Shared publicly  - 
You know what I don't get about G+?
That whole SUL thing. I don't get it. At all actually. None. You have all these photographers listed and 1/2 of them? Yeah I won't even mention what I think. I see all these awesome images in my stream by people who are a hell of a lot more deserving than 90% of the people listed in the SUL. Case in point? +Nate Zeman +Dave Nitsche +Patricia Davidson

Now someone tell me WHY they are not listed in the SUL? Their work can stack up against anyone's and I mean ANYONE'S listed in the SUL. The popularity contest around here is getting to be rather annoying lately. It is starting to get to be "it isn't what you know it's WHO you know" and that is sad....

Gosh how I wish I had the funding, I would so start a photographers only social network where everyone is on the same level playing field.....

My Sunday morning random thoughts of the day.
Now go look at the people's images above I linked to. You will be inspited and you will be glad you did.
Sandra Parlow's profile photoMorkel Erasmus's profile photoGreg Berdan's profile photoJeff Sullivan's profile photo
As someone who is rather new to this, I have to agree with you that there are times when I scratch my head and say to myself "am I missing something?". There is some incredible talent on G+ that is overlooked at times... I too see it in my stream as well....
+Shannon S. Myers Agreed, I just don't get it I guess. I really wish that they would ditch that stupid thing, it never used to be like that.

+Doug Wittrock Yeah, I have bit my tongue long enough about it. And believe me, my tongue is VERY sore lol Ask +Rachael Alexandra she can tell ya lol I won't say anything more though than what I have said. It just starting to get on my nerves and many others greatly. there are so many incredible photographers on here who really deserve to have their work seen & noticed
+John De Bord the purpose of SUL is not to put there a celebrities or popular photographers, but just active people, who post everyday and recommend, and don't forget to mention, to bring more people to conversations.. It was idea to bring more to the empty streams of newcomers !
+P E Sharpe That is an interesting take on it I have to admit, hadn't thought of it in that sense
+Victor Bezrukov If that's the case then why isn't 99.9% of my stream in the SUL, that doesn't make any sense at all. There are many who are active and post daily and even multiple times daily who aren't listed in the SUL.
I agree with your main comment and the above response to Victor. I follow the ones you mentioned as well and their work is very cool I too feel at times that it isn't what you do but who you know. Kind of frustrating.
+John De Bord here the secret - the SUL is not for you ! you know exactly how to find the right for you stuff :-)
The thing is there are so many photographers with 50.000 followers that it is insane. Everyone's stuff can go viral if it's good and get into what's hot ...
+P E Sharpe I don't know about amazing viewing audience, I just want to know why it even exists. Viktor above stated why he thought but it doesn't make sense when so many are active on here. It also never seems to change, always the same people.
John social network contribute to market people more than thé work they produce. Web can even wonder if there is not a lot of great photographer who have chose toi do note communicate on what they do. I know personnally on i condider has thé greatest macro photographer i have had the luck to discover. Photography is a market and product anf quality is not so important compared to the commercial action to place thé product.
+Shelly Gunderson You know what would be neat? A rotation. Something that changes on a daily basis. So you don't have the same people all the time each and every day....hmmmmm.......
I just add on thing... you have followers it ils good for you.. but for my professionnal point of view it is better to get customer anf i don t find them trough social network
+P E Sharpe I don't know, some have certainly blazed a path on here and didn't ala +Mike Shaw What I am thinking is a rotation, it changes daily.
Does anyone remembers time before SUL? Most of the photographers that are on SUL were ahead by followers anyways ... SUL did for us what circle sharing did for the rest ... people wouldn't be near that numbers if both didn't come to exist.
+John De Bord looking for idyll John ? people are completely different. I realized this when I was .. don't remember - very young.. i have this Dream in y head, but it don't move me to any place .. the photographers are people too and you now the main disadvantages of this specialty ? right - increased and highly vulnerable ego !! :-)))
+P E Sharpe so agree with your words !
+Mihailo Radičević do you know another ? :-)))
it was very simple to be your favorite one.... ....from Israel .. and the best one .... from my street :-))
+P E Sharpe The issue with is that the feeds no longer worked. If there were a feed from people, we could make it work again. There is a way if people authenticate themselves--see how there's my feed on the site now. But this requires that people do this:

For us to make it work for all the people who were on Pluserati, all those people would have to create their feeds. I can't see that happening.

