>From: David Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >On Jun 23, 2006, at 5:26 AM, Tom C wrote: > > > I actually like John Forbe's idea of having a panel of judges that > > votes on > > which submissions are included. Sure it has the possibility of > > appearing > > arbitrary, but no less so than submitting a photo to a contest or > > periodical > > for publication. > >PUG isn't a contest, and it doesn't have the space-limitation of a >periodical. >
Hi Dave, No, it isn't and right it doesn't. It wasn't actually suggested that it should be a contest. It was suggested that a set of informal judges decide whether pictures should be included or not. I guess in a sense that could be a contest. I was not actually viewing it as competition, but more just a rather loose standard that would be met. If one's picture did not make it in, go out and try again. I've submitted pictures to contests that were perfectly beautiful and did not receive recognition. With those it was a limited number of winners and the judges subjectivity. In this case there is no limit on how many will be included. I realize many people will not like this idea and I'm not actually pressing for it. Just voicing an idea and opinion. >I like the PUG as it is - an all-inclusive place where people can >collectively show their work and have it identified as part of PDML. So what about having work identified as connected to the PDML. :-) That is not necessarily a good thing. >Just like the list, there's a wide variety of people with different >skills, different tastes, and different viewpoints. I don't see the >PUG as a "gallery" in a strict artistic sense, as the photos really >can't be expected to fit together in any cohesive way. The themes >are pretty loose so we see many different interpretations, and that's >part of what makes it so interesting. I guess I've always had the opposite viewpoint than you. I don't know what "strict" artistic sense you mean. I have always viewed it/hoped it it was an artisitic gallery. Widely varying interpretations of the theme are interesting and do provide a cohesion in my mind. > >If people are worried about declining quality, then get off your >collective ass and make an example: submit something, and comment on >how you think others could improve their photos. Collective ass is something that could be photoshopped. It might even make a good theme. :-) To tell the truth, I thought that was what was being done all along for quite a while. I'm not going to comment on photos I don't think are worth commenting on and I don't see why it's anyone's responsibility to tell others how they think they can improve their photos, even though I have offered my opinion at times. The oness for for producing a quality image is on the photographer. Reading books on the subject and studying photographs they like, learning how to see and edit should provide most of what is required. >If the file size >limit is too small, feel free to sponsor some web hosting space. Or >just make a compromise and look for a pic that will compress to the >required size while maintaining acceptable quality. > >And I fail to see how excluding photos is going to increase >participation. I don't actually care about increased participation. >If someone wants to show a fine collection of >inspired photographs, they can put it on their own website (in my >case, a disorganised work-in-progress collection of varying >quality). I often enjoy photos which experienced photographers don't >care for (maybe my eye isn't trained right), and I really don't want >a panel of judges telling me what they think I should like. > >Above all, else the thing that worries me most about this suggestion >is that it will inevitably bring politics into the list. If you >think our petty squabbles are bad now, just wait until this goes ahead! > >- Dave I'll just say it again. If the PUG is simply a photo sharing site where participants submit, look, test out their images, then there probably are better mechanisms for doing so than a static webpage that must be manually maintained once a month. If it's an artistic showcase, then I feel otherwise. Everyone certainly has the right to their opinion. I just don't view the PUG as some sacrosanct institution that must never change. Peace. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
