Hi John, I understand the gallery's position and decision making process. However, it would be nice if there were a way of correcting information without risking rejection. For example, when we first began the submission process, the range of camera choices didn't even include the *istD or the *istDS. M lens choices were added only recently and SMC Pentax (K series lenses) are still not listed. Thus, the info is wrong for some pictures. But since correcting the information initiates the review process all over again, some of us may be hesitant to make those corrections. Thanks, Paul Stenquist On Apr 5, 2007, at 6:04 PM, Carlson, John___PAIC_SO wrote:
> > Mark, > > Sorry for the shorter reply to your second e-mail. To break it > down to > basics, the site administrators are being more critical now than when > they first started reviewing images. This is due to the very large > number of images being submitted (we actually thought we would have a > hard time getting enough images and artists - imagine our surprise). > Since we are getting quite a few submissions, it is difficult to > give an > explanation for every image that is declined, and sometimes a revised > image isn't accepted again (if better work has been submitted by the > artist). > > Again, sorry for the short reply to your direct e-mail. > > Thanks, > > John > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 3:02 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: pentax Gallery: Interesting correspondence > > A while back I noticed some errors in the data I had included with > photos I'd had accepted into the Pentax Gallery. I edited the data to > correct it and the photos went into the "awaiting approval" queue > again. > > > And as has happened to others, one of my previously approved images > was > rejected. So, just for the heck of it, I sent an email to ask why the > images needed to be reviewed again if only the text associated with > them > was changed. It seems to me to be actively discouraging people from > correcting mistakes (or just misspellings, in my case), as well as > making unnecessary work for the judges. > > Anyway, I got a reply which did discuss some of the qualities they are > looking for and how they look, not only at the overall contents of the > Pentax Gallery, but at the individual submitter's body of work. (I > hadn't considered that and it seems like a very sensible idea.) As far > as why an photo would need to be reviewed again when the image data > hasn't changed, I got only: > >> If you change any data on an image, it will need to be re-accepted. >> Unlike the artist approval, even though an image was accepted before, >> it may not be accepted again. > > Which of course we already knew. > > So I wrote back saying I was interested in knowing why this was the > case, since it didn't seem to make sense to discourage photographers > from correcting errors. > > Perhaps it's my imagination, but the reply seemed slightly peeved and > commented that the question had been answered in the first email.. > which it quoted exactly as above. I didn't write back to point out > that > the above most certainly not answer the question of *why* this is the > case. I didn't want to be rude and heck, it's their gallery; they're > entitled to run it any way they like. I was just curious. I like to > know > how things work! > > The first email mentioned that the Gallery has been *far* more > successful (interms of interest and submissions) than they expected > and > is generating a large volume of submissions. So personally, I think > the > "re-review upon data change" is something that started out as a > database > bug and is now being used to thin the herd, so to speak :) > > Needless to say, any further errors I find in my submissions will > remain > uncorrected! > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
