> > From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2007/03/05 Mon PM 01:47:29 GMT > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Declined... > > mike wilson wrote: > > >> From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> Paul Stenquist wrote: > >> > >> >46! I have to get busy. > >> > >> I think I've submitted about 22 so far. I'm trying to be selective, > >> though; I'm only going with images that I think are very strong > >> graphically, so they stand out as thumbnails as well as being good > >> photographs when seen in detail. > >> > >> We'll see how it works out. > > > >This approach is known in NGO circles as "funding led" and is > considered a baaaad thing. 8-) > > I don't think I understand the reference. But if anything in my life > were "funding led" I'd have no life at all. > Now that I think about it... >
"Funding led" means 'rearranging' your principles to attract the highest amount of funding. As you say, digital images work best when they are lacking in detail and graphical in nature. If your previous images were more inclined to hold a lot of detail and subtle nuance, changing the output to more graphical appearance in order to sell more might be construed as being funding led. The comment was meant mostly in jest but I think it is a valid concern as to the direction of photography in general. ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