Google needs to enable RSS feeds. That would make it easy.
+P E Sharpe I don't know what broke the feeds, but Google should make it easy to get feeds of everyone's public posts. I will change your feed. Check in 15 minutes to see if your feed appears there.
Someone said it, be careful what you wish for, being on the SUL is a double edged sword, you get exposure but with that comes the work to maintain your streams, mine has become high on nigh impossible of late and my interaction has slipped, there has been many times when I can't even comment on one of my own posts as it hits the 500 limit. I miss doing things I used to do here such as POTD and new members but even thats getting harder.

As +Victor Bezrukov said its simply to give a starting point to new members, and as you said +John De Bord prior to G+ no one knew me here and if I'm honest only about 2% of those that have me circled do know me :)
My guess is that the SUL isn't there so much to benefit the individuals, but to benefit Google. The sheer number of followers creates buzz for Google and gets news stories for their new product.

While I dislike the SUL and think it does Google+ members a disservice, I think it's probably a good PR move for Google.
What is SUL? I'm not (for once) being facetious... genuinely has passed me by I think.
I have to ask the same as +Laura Harding been away from g+ for some time so i have no idea what it is..
+Laura Harding +Suzana Ristic It stands for Suggested Users List, when you first join G+ they recommend users to you, I happen to be one with a few others hence my followers count is high.
Thanks +Mike Shaw it's clear to me now :) I should of read what you posted earlier you say it there :) Hopefully you can get back to interact again and do your POTD i enjoyed them.
Hey Thanks for the nod +John De Bord. I really appreciate it man. I've never actually gone to the SUL but have heard a lot about it lately. I do think it should be a rotational thing as it would bring some attention to other folks. I think anything that set's up 'classes' in a system makes the system destined for failure.
"Most of the photographers that are on SUL were ahead by followers anyways" really ?
i can't agree with this +Mihailo Radičević
something similar just said Alex Koloskov - that he entered the SUL when he was more then 1M followers :-))
here the history of everyone - (your history in this example )
the day of SUL's start is 2011-09-20
you can to compare just for curiosity and to get interesting result that only few photographers - Trey, Thomas, Lisa, Robert Scoble (the last is most popular without SUL too) were very popular from their start.. i guess that they were invited to G+ with purpose to create what we have today and to bring all their followers from Flickr, 500px and their blogs.
btw - i love your jokes Mihailo ! they are always carry a bit of cynical tone :-) way of protection?
anyway - it's a reason why i stopped to enter your hangouts.
+Victor Bezrukov Google+ people didn't randomly pick out 25 photographers and placed them on SUL. If there was some order in selection or some reason it was strong enough to differentiate them from all others at that point.

Whatever it was ... quality of photography, interaction or something those people brought to Google+ it was present as a reason.

I've stopped doing hangouts quite some time ago :)
Also, on 20.09.2011 we had more followers then most of the photographers ...

We didn't have millions but we were ahead in some way. That doesn't mean a thing but we were here from the beginning, very active ...
You know what? I"ve never looked at it. I don't know who's on it other than a few people who I keep seeing pulled into these discussions.

Like +P E Sharpe sharp said - I used to think I wanted a million circlers - but no longer. I've seen what happens when people get that many people following them and I don't think it looks like a lot of fun. It's work and headache and pain in the butt! I don't know how they can function with all that bogging down. And the strange people and comments.. good grief!! I already have problems with those things and I'm just a small fish.

I've come to the realization of why I'm here. I'm here to show off my "meagre" photos. I'm here to learn. And most of all I'm here to meet like minded people who I can become friends with - and I have done that over and over again.

I'm not sure why this is such a bee in people's bonnets... is it because they are looking at G+ as a spot to become famous and sell a million prints? Is it an advertisement for their business? I guess I can see that they might be bothered by this list.

I see it as something for new comers. Someone new joins G+ and they don't have any direction or people to add - so they have the SUL to start off with. Why is that so wrong? I admit that I have yet to venture out of the photography venue here, so maybe my views are simplistic.... but I really feel that G+ is going to be what you make it.

Sure, a rotating system would be nice.. but still.. there are going to be people who never get on it and they will be unhappy.

The same could be said about all kind of things here, John. How many times have certain people been on Jared Klimek's Photo Extract? I had two photos, two days in a row that hit the what's hot list. One of them was shared over 70 times, over 1000 +'s and the comments maxed out at 500. I had both of these photos tagged for Photo Extract. They never made the page. Recently I saw a similar photo on there that had no where near the plusses, comments and shares that mine did.

