Re-revisited: photos per thread limit?

I agree with Lowell on having some "rules" and structure to photos whatever is decided. The free for all approach risks creating a mess in my opinion and would change the culture of the site. I like the idea of having thumbnails in addition to the 3 larger photos. I have gone to posting thumbnails as part of the current 3 photo limit. I found this to be pretty easy to do (I'm no techie) with an inexpensive software that you can buy online. So one option might be having that tool available for TAY users or a structure for posting the equivalent using "thumbnails".

I also agree that for longer trips there might be consideration for an increase to the limit. I personally find much more value in photos than in verbage so prefer more photos over less in TR's to tell the story.

While the snow report aspect is great and I wouldn't want to get away from it I get more out of the TR's from a "that looks like a cool trip" aspect. Of all of the TR's I have read I would say that less than 10% were read because I was looking for snow conditions. The rest were just general interest reading for the stoke. Those with photos are more interesting to me than those than just talk about conditions I will not be experiencing because I am not planning a trip to that area. I would go for no limit, but short of that a big number like ten. If people post photos of things I don't find interesting I don't have to look at the photos. I say lets get more photos. If that means some people post their TR's here rather than cc.com or wherever then that is great. If it just means more photos that is great too.

hi. this is an interesting discussion. i'm more or less partial to structure and rules, and i appreciate simplicity. i haven't read all the responses, but what about a simple solution:

two choices -- pick just one per thread!

door #1: 5 photo limit (if you want to show more, then link them.)
door #2: 3 photos + thumbnails (10?) (and you also have the option of linking more photos).

just a thought.

I'm partial to the large photos. 3-5 seems like a reasonable number. Beyond that, thumbnails may be a good idea. For what it's worth, when looking at other sites, I'm usually interested in the first few photos, but then I start losing interest if there's lots of photos (i.e. >10). The reports I'm drawn to the most have a good balance between text and photos.

A concise history: this Trip Reports forum started off primarily as a place to share info on backcountry skiing and snowboarding conditions. The design of the forum and the rules for posting were chosen to make access to this information - the trip reports - as direct and speedy as possible. Each month was given its own board so that current trip reports didn't get mixed in with out of date (older) reports. Every post in a monthly trip report board was required to start with a primary trip report so that everyone would know exactly where to find the conditions info -

Maybe it's time to put conditions reports and trip reports in separate forums?   Conditions reports could have no photos and no reply, just the facts.   Trip reports can be the more cultured visual and literary art forum.

Maybe it's time to put conditions reports and trip reports in separate forums?   Conditions reports could have no photos and no reply, just the facts.   Trip reports can be the more cultured visual and literary art forum.

You may be on to something there. We could have TR's and CR's. I don't know if they need to be in separate forums, but some method of differentiation might be worth while.