myPicturetown got a bit of an update this week (hmm, services don't seem to use version numbers, so you can't say v1 versus v2; that hides the progression of features, which is I guess what they want). Specifically, myPicturetown now has links to Facebook and can Twitter about new albums that you create. There's also some new album designs and a couple of new security features for those who actually pay for the service (those that don't pay don't need security?).
But here's my problem. myPicturetown is actually growing the workflow hassle, not reducing it. Capture>card. Card>computer. Computer>myPicturetown. myPicturetown>Facebook. Apparently no camera manufacturer other than the deceased Kodak has read my manifesto on socializing photos: Capture>Anyplace with the migration happening automatically on connection using preferences or overrides you make on the camera. That's the workflow users want. Not Camera>Transfer>myPicturetown>Facebook.
Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing that Nikon is beginning to realize that photographers actually want their images to go somewhere other than a Nikon server. After removing the emailing option from ViewNX2, the howling protests got them to put it back and actually add a bit to the options on that. Now myPicturetown has some nascent Facebook and Twitter capabilities. Those are small steps in the right direction. But where's Flickr support? Oh, wait, that's a rival to myPicturetown ;~). Where's EasyShare? Uh-oh, another competitor. Where's Blurb, Shutterfly, and a ton of others?
Nikon is once again trying to find a lock up in which they can ensnare users. If you use Nikon Transfer, for instance, there's a myPicturetown option, but no Facebook option. You can't tag some images to be sent via email to someone as well as stored to your computer. No, you have to use another Nikon software product to do those things, and then you can only do the things that Nikon gets around to letting you do. That's not a good workflow solution.
Over ten years ago I gave a presentation to industry folk on the notion of hub. Cameras need to feed a hub and the hub needs to be where you manage all your workflow. The hub can't be two steps removed from the camera. The hub should be where the images go automatically. The hub should be extensible, and it should be capable of doing all the image management a user desires, regardless of what that is.
To some degree, iPhoto, Aperture, and Lightroom now come somewhat close to my hub concept. myPicturetown could get there, but as it is currently being developed, it's decidedly sub par. A hub, properly configured by its user, reduces workflow, not increases it.
Let me end on this note, which will probably be a surprise to many readers of this site (and unfortunately, a few camera makers): most images now live in the cloud. That's being driven by the images that are coming off camera phones, which need somewhere to go and the easiest place is to somewhere on the Internet. The hub for the youth is fast becoming not their home computer, but either the phone itself or some Web service, such as Facebook or Flickr. The workflow for taking an image on a phone is simpler than that of taking an image on a camera. Is it any wonder that compact camera demand is drying up? (And wait until the phone makers discover that accessory camera modules open up new revenue streams for them.)
True, many of you reading this are older, more conservative, and use more film-like linear workflows. Your images don't live in the cloud (partly because you can't afford to put thousands of those 36mp D800 images you're about to take into the cloud, and it would clog your Internet pipes if you tried. Still, the same concept of hub applies locally as well as remotely, and the popularity of Lightroom is a testament to that. Nikon needs to move the hub closer to the user if they want to play at software.