*settling in on the fence* all valid points but *moving to the left slightly* if these challenges put us in the role of a professional photographer
given an assignment by an editor why do 'we' keep making such glaring errors? is it 'our' fault for not fully understanding what the assignment is? or the editors for not giving specific requirements?
*falling off the fence* I know many of you take voting seriously (and quite right too) but I'm not going to research the last 12 months editions of 140 magazines to decide whether the entry should get a 5 or a 7 (or whatever) I voted on the assumption that the image met the magazines request, not whether the image could ever actually be used for a magazine (I'm sure many don't have the resolution to be printed at magazine requirements) Everybody had the opportunity to submit their own theme and as such "did not meet the challenge" should not be taken into account when voting. I may be totally wrong but I (currently) vote more on aesthetics than technically meeting the challenge. First pass,I did'nt give a 1 or a three on this challenge and only 3 2's (nor did I give any 10's). Right or wrong at least, imho I'm consistant.
Photography is many things to many people and to me it is fun, am I in the wrong place?
Landscape covers -I thought they were all special editions with a gatefold cover.
Yes, Mine was a special edition, that's it. No, I just spaced it on the entry. I wish I could go crop it to the right way, but I didn't even think about it. So does that mean that I would be scoring about a point higher if I would have really thought about it and cropped it right? Anyways, sorry for goofing.
(Though Gordon seems to have changed his position. Tough to tell without the Martha Stewart Living examples though...) :)
My main point in digging through these old posts was that I remember the following post which, in my mind, to a degree, sealed the case for being leniant on landscape entries:
I think the site council could save a lot of headaches by being more specific in the future challenge guidelines. That way we would not be in this forum asking all these questions to see how voters are going to react.
You are right if given an assignment we would have all the specifics.
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
in the role of a professional photographer
given an assignment by an editor why do 'we' keep making such glaring errors? is it 'our' fault for not fully understanding what the assignment is? or the editors for not giving specific requirements?
I think the site council could save a lot of headaches by being more specific in the future challenge guidelines. That way we would not be in this forum asking all these questions to see how voters are going to react.
You are right if given an assignment we would have all the specifics.
Then people would complain that the guidelines are too stringent, and they can not fully express themselves.
I thought all the entrys were great, Who gives a #^&@ which way they are oriented its the idea we are after. This challenge probably received my highest marks yet, good work everyone!
Neil
(Though Gordon seems to have changed his position. Tough to tell without the Martha Stewart Living examples though...) :)
Perish the thought I might have learned something in the last year or so!
Though I think, given the circumstances, I should be accused of changing orientation, not position...
I don't think landscape images automatically 'dont meet the challenge, however, given the experiences I've had with magazine editors and their preferences, I do feel that images that are shot with consideration of a cover layout are potentially more on theme than images that are not.
Yes, any good image could potentially be a cover and all sorts of layout hoops can be jumped through to make it work, but some images work better by design than others - I think in some small way that should be recognised in my voting.
Much like politics, it isn't black and white - no matter how hard you try to make it so.
Landscape positioned photo I did for a real magazine cover. Im not entered in this challenge, but people need to recognize there just isnt one correct way for magazine covers.
Like pointed out beforehand though, it is always good to get both a landscape and portrait version of the shot. You dont know what the client may want to go with. Giving them options is a plus.
Landscape positioned photo I did for a real magazine cover. Im not entered in this challenge, but people need to recognize there just isnt one correct way for magazine covers.
Like pointed out beforehand though, it is always good to get both a landscape and portrait version of the shot. You dont know what the client may want to go with. Giving them options is a plus.
Thank you so much for that post. I have been reading this thread seriously rolling my eyes. I can't believe how nit-picky people are being. Man, if you are voting on if the format's correct, then I think you have missed the boat. There are some FANTASTIC shots in this challenge, so far, my two highest ranks just so happened to be in landscape, not because I am, tryijng to make a point, but that they were the shots that I thought suited the challenge the best. That is just my two cents worth.
(Though Gordon seems to have changed his position. Tough to tell without the Martha Stewart Living examples though...) :)
Perish the thought I might have learned something in the last year or so!
Though I think, given the circumstances, I should be accused of changing orientation, not position...
I don't think landscape images automatically 'dont meet the challenge, however, given the experiences I've had with magazine editors and their preferences, I do feel that images that are shot with consideration of a cover layout are potentially more on theme than images that are not.
Yes, any good image could potentially be a cover and all sorts of layout hoops can be jumped through to make it work, but some images work better by design than others - I think in some small way that should be recognised in my voting.
Much like politics, it isn't black and white - no matter how hard you try to make it so.
(Though Gordon seems to have changed his position. Tough to tell without the Martha Stewart Living examples though...) :)
Perish the thought I might have learned something in the last year or so!
Though I think, given the circumstances, I should be accused of changing orientation, not position...
:) Is learning allowed here?
Originally posted by Gordon:
I don't think landscape images automatically 'dont meet the challenge, however, given the experiences I've had with magazine editors and their preferences, I do feel that images that are shot with consideration of a cover layout are potentially more on theme than images that are not.
Yes, any good image could potentially be a cover and all sorts of layout hoops can be jumped through to make it work, but some images work better by design than others - I think in some small way that should be recognised in my voting.
Much like politics, it isn't black and white - no matter how hard you try to make it so.
That pretty well sums up my feeling on the issue as well. If I can see a crop that would work, OK, if not, then probably mark it down a bit.
DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> magazines
Pages:
Showing posts 1 - 4 of 4, (reverse)
Author Thread
Inga_fang
Sony DSC-F707 03/23/2004 09:57:50 AM
just a note to you all
I work in the magazine-buisiness and know what I´m talking about
A LOT OF MAGAZINES PUBLISH HORIZONTAL PHOTOS ON THE COVER
If you ppl don´t belive me
go and look at some magazines
It is unfair to to mark images down for this
Gracious
Kodak DX6490 03/23/2004 10:05:52 AM
Yep...I know that. Evidently some just don't know it, and will score based upon their own ignorance of the fact. No offense meant, just an unrecognized fact.
:-)
Inga_fang
Sony DSC-F707 03/23/2004 10:07:50 AM
what I don´t understand is....
we are supposed to be photographers here
all of us
mad about photos
why don´t these ppl look at magazines
........that are indeed full of photos for us
Message edited by author 2004-03-23 10:08:27.
EddyG
Canon EOS-10D 03/23/2004 10:35:03 AM
Since this has already been discussed at length in this thread, locking this thread so we can keep it all in one place.
Pages:
