Curious, how much re-editing are you guys comfortable with just to get approved? Is there a line?
Mine was a different frame of the same scene and not reedited. But I'd use constructive criticism to help me get published. The line would be that crossed when suggestions resulted in something unappealing to me. :) I respect those people. There's quite a few who know what they're doing.
ETA: The criticism I received about the previous frame was that it was "dirty" and soft.
Curious, how much re-editing are you guys comfortable with just to get approved? Is there a line?
If it changes my personal vision for the image, then that's too much. I haven't resubmitted anything yet, but I plan to resubmit the portrait I linked above utilizing the critiques as a guide to strengthen the image.
* Good handling of depth of field, but the composition is somewhat not well resolved.
Additional feedback: Of those who voted against your image, seven indicated that there is a problem with impact, four noted composition as a weakness and two selected motif as a reason for not publishing the image.
I guess it must be somewhat true that misery loves company -- because sometimes, when I'm feeling like a total loser and failure, I am so comforted to see some of the fascinating and interesting photography here that also gets snubbed. Thanks you guys!
Good handling of depth of field, but the composition is somewhat not well resolved.
That's an interesting criticism.
Yes, I had tried to get the "spiraling bokeh" to fill more of the frame, but the light would not allow for that. I think that is what this comment is considering. I didn't crop the right side of the frame because the blurred thorns are integral to the image. This is one that I would not resubmit, unless I shoot it again.
Additional feedback: Of those who voted against your image, four indicated that there is a problem with impact, one noted composition as a weakness and one selected motif as a reason for not publishing the image.
Does anybody know if they are getting larger numbers of entries these days compared to say...a year ago?
It seems that my stuff takes 5 to 6 days to get action. Before things only took a day or three, the longest, for a verdict.
looks like it. An yet they also accept more per day it appears, so unless a photo becomes "popular" it may be pushed off the main page in mere 7-8 hours, and these hours can happen to occur while you are asleep :). And of course, the popularity of the photo is heavily influenced by the popularity of the photographer, since at this stage the anonymity is gone. Well, this is the flip side of the site success, I guess...
Does anybody know if they are getting larger numbers of entries these days compared to say...a year ago?
It seems that my stuff takes 5 to 6 days to get action. Before things only took a day or three, the longest, for a verdict.
looks like it. An yet they also accept more per day it appears, so unless a photo becomes "popular" it may be pushed off the main page in mere 7-8 hours, and these hours can happen to occur while you are asleep :). And of course, the popularity of the photo is heavily influenced by the popularity of the photographer, since at this stage the anonymity is gone. Well, this is the flip side of the site success, I guess...
Yeah, I had one pushed off the front page in what might have been 5-6 hours...at best. Bummer. However, the Random Images is a nice feature to replay the oldies.
A recent reject of mine was published after resubmission. I was hesitant to re-edit the image after posting in the critique thread, but I must admit I like this cleaner version. I took Deb's suggestion and went to work on some of the stray hairs throughout the face. Bringing down the grain that was added in Nik Silver really added more life to the image as well.
And of course, the popularity of the photo is heavily influenced by the popularity of the photographer, since at this stage the anonymity is gone.
Oh dear... how is the anonymity gone?
well, because the popularity of a photo presumably (the algorithm is not divulged) is based on the number of views, comments, and faves received AFTER the photo is published and the author is known.
Uploads have dramatically increased in the last year and with that comes more published images so the time on the front page will get shorter. We try to space them out as best we can. :D
Uploads have dramatically increased in the last year and with that comes more published images so the time on the front page will get shorter. We try to space them out as best we can. :D
thanks Dave! That's what I figured, and I understand there isn't much you guys can do about it.
Uploads have dramatically increased in the last year and with that comes more published images so the time on the front page will get shorter. We try to space them out as best we can. :D
thanks Dave! That's what I figured, and I understand there isn't much you guys can do about it.
Hehe, we got a plan. Any person who goes saying that we publish their pictures that aren't so good, but reject their good ones, gets one upload slot per month, maybe. The rest get two. It's Dave's idea. Really. :)