I'm not going around worrying and complaining about it though. I don't understand how these things get decided and for the most part, I dont' really care. Would it have been nice to be in it? Yeah, sure it would! But it's not something that I'm going to make a big deal out of. Same thing with the SUL. It is what it is. Maybe some day they will change it to include more people, but guaranteed.... there will still be people who are left out of it who shouldn't be.
I like following people who I find interesting, if I followed who I'm told to follow, would I be a mindless zombie ?
It's so much easier being on the list I'm on... The TPOPUL (Those Pesky Other People Users List). I judge my account by how many I lose a day!!! LOL!!! Holy crap... Google has it's own 1%. :D
+Dave Nitsche I love you lol Seriously, it makes no sense. You are one of the absolute best photographers around. Period. Your work speaks for itself.
+Mihailo Radičević I don't really agree with that with how most were ahead before the SUL... +Mike Shaw proves my point. Mike though is one of the most deserving for having the followers he does has, when I brought him here he knew nobody. It is always the same people mostly though and the same little clique as any place else. It is time that other photographers are noticed and who deserve it. Enough with the monotony of other sites carrying on over here now. What needs to be done is a rotation on a daily or weekly basis to give others a chance as well . That my friend is only fair.
+Sandra Parlow I am going to throw you a bone and I want you to read it

See here is the deal. And this is damn real.
Each and every time you upload a photo you are in effect self promoting. Now by having a million + users this equates to being literally a walking billboard for your images. This gives you a huge base to promote to. People can say what they want, but let's call it for what it is; would that Google photography conference even be happening if the thing wasn't essentially a SUL of who's who? Nobody would even know about it or show up. Mike was approached by an investor for his work, Trey makes a living off basically showing his work online and promoting it to those who follow him.

It is Marketing 101. The larger user base you have the better chance you have of your work being seen, not just by people but people who matter; publishers and the likes.

What bothers me is this;
it is always the same exact people. Constantly. It never changes. So you in effect have a bazillion people who will never have the power that the .0001% have. They will never be able to launch themselves like those on the SUL can and do. This in turn causes frustration because of opportunity lost. Is this fair? Not by a long shot.

How do you fix it?
You have a daily/weekly rotation and you level out the playing field completely and utterly. You give others their chance.
Hey +John De Bord thanks, I really appreciate the vote of confidence man. It's funny how this place is so much like other places we've been at. I guess all social sites are the same. I thought it was all harmless fun till I see conventions starting around it. Do these people really represent the best or most informative in the business or are the numbers creating their 'expertise'? I really don't know. I know a couple people who are SUL guys and they are pretty damn good. It's all fun and games until money get's involved.
I guess it all comes down t what you want, or what your expectations are John. I fully agree that there are many, many people out there who deserve to have their work seen more (and yes, +Dave Nitsche is one of them)

For me, my expectations aren't that I'm going to become famous nd start selling my work. I do realize that many others, including yourself are working towards that goal though. For those of us who photography is a hobby, it's different than for those of us who make it our job or our living.

Of course every one likes to get plusses and comments. It's great to get those things - it's a sort of validation that you are doing something well . For some it may translate to sales. Trey has been brought up .... does he sell his work more, now, than he did before G+? It seems to me that he was already a super star before G+ came along.

One thing that I also wonder about... many people make a great deal of noise about the SUL. If the noisiest of them were to suddenly be on it, would they still fight for change, or would they just be satisfied that they made it and think it was ok?

I would LOVE to see the SUL work on a rotation - but I still maintain that there would be awesome people who get passed over.
How much photographers would you rotate and how would you pick them? Then apply that onto other parts of SUL. It's an interesting idea, but I don't know how to execute it.
+Sandra Parlow There are many of us on here who are working photographers, myself included in that mix.

Trey was famous before here, sure, but I am pretty sure that his business has certainly picked up and brought new opportunities for him just as it has for Mike.

If the nosiest were on the SUL, I would at least hope that they would fight still for change. I fought for change while I was on DA and my images made the front page each and every day I posted something under the most popular section. I didn't think it was fair and in many ways I am starting to see a HUGE correlation between here and DA...for me the sites really are NOT that much different when it all boils down.

A rotation would eliminate the chances of people getting passed over. Granted it would take years to cover everybody but you have to get the ball rolling at some time. Or....break it down even more so. Have different categories within the SUL of the kind of photography someone specializes in perhaps. Idea there too. It can be reworked in a way which would be beneficial to others.
+Mihailo Radičević A complete upheaval and rearrangement. Rotate it out weekly with breaking it down into what would be like a gallery category. have a section for portrait photographers, wildlife photographers, landscape photographers, travel photographers, street photographers, etc. Each week the list would rotate out with each week bringing in new people and faces. You would of course have to figure out what constitutes "active" but I don't think that would be very hard to do.

As I said, if I only had the financial backing I would create a true social network just for photographers.......
ok - but the SUL is not just for photographers... right? like I said- I don't look at it but I assume there are photographers, tech people, social media experts, etc, etc, right? So how many people are on the list and how many of them are photographers? If it's only a small percentage, then breaking it down into categories might be too involved for what they are trying to do.

