Is Motionographer changing?

[Carey 0]

Maybe it's entirely temporary, but I saw that they're doing some kind of update. I know they had kind of slowed down for a long time, posted a "how can we be better" type of questionnaire a few months ago, and now the site is intentionally unavailable. Just curious if anyone here has been a part of a reimagining or a format change or whatever seems to be going on.

[solid 0]

All that I know is that the guy running it wanted to know if people would donate to make it a more viable project, seeing as it takes so much of his time. Plus, I just went on and OMG, they have changed the site! Whhaaaaattt.

[AromaKat 1]

Its back but things are broken. Give it time.

[daveglanz 0]

Relaunched and very snazzy looking.

[Carey 0]

Ah, that was quick. I was assuming it would be down for a while for testing or something.

[oeuf 0]

It's red.

[Spence 0]

Seems like it was laid out better before.

I guess you can never make everyone happy.

[oeuf 0]

There seems to be less focus in this new design. I liked the delineation of Quickies and Features.

Oh wells, what Spence said...

[AromaKat 1]

I didn't say anything, assuming I'm just being a grumpy old man who doesn't like change. But I agree. To me, it lost the feeling of being an authoritative industry figure.

 

I'll get used to it. Hell, I don't even visit the site - the articles come to me via RSS anyway.

[Carey 0]

It's a weird niche to fill. They try to be editorial about selecting the work they present, and then try to add value with editorial commentary. It just seems like it all rarely proves that valuable unless there's commentary or an interview that really provide insight, and that's exceptionally difficult to churn out. So it ends up with kind of spotty content. There's basically no community involvement because it's hard to comment and presumably much harder to get work posted. The net effect being that it functions like a magazine, in the era of the internet.

 

I was hoping that maybe mographwiki could somehow fill the void. Because its content is crowdsourced, a simple voting/liking structure like behance (or a million other sites) might allow cream to float to the top. So the community makes the content and then buoys the usefulness of it by sorting it. By soft editing. I just don't think there's another way to do it unless there's dedicated staff with awesome taste and brilliant insights to share constantly.

 

Oops I'm getting on a plane now.

[vozzz 2]

I agree with what Binky Says... as always