Odd workings:
Percy Main based Omnicity 5245 on X66. (danielgrahamm)
Percy Main based DFDS Seaways Lolyne on X66. (danielgrahamm)
Gateshead based "Citylink" Citaro on X66. (danielgrahamm)
Gateshead based "Highwayman" Solar on X66. (danielgrahamm)
Metro Replacements:
3885 (danielgrahamm)
6023 (danielgrahamm)
6019 (danielgrahamm)
6019 and 3885 (danielgrahamm)
Ex-"Route 19" Darts, now in plain red:
8240 (Deptford) (danielgrahamm)
8241 (Percy Main) (danielgrahamm)
As for the GNE: "Buses By Brand" status report - I've not yet placed them into the appropriate sets, nor have I worked out which will be replacing what, etc.
____________________
I feel somewhat obliged to comment on the things that have been said - just to clarify things... I've refrained all day, but now seems the appropriate time to say something. Hopefully won't receive a slap on the wrist from the admin team for what could be perceived as a little too 'bitchy' for a public forum..!
(30 Mar 2013, 11:42 pm)Adam Malarkey wrote Obviously you are implying I copied off Daniel, but the thing is loads of bus spotters do it to make photos easier to view.Elaborating on my first post that I made: It does seem that was the implication, though it was not clearly stated at all. Your instant reaction to it being me who you allegedly copied off does indeed suggest something though. No names were given at all, but mine seemed to pop up!
I still stand by what I said yesterday - I've seen no other enthusiasts arrange their photos into such a manner of, "Buses By Brand". I've gathered opinions from several (yes, several) enthusiasts now, and they've all said that, prior to me addressing the arrangement of my photos into these sets and collections, they had not previously seen it. This also comes from people who viewed photos on other domains used to host photos on - not just Flickr!
(31 Mar 2013, 3:22 pm)Adam Malarkey wrote I personally not a big fan of people of who make accusations of copying as they can be quite offensive as you and Daniel have both experienced in recent weeksNobody is a 'fan' of having had an accusation made against them. It's not great at all, and it can make you feel awful - especially when the accusation is not true. I don't think Wellsey18 was in the wrong by hinting at the matter he was, though. As for my recent falling out with another enthusiast on Facebook, you shouldn't bring that up on this website. It's a completely different group, and it was a matter that was very serious indeed and led to a long conversation between the other person and I - unfortunately, neither party could truly see eachother's side and see fault in their own ways. The "issue" was resolved by blocking one another on Facebook - it seemed the only way. Nevertheless, that matter (or any other argument/falling out that hasn't occurred on this website, actually) shouldn't be brought up on this website. Our community is a lot nicer than some of the other communities out there as it doesn't have half as many arguments and bitchy comments made to one another. Let's keep it that way?
(31 Mar 2013, 3:22 pm)Adam Malarkey wrote Yeah mine maybe set out similar to yours Daniel but it was other users layout of sets which lead me setting mine out in such a way.I don't think I'm being completely unreasonable here, but can you provide an example of an enthusiast (on Flickr) who has arranged their photos in this way? I've searched Flickr for quite a while now, and so have a few other enthusiasts I've discussed the matter with. It's not that I'm annoyed other people are using my ideas (it just shows that they're good ones), it's the fact that my idea is now apparently not my idea. You're claiming that others have organised their photos in such a way before - there have been a few of us who have searched and none of us can find any evidence of this.
(31 Mar 2013, 7:23 pm)gtomlinson wrote Unless you developed Pixelmania, Flickr, Fotopic etc then you have no claims to how one should display photos!I don't believe anyone on this thread has claimed how someone should be arranging their photos on their own websites? I commented on the usage of sets and collections on Flickr, and said that it was 'organised' and 'clever'.
(31 Mar 2013, 7:23 pm)gtomlinson wrote Lot's of sites are similar in layout, simplybusphotos ages ago did a layout like that.I believe that simplybuses didn't do that exactly. They placed the photos by vehicle type, and then within each vehicle type, they were subsequently segregated by brand. Quite different indeed, actually.
(31 Mar 2013, 7:23 pm)gtomlinson wrote When I was younger photography wasn't digital, people organised photos by collection in albums, all your Leyland Atlanteans for one company in one file, nationals in another. Everyone did it, hardly copying.As above, simplybuses did that too. It is common nature for enthusiasts to arrange their photos in such a way. Such a common way of arranging photos is hardly 'copying', I agree. With such a unique approach to organising these photos though, it's obvious there was an original source. As I do believe I came up with this method of organising, it does seem likely I was the original source in this case. That said, enthusiasts have approached me to ask can they do a similar thing with their photos, and of course, the answer has been yes every time! I'm happy that people are using an idea that I believe I developed and am starting to make popular. Everyone has their own spin on the original idea (be it simply piling in all of their photos under a specific Go North East brand set rather than one individual photo like I'm doing) but the source remains the same. It could be argued that my source was Chris White's collection on Flickr... I mean, I hadn't seen it prior to today, but he hasn't made a public post about it every time new photos have been added to it - has he? That's the difference. Anyone who views this website would have an extremely difficult time missing the progress reports I spend time to post every few days.
