Dan...
Intersting point about the thumbnails... while I might rescan to get a
better
quality file (and/or not go the route of scaling them down myself just
for my submissions)
I'm not inclined to crop anything, especially from this collection, just
to get in that gallery. Nor
would I change them in anyway that didn't look good to me, though I
certainly listen to and
consider suggestions people I respect on our list make about them....
but I'd never change them just
to please someone else... I've got to be convinced they are right ;-)
Of the 4 that got in, one of them (The one at versailles of the people
walking away from the camera)
is one I considered I did a poor job of scanning. While one of my
favorite new photos was declined in a second.
So... its shooting craps as far as I can see.
Fortunately, one can see the way the thumbnails will look to the other
photogs when one submits them...
But I'm frankly rather surprised that the PPG allows people to vote on
the thumbnails.. there should be
some mechanism that keeps that from happening. Though when I've been
voting I skip out without voting on
any of the 5 on a page if it looks like I'm not going to be interested
in any single image there, I confess.
(especially if I did a few pages already)
I'm glad that the thumbnails are seen in the correct proportion on that
site, though. I don't understand
at all why when a good 90% of photogs (just guessing here, but it seems
so) are producing their original images
in othe aspect ratios.
A couple of the ones I put up were sign shots, and it occurs to me that
unless there is a very strong visual
not associated with the sign as such in the photo (which is what I
strive for anyway) I can see them rejecting those,
given the international scope of the list...
My next batch (aside from the few that are still sitting there waiting
for review) will probably be more recent color stuff
or possibly some older color work ..
but I'm sure not going to scale down the photos for them - I'll send in
my smugmug sized ones so I'm not doing double work :-)
I apologize if anyone is annoyed I left all of waht Dan wrote in, but I
want to keep that, and my SENT mail is my way of
keeping mail.
ann
Daniel J. Matyola wrote:
I am still puzzled by the Pentax review process. I just had three
images that were held "under review" for 2 weeks after others
submitted at the same time were "declined." Yesterday, all three were
declined, and one that was submitted less than 2 weeks ago was
"approved."
Ann, I suggest that you re-submit some of those great images that were
declined. I noticed, for example that in some of my rejected images,
the point of interest did not show up in the thumbnail. I re-cropped
them so that the "good bits" would be included in the thumbnail, and
the voters could see enough to make them want to view the full image.
(I suspect that many look at the thumbs, and vote to reject on that
basis alone.) Also, on some I brightened the image or increased the
contrast a bit beyond what I thought ideal, and that has worked in a
few cases. Remember that not everyone has a perfectly calibrated
monitor, and certainly not a monitor calibrated just like mine. Also,
cropping to make the focus of interest more dominant (even at the
expense of what I thought was the best composition) has worked in one
or two cases of images I really liked that were initially rejected.
Not everyone shares my concept of proper composition, and many seem to
vote for a clear and catchy image rather than one with good
composition that must be studied for a moment or two to find the focus
of interest and the theme of the photograph.
Of course, in MY files, I keep the original image that I still like
better, if that is the case. I must admit, however, that several of
my images have been substantially improved by the process of
re-processing them for the Pentax Gallery, That is why I still do it.
Dan
--
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.
