this is an interesting thread. i think the decision as to whether to leave space for title etc should lie with the magazine being "imitated." my photo is from a mag that frames the cover photo with whitespace for title and etc. many magazines like that offered by trinch let the cover photo drift over the mag title.
i am voting on the basis of the photo being appropriately oriented (points off for landscape, in general) and true to the magazine's typical quality and effect. it's requiring some time but i am actually going to the magazines' websites to check their style when i am uncertain.
i think it's important to use the resources available and give fair appraisal of the work that's submitted. we all take pride in our efforts and as such should receive recognition where due.
i think the main point is whether or not the photo is decent enough to be a cover of a magazine.
worrying about aspect ratios is pretty silly, if you ask me. if you really want to base your score on something so arbitrary as YOUR interpretation of how the photo should be cropped, that's your perogative.
but i think you're missing the point, which is: is it a good photo or not?
but i think you're missing the point, which is: is it a good photo or not?
Experience shows that, for a significant proportion of the voting public, that's not true. The point for them is, does it fit their interpretation of the challenge?
If not, you'll get low votes. And with Magazine Covers, which was argued about extensively last time (and that was before the "does not meet the challenge" people got quite so determined with their 1's) you have to expect non-portrait shots to get panned.
I've had at least one image were I've been told that it would have been used for the cover, if it was shot in portrait aspect ratio. Should I have told the editor that they were wrong ?
It certainly taught me a lesson (shoot both portrait and landscape of a good scene)
I have been told that this is the worse thing you can do, to come back and start justifing your shot. If you had explained your thoughts when you submitted it, it would have been fine. I have been told that Editiors do not want to hear this type of thing and in the future they will not ask for your services.
Originally posted by Gordon:
.... Should I have told the editor that they were wrong ?
I have been told that this is the worse thing you can do, to come back and start justifing your shot. If you had explained your thoughts when you submitted it, it would have been fine. I have been told that Editiors do not want to hear this type of thing and in the future they will not ask for your services.
Originally posted by Gordon:
.... Should I have told the editor that they were wrong ?
Sorry - I was being rhetortical/ sarcastic :) My point was that I need to provide images that the magazine wants - not try and get them to fit. Typically for the cover they want portrait shots, with some space at the top - arguing otherwise isn't going to get very far - unless they've specifically requested something in a different format (e.g., landscape and even there, there are some fairly specific ideas on layout)
So if my submission for a real magazine has to be landscape, people will vote it down because they think the magazine should be redisigned to use only portrait photos, I would get low votes?
If that is the mood of the voters, then, to paraphrase Dickens, the mood of the voters is an ass.
I had to ask because this was not specified in the rules.
I just wanted to get a feeling for how the overall majority was going to vote. I will vote on the photo itself, if it is landscape I will figure it to be a portion of the cover and not a full page photo for I have never seen a full page landscape shot on a cover.
I know this has been said over and over; but I feel we need to take more time in voting and not just automatically vote a shot down. Not enough thought is being put into the voting process. If we do not have the time to vote on all of them, then vote on the ones you like and feel you understand, then try to go back. I think some voters are doing a great injustice for the photographer and work done by voting and not understanding the thought process put into the shots.
Just my 2 cents worth :)
Originally posted by GeneralE:
So if my submission for a real magazine has to be landscape, people will vote it down because they think the magazine should be redisigned to use only portrait photos, I would get low votes?
If that is the mood of the voters, then, to paraphrase Dickens, the mood of the voters is an ass.
What if I submitted a portrait orientated photo to a magazine called Landscape Digest?
exactly the point i was trying to make. go to the magazine website or to amazon.com, take a minute to see what the cover looks like and then decide whether the photo is fitting. there aren't that many entries and most are magazines we know but the few that aren't shouldn't be docked because we assume that the orientation should be different or some aspect of the photo is inauthentic or unfit.
I think that it depends on the magazine and the photo in question. I checked the cover photos for all back-issues of the magazine that I chose to shoot for, and about 70% were full-page portrait photos, and the remainder were landscape photos. The landscape-oriented photos were usually placed across the full width of the cover, although a few were framed with large borders. The space above and/or below the cover photo is filled with either solid color bars and text, or smaller insert photos. I doubt that a good editor would pass up a great photo just because it was landscape.
So if my submission for a real magazine has to be landscape, people will vote it down because they think the magazine should be redisigned to use only portrait photos, I would get low votes?
If that is the mood of the voters, then, to paraphrase Dickens, the mood of the voters is an ass.
I received a comment stating, basically, great shot but -1 because it's portrait oriented -- never crossed my mind when shooting nor when I scored my first 50 or so entries. sheesh!
Given I work in a print shop, I was going to shoot a photo suitable for American Printer. That would be a square or landscape photo, to be placed below the type on a solid-color flood background.
Why don't you all just judge the quality of the photo, and assume the photographer knows what kind of photo the magazine (which you've never heard of) wants? Is everyone so anxious to boost their score by a few thousandths they have to constantly look for excuses for photos "not meeting the challenge?"
To vote down a photo in this challenge merely because it is not in portrait format is (insert favorite derogatory term meaning very much not what most smart people would do).
So if my submission for a real magazine has to be landscape, people will vote it down because they think the magazine should be redisigned to use only portrait photos, I would get low votes?
If that is the mood of the voters, then, to paraphrase Dickens, the mood of the voters is an ass.
I received a comment stating, basically, great shot but -1 because it's portrait oriented -- never crossed my mind when shooting nor when I scored my first 50 or so entries. sheesh!
Theresa, hopefully that was a _rare_ voter. Like you said sheesh!!
i agree. luckily, for all of us, there is no real consequence to losing (or winning for that matter ) on this site ;)
Originally posted by muckpond:
i think the main point is whether or not the photo is decent enough to be a cover of a magazine.
worrying about aspect ratios is pretty silly, if you ask me. if you really want to base your score on something so arbitrary as YOUR interpretation of how the photo should be cropped, that's your perogative.
but i think you're missing the point, which is: is it a good photo or not?
So if my submission for a real magazine has to be landscape, people will vote it down because they think the magazine should be redisigned to use only portrait photos, I would get low votes?
If that is the mood of the voters, then, to paraphrase Dickens, the mood of the voters is an ass.
I didn't count any off for landscape orientations, but I mentioned it in some comments. I think, to my eye, it's easier to visualize the photo being a magazine cover in the portrait orientation, because that's what I am most used to. The feedback is intended to help the photographer find out how the viewer grasps the concept presented, and for me the concept of magazine cover - while not limited to portrait - is easier to see in portrait.
I have the format in mind when posting votes, and give a little extra to those shots with almost neutral space for title at the top. I think this is an important consideration for this competition, at least if the magazine you made the picture for use that kind of layout.
I dont mind if the shots are landscape/moonscape or whateverscape, I dont mind if there is a gap at the top,side,middle or bottom. I have been through them once and voted now I will go back through them again and again, adjust some votes up some down. I dont understand anything anymore, coffee 'mug' and animals in what was supposed to be a potrait of a person challenge. The world has gone mad mad mad!!