(31 Mar 2013, 7:23 pm)gtomlinson wrote The whole argument is typical of why I tend to stay away from photos and displaying my old collections (including model collections) because I can't be bothered with the back biting of some enthusiastsI've heard that line from one or two other enthusiasts this week too. It's a shame that you older enthusiasts feel this way. You have to realise also though, that these "arguments" don't crop up every day? On my Flickr photostream, I've only ever had one disagreement of how 'rare' a photo was. This did get out of hand, but guess what? I pressed the delete button on all of their comments to get rid of them - it wasn't what I wanted to be displayed on my photo, so they were gone. It's your photostream, you're in charge. As for other networks, arguments are becoming more frequent, but this is because of - depending on the network we're on here - a spate in bullying which I strongly disagree with, 'banter' which is at the point of degrading one another and general disagreements which have gotten out of hand due to the management of the group which could have stopped it before it prevailed.
(31 Mar 2013, 7:23 pm)gtomlinson wrote Does it really matter as long as someone, somewhere can enjoy and share your photos? It personally doesn't bother me to know when a bus was bought, what it operates on, what its fleet number is, I just appreciate a good photo.I think you're missing the point of this altogether though. At least in my case, the organisation of my (Go North East) photos in these sets is critical in my eyes. Although it's not everyone's cup of tea, it may be someone's... People - like me - may like the organisation of these sets. This could thereby enhance a viewer's enjoyment of the photos themselves - don't you agree? It's a possibility, and I know that if I saw something in such an organisation that I liked, it would most likely enhance how greatly I thought of the photo itself. Of course, there are people like you, who don't care for anything more than seeing a nice photo. Each to their own - I think that's all that can be said on the matter.
(31 Mar 2013, 8:13 pm)Adam Malarkey wrote keyboard warrior think they no it all but know jack sh**Having been called a 'keyboard warrior' plenty of times before, I hope that wasn't aimed at me. I hate the term in fact. I've been said to be a 'keyboard warrior' because I use a high standard of English and can surprisingly maintain interest in writing such long paragraphs on forums just like this one. I mean, this post is a prime example! It doesn't mean to say I'm a 'keyboard warrior', it just means I'm opinionated and will willingly contribute to group discussion on a forum...
(31 Mar 2013, 8:13 pm)Adam Malarkey wrote Then on top of that you have crying bitching and moaning over you copying someone elses layout of photos.Perhaps a bit of an exaggeration. Wellsey18 only commented on how he'd seen a similar format before. Posts made after that certainly weren't that extravagant.
(31 Mar 2013, 8:25 pm)gtomlinson wrote But your spot on, it is a shame, I won't share my photos because I've been burned at rallys when an enthusiast took exception to my photo of an OK Mini bus covering a breakdown on the 724 with 'there's a glint of sun covering the axle'.....I've not met anyone quite like that before, nor had my photos criticised in such a manner. The bulk of the criticism my photos get actually comes from myself. It's actually the little things like that that I dislike about my own photos - you really do have to be a nitpicker if you spot them. Having said that, I spot those things in my own photos because they're my own. I'm constantly on the lookout for how I could enhance my photography and make it better. I'm not on everyone else's photos, so don't spot the little things like that.
(31 Mar 2013, 9:57 pm)aureolin wrote Constructive criticism is good and you need to hear that, but criticism is disappointing when it gets to the point of becoming either offensive or bitchy.Where actually is that line though? That's why I don't often comment badly on photos which have been publicly released - even if it's what I believe to be a helpful comment to the photographer. At the end of the day, if I don't like a photo, I'm not going to give it floods of praise - I'll probably not comment. If it's okay, I'll probably view it and like it. If it's excellent and one of my favourites, that's what the favourite button is for on Flickr, right?
If someone asks for my honest advice when the photo is not on the public domain, they'll get it straight up - no matter how strongly in favour of the photo being excellent or terrible that advice is. Having said that, only my closest friends in the enthusiast community ask me such things - and that's because they know I'll be brutally honest, just as I'd expect them to be if I asked them the same (or a similar) question.
(31 Mar 2013, 9:57 pm)aureolin wrote On ways of organizing - lets not try to reinvent the wheel eh? Sorting by category is nothing new, and has been around for centuries.I think you've missed the entirety of this healthy debate if that's your ultimate conclusion of it. Sorry to be blunt, but that's what I believe. The whole point of this debate was that Wellsey18 insinuated that Adam had copied such a distinctive and unique way of organising his Go North East photos from me (hopefully me 'nyway). As I've explained in this post a few times already - I don't mind people using this method of organisation of their GNE photos as it just goes to show it's a good idea. What really irritated me was that it was suggested that I didn't "invent" the idea as it were, which I do believe organising by brand is something unique which I started off - despite only having taken photos for seven months!
