I agree. No matter the subject, there is no question that it's much more difficult to get an image accepted now than was the case in the beginning. Not disagreeing with Paul that there may be a genre sensitive policy in place, but it's clear that landscapes bounce back as "declined" freely and with very little hesitation.
Jack --- David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have recently submitted 3 landscape shots, all we're rejected in > about 4-5 days or so. > > I submitted another today, landscape/B&W themes, so we'll see. > > Although the four pictures that did make it, we're submitted early > and > most likely accepted on a "we may not get a lot of response" > feelings, > are what i consider some of my better shots over the past few years, > and am glad they are in there.. > > Dave > > On Dec 15, 2007 9:09 AM, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The "slant" may tend to reflect the ratio of submissions. The > > acceptance, as a percentage of offerings, is an unknown. > > > > Jack > > > > --- Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Here are the current counts for the categories: > > > Abstract - 283 > > > B&W - 292 > > > Cityscape/Urban - 466 > > > Documentary - 295 > > > Food - 67 > > > Glamour/Fashion - 38 > > > Landscapes - 907 > > > Lifestyle - 189 > > > Macro - 464 > > > Nature - 1077 > > > Portraiture - 327 > > > Sports/Action - 123 > > > Travel - 474 > > > Wildlife - 446 > > > > > > Yeah, when you look at the actual numbers, I agree with Paul, > there > > > is > > > a very definite slant. > > > > > > -- > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > Friday, December 14, 2007, 7:25:14 PM, you wrote: > > > > > > pcn> I don't know why it would be the case either, but > > > pcn> observation suggests that only landscapes have a fair chance > of > > > pcn> acceptance. I'm okay with that. Perhaps the judges feel they > > > need > > > pcn> more of that genre. But I do believe it's very difficult to > > > score > > > pcn> in some categories. > > > pcn> Paul > > > pcn> -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > > pcn> From: Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> I don't know why that would be the case, but there is no > question > > > that > > > >> you're in a position to realistically assess the work you're > > > offering > > > >> and have the experience and detachment needed to objectively > judge > > > its > > > >> merits. > > > >> Naive it may be, but while there is no question the bar has > been > > > >> raised, I feel it remains level. > > > >> > > > >> Jack > > > >> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > I was better than a quick rejection, but I doubt that you > could > > > get > > > >> > it accepted. I don't think it's what they're looking for. > Fair? > > > Maybe > > > >> > not, but that seems to be the way things are. > > > >> > Paul > > > >> > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > > >> > From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> > > I may do that - my reason to ask here is to see if most > people > > > also > > > >> > > feel it should have been rejected or not. If most do, > then it > > > >> > isn't > > > >> > > worth resubmitting and I learn something more about my > photos. > > > For > > > >> > > this one, I felt it was better than a quick rejection - > but > > > maybe > > > >> > I'm > > > >> > > wrong. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -- > > > >> > > Bruce > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Friday, December 14, 2007, 4:28:48 PM, you wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > JD> Remember my speedy rejection whine awhile back? > > > >> > > JD> I contacted Carolyn who said that she had, also, had a > one > > > day > > > >> > > JD> rejection, was going to re-submit her image and > suggested > > > I do > > > >> > the > > > >> > > JD> same. She stated that there had been some voting > "issues" > > > >> > during that > > > >> > > JD> particular time. I did re-submit my image and it was > > > ultimately > > > >> > > JD> accepted for the gallery in about a week. > > > >> > > JD> You might re-submit your image.(?) > > > >> > > > > > >> > > JD> Jack > > > >> > > JD> --- Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> Hello Jack, > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> speed of rejection - about 1 day. > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> -- > > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > > >> > > >> Bruce > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> Friday, December 14, 2007, 3:31:13 PM, you wrote: > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> JD> Bruce, why do not think it was not seen by the > judges? > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> JD> Jack > > > >> > > >> JD> --- Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> >> I need to see if my perceptions are off base or not. > I > > > was > > > >> > rather > > > >> > > >> >> surprised that the photo I recently showed of the > kid > > > with > > > >> > > >> lollipop > > > >> > > >> >> was declined without even making it to the judges. > I > > > would > > > >> > have > > > >> > > >> >> thought it would have made it through the peer > judging. > > > Let > > > >> > me > > > >> > > >> know > > > >> > > >> >> if I am perceiving wrong...thanks. > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> Here is the photo: > > > >> > > >> >> http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/rivercats_0004a.htm > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> -- > > > >> > > >> >> Best regards, > > > >> > > >> >> Bruce > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> -- > > > >> > > >> >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > > >> > > >> >> PDML@pdml.net > > > >> > > >> >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > >> > > >> >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link > > > directly > > > >> > above > > > >> > > >> >> and follow the directions. > > > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> JD> > > > >> > > >> JD> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > JD> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________ > > > >> > > ____ > > > >> > > >> JD> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. > > > >> > > >> JD> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> -- > === message truncated === ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
