Well, I did the unpardonable - I took down all 53 of my photos. I had two in the collection.
I have been slowly resubmitting my shots with the new voting in place. So far, the two that were in collection have been accepted, but not in collection. 9 that were in the gallery have been rejected. Most of those rejections have come on the peer voting - maybe 2 or 3 were rejected by the judges. In a weird sort of way, I feel better having almost all my work rejected. Before, I'm thinking that I had 53 in there and now everything is rejected. Now, I can just think that almost everything of mine is rejected, so at least it is consistent. I still haven't quite figured out the voting yet - it appears that if there is a huge wow factor, it might make it, but anything else, is very iffy. In some respects, this seems to be following a larger trend. One in which art is transcending photography. Try looking at all the photos on photo.net galleries based on popularity. Almost all the shots are soooo dramatic that they just don't hardly look like our planet - even people shots have heavy doctoring of lighting. Extreme skies and wild, saturated colors are the norm these days - even though where I live, I see that kind of thing maybe once every few years. I seem to be rambling...must be one of those days. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, February 29, 2008, 10:50:35 AM, you wrote: JD> 'prox 4000 images divided by 1900 photogs = 2 images ea. JD> ' " " " " " 680 " = 6 " " (seems more JD> logical). JD> If there are some 4000 voters, the yes/no vote should be considered on JD> the basis of the ratio and not the count, as was initially stated. JD> May help explain the high reject level. JD> Jack JD> --- AlunFoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> A couple of observations: >> >> Bunnell writes: 1900 photographers. >> Photographers list in gallery counts 680. Which means there are more >> than 1200 *unpublished* photographers casting votes. Interesting. >> >> Bunnell writes: max submitted photos from one photographer: 133 >> No photographer in the gallery have that many published. Some guy has >> at least 70 photos in the voting queue, and I'm dead certain it's not >> me... >> >> (yeah, I've got one of those days again... too much time and too >> little to do...) >> >> Jostein >> >> 2008/2/28, Brian Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > Just noticed that Ned Bunnell has posted some statistics (pdf >> files) about the gallery on his Blog. >> > >> > http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2008/02/pentax-photo-gallery.html >> > >> > One file shows a break down of contributors by Country. Not >> surprisingly, the USA is well out in front but Oz contributors are >> doing well and bringing up third place. >> > >> > The other file lists the most popular lenses used. >> > >> > >> > >> > Cheers >> > >> > Brian >> > >> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > Brian Walters >> > Western Sydney, Australia >> > http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ >> > >> > >> JD> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > Get a free email account with anti spam protection. >> > http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/2 >> > >> > >> > -- >> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> > [email protected] >> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >> and follow the directions. >> > >> >> >> -- >> http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ >> http://alunfoto.blogspot.com >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> 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> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. JD> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
