern1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5there's more to pictures than rice rockets in different settings ffs. they're half the pictures on some of these sites.
- crashflow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I am Spartacus!
- svenjick, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Dugg down for misleading title and crap selection of websites.
- misfitpanda, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'm loving the grey tone of a Loading firefox page...
- shaelen, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4So.. it looks like one has to have GREAT BIG pictures on their site to have it deemed as a good site? Those pictures aren't even all that great, they are just HUGE. I thought the idea of making a great web site is to be able to have it load fast for everyone, even dialup users.
- chrrie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Shocking! Great photography on portfolio websites!
Oh and lets throw in Nike just for kicks... - d3faultnet, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2damn, we're all perverted ^_^
- nocternaloxide, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5WARNING: Contains Self Promoting
This is my work. I get some good feedback, maybe you will like it too...
www.nocternaloxide.com - Arctirus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Let's face it, no one cares about dialup users.
- gitrplaya4u, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2wow so did i
- iLEZ, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Ditto. I am going to hell.
- Japan1, on 11/17/2007, -0/+2My site http://www.hdrjapan.com has quite a bit of HDR Photography for those who know what HDR photography is.
- cherwilco, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2go away clown
- dernynjunk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well, at least we'll have company there.
- somerandomnerd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Bare naked. Close enough.
- josenim, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1ditto, isn't the internet great.
- Forshman, on 11/29/2008, -0/+1Site is moved to here: http://www.johnburgreen.com
- JamaicaJames, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2you know what else can make or break a website? whether or not it crashes when a lot of people go to it.
- lelion, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I hate flash, why? I don't know, I think I need to see a psychologist about it. I just automatically hit the back button every time I see this long download bar going, and going, and going. Something must be wrong with me. Not digg'in till I resolve my mental issues.
- ahawks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Buried!
Wtf? Nike? Incase? Yeah, advertisers (aka, corporate websites) hire pro photographers, but it's also hugely touched up.
How about some real photography sites? This seemed to be nothing but a blog with some links to some corporate websites - Arctirus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I don't know why so many photographers nut themselves over having flash sites. It doesn't matter how good or interesting the photography is, when I come across those sites I just move on.
I'm a photographer myself and I use singapore. http://sourceforge.net/projects/singapore/ - Arctirus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1HDR sucks.
- mancat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1well did the hunters ever get a bear?
- BobTurtle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I couldn't agree more. This will be one of the few non-iPhone related stories that I am going to digg down.
- bob12321, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3where is wvs.topleftpixel.com?
- pankaj010203, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i like http://www.greymatterindia.com/
- redneckcanuck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0The only thing that bothers me about some of these sites is the load time
- androodotnet, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Tens of thousands of Creative Commons licensed photos at http://openphoto.net ..
disclaimer: operated by my twin brother ;-) - poohat1000, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1http://www.picli.com
- eddx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1As a designer moving into the photography world I found it difficult to make my website look great, I have ended up taking only landscape aspect pictures. I think that Dirk Lambrecht's websites shows a great way to show off portrait aspect photography in a stylish way.
-
Show 51 - 66 of 66 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is