I know that you fought, and still fight for the little guy - and that's awesome! however, a list like that is NEVER going to satisfy everyone.... because it can never be big enough. If it gets to big it will start to lose it's effectiveness.

Rotation is a great idea - and it would certainly help to improve the situation - but even that would have people who don't like it and would complain about it.

I think it's one of those "damned if they do and damned if they don't" kind of things. Even on DA the DD's are inconsistent and every day a whole different set of people are featured... and the complaining continues.
ps - if it were a social network just for photographers.... who would buy your art? ;p
+Sandra Parlow That is correct however I am talking in the photographic sense here. I don't use G+ for anything else BUT photography and photography related things. That "other" site is for that (cough cough facebook cough cough lol) I don't see it as to involved, I see it as being more exact. It would be no different than you being able to browse this which is the "SUL" (if you will) for most popular APN images in the last 8 hours.

If DA is any indication it cane be done and done well at that too (imagine that, me giving DA credit for something lol ) each and every gallery on DA, all of them, have a "SUL" broken down by 8 hrs, 24hrs, week, month, year, etc.

As far as "who" would buy my art on a social network just for photographers? The answer to that question is rather easy:

The same people who purchase work from photographers on the likes of flickr :)
excuse me? Who are you and what did you do with John?? I think you are an imposter if you are giving DA credit for something!! :P

for me G+ is all about photography as well - I hate to even go to that other place any more!! ;)

I guess you just need to find the right person to pay attention and maybe they will begin to implement changes... But I still think that people will be upset- no matter what they do with it.
I think you secretly still love the place!!!
yeah... but that doesn't change the fact that you still love that place!!! ;P
+Sandra Parlow nawwwwww I don't. I much prefer it here. I wish that we could sell prints here, that would be nice. I do like how DA just redid the prints though with us now having the ability to withdraw our $ at any time we wish to. That is nice. But honestly, as Henry Rollins said "balls of shit, no matter how nicely and cutely coated, are still balls of shit". That place needs an enema and the administration needs to be fired.
I know John - I just had to tease you a bit!!!
“All of these problems at the end of the day are human problems,” he said. “I think that that’s one of the core insights that we try to apply to developing Facebook. It’s as much psychology and sociology as it is technology.” - Mark Zuckerberg

What makes people happy
"According to the self determination theory, all humans have three basic psychological needs: the need to belong or feel connected, the need to feel competent, and the need for autonomy or self determination. 'When those needs are satisfied, we're motivated. productive and happy. When they are thwarted, our motivation, productivity and happiness plummet,' Prof Ryan says.

Not wanting the community's autonomy and self determination to be undermined is simply basic human nature. Arguing against a fix does not do Google+, or Google, any favors, especially as Apple gets set to launch a competitive service to 145 million iCloud subscribers plus 42 million additional iOS users per quarter (a rate roughly doubling each year).
A very interesting thread, +John De Bord, and I concur wholeheartedly with you on the need for rotation to get other photographers who have stunning portfolios/bodies-of-work and much to contribute into the feeds of G+ users who might otherwise not link up with them. By the way - since you mentioned a "social network by photographers for photographers", I am not sure if you are on "WhyTake" yet? It's something along that vein - still very much a 'start-up'...the owner is +Alister Benn...check it out at WhyTake-dot-Net.
Out of 14K+ followers here I get about 6-10 +1's or comments. Over on FB I get much greater response and have only a couple hundred flowers. Most days my efforts feel wasted here. These people aren't customers , they are only peers. None of whom will ever buy a photo of mine. I use my circles as a source for ideas or inspiration, I am sure this is the same purpose others follow me. For that reason alone I will probably linger on. My interaction has dwindled though. "You get what you give"... that didn't apply here, with the exception of those who grace my Photography Friends Circle. That's where I keep those who reciprocate with actual effort beyond a +1 on a regular basis. They are the reason I still have the G+ app on my phone and the page pinned in my browser on my PC. 

Now If Google would get its act together and discover drag and drop so we could reorganize photos and albums quickly,  easily,  painlessly, and without destroying comments and such.... Well I might be inclined to post even more here. That and stop cropping my photos or adding black bars to them... That is just stupid and annoying. Have they fired the guy who thought that up?
+John De Bord More than the ability to sell prints, I'd like the ability to sell screen saver resolution files for $1, like an iTunes song.  I don't think that online prints sales are as useful as most photographers seem to think (generally speaking, a print is something people want to see in person before buying), but low cost digital files... look at the growth of Trey's staff.
Add a comment...