| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/23/2010 10:50:44 AM · #2076 |
@ colorcarnival:
LOL! Since I am uploading what I consider my most bestest to 1x, and since I thus far have a 100% rejection record, I fear that I simply do not have the most bestest eye for "great". |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 11:05:35 AM · #2077 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
@ colorcarnival:
LOL! Since I am uploading what I consider my most bestest to 1x, and since I thus far have a 100% rejection record, I fear that I simply do not have the most bestest eye for "great". |
lol Johanna. The special 100% rejection rate is reserved for the members of the -1x club :)
You have a lot of great work btw. I'm really surprised that you have not had something accepted there. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 11:21:31 AM · #2078 |
So because of all of you I won't be able to enjoy 1x.
/shakes fist/
;) |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 01:28:15 PM · #2079 |
Originally posted by salmiakki:
Did anybody notice the new rules change for "blue" members? Suggest if you haven't you check out the threads about it under site news in the forum. It seems you lose all uploading rights now after 10 straight rejections. The change will take place at the next "upgrade" of the site.
One post from the site admin:
Originally posted by 1x admin:
We have had reports that some people on other sites are abusing the 1x-system in a challenge to get the most images rejected. This means that our screeners have to do a lot of unnecessary work. To deal with this, we will implement an upload limit on blue members. After 10 pictures not published, photographers will need the bronze premium membership to upload more. This will only affect future uploads.
At the same time, we will soon introduce a system encouraging uploading great pictures. Every time an image is published, the photographer automatically receives a new upload slot! |
I hope that is not directed towards this thread, if it is then I think it's been terribly misunderstood. As I recall, this thread was created so we could commiserate together when we had been rejected, and was not a competition to get the most rejects! |
Nah, it isn't. Shucks, I posted a couple of my (many) rejects here too, commiseration feels good sometimes.
It's an attempt to get people to think before posting an image to screening. That probably sounds funny, but, in a way, that's it exactly. Some people keep posting picture after picture after picture to screening, without (seemingly) thinking that much about whether the picture fits the mold, and it sort of bogs down the system for crew to have to deal with so many pictures. Even though most of them are dealt with quickly, it still takes a lot of time to do it. But more so than the time it is probably the "depression" that crew end up feeling from rejecting so many pictures. I mean, imagine you're on crew (and I'm not asking for sympathy here), but imagine you get 100 pictures to look at, and of those about 80 to 90 you reject on the spot ... after a while it's really depressing. I guess it would be good to figure out how to come up with a sort of better pre-screening process, but since the pre-screening is member dependent, that's where the limits for uploads come in.
To help with this, what they also did at the same time is open up the critique section to all members (paying and non-paying), so that non-paying members will be able to post their images to critique BEFORE posting to screening (as paying members were able to do). It might help. I think the critique section is pretty good overall at 1X, probably one of the best features of the site. So opening it to all members to use it BEFORE screening is a very good idea I think.
|
|
|
|
09/23/2010 01:29:08 PM · #2080 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by salmiakki:
Did anybody notice the new rules change for "blue" members? Suggest if you haven't you check out the threads about it under site news in the forum. It seems you lose all uploading rights now after 10 straight rejections. The change will take place at the next "upgrade" of the site.
One post from the site admin:
Originally posted by 1x admin:
We have had reports that some people on other sites are abusing the 1x-system in a challenge to get the most images rejected. This means that our screeners have to do a lot of unnecessary work. To deal with this, we will implement an upload limit on blue members. After 10 pictures not published, photographers will need the bronze premium membership to upload more. This will only affect future uploads.
At the same time, we will soon introduce a system encouraging uploading great pictures. Every time an image is published, the photographer automatically receives a new upload slot! |
I hope that is not directed towards this thread, if it is then I think it's been terribly misunderstood. As I recall, this thread was created so we could commiserate together when we had been rejected, and was not a competition to get the most rejects! |
Is that 10 straight rejections or just 10 rejections in total? |
I believe it is 10 in total. Not absolutely sure about that, but that's what I think it is. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 01:32:15 PM · #2081 |
Ursula
Thanks so much for clarifying. I would hate to think that our reject club was interpreted in that way. I'm just depressed, since I have never succeeded in getting anything published that I'll be locked out pretty quickly. Mind you, I have only submitted 30 in 3 yrs, so I'm not really spamming the queue. I vowed I would buy membership if I could get one published. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 01:32:58 PM · #2082 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by yanko:
Is that 10 straight rejections or just 10 rejections in total? |
I believe it is 10 in total. Not absolutely sure about that, but that's what I think it is. |
Ooh, thanks, that was obviously not clear to me. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 01:35:38 PM · #2083 |
Originally posted by colorcarnival:
You have a lot of great work btw. I'm really surprised that you have not had something accepted there. |
Why thank you
*blushes*
Now, if I could only get the screeners at 1x to think so... |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 01:41:35 PM · #2084 |
Originally posted by salmiakki:
Ursula
Thanks so much for clarifying. I would hate to think that our reject club was interpreted in that way. I'm just depressed, since I have never succeeded in getting anything published that I'll be locked out pretty quickly. Mind you, I have only submitted 30 in 3 yrs, so I'm not really spamming the queue. I vowed I would buy membership if I could get one published. |
I don't think there's anyone in this Club here who is spamming the system at 1X. The number of people from DPChallenge that are active at 1X is really not very big either. I do agree with the owners though that it is a good idea to put limits on the number of uploads to screening that people can make on free memberships - from the crew's POV, it will hopefully make our job a little more enjoyable again. Hopefully. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 01:41:55 PM · #2085 |
Originally posted by ursula:
I believe it is 10 in total. Not absolutely sure about that, but that's what I think it is. |
That's pretty amazing. I have two published. I've submitted a total of 12. So I have 10 unpublished works. All of them nice images, actually, just apparently not to the screeners' tastes. But I'm going to be no longer allowed to submit? Of course, I could pay I suppose. I gather if you pay, you can submit no matter how many get rejected?
I'd have thought they might make the cut against those who submit x number and get none published, but allow those who DO get published to continue submitting...
R.
Message edited by author 2010-09-23 13:44:08. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 02:02:05 PM · #2086 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by ursula:
I believe it is 10 in total. Not absolutely sure about that, but that's what I think it is. |
That's pretty amazing. I have two published. I've submitted a total of 12. So I have 10 unpublished works. All of them nice images, actually, just apparently not to the screeners' tastes. But I'm going to be no longer allowed to submit? Of course, I could pay I suppose. I gather if you pay, you can submit no matter how many get rejected?
I'd have thought they might make the cut against those who submit x number and get none published, but allow those who DO get published to continue submitting...
R. |
It's going forward I understand. So your 10 unpublished images wouldn't count. Maybe I'm wrong about the 10 total. I haven't been paying that much attention really. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 02:04:36 PM · #2087 |
To save bugging Ursula, here's the rules which are on the forum on 1x under site news.
Originally posted by 1x:
The new 10 limit upload limitation will work as follows:
1.) As a blue member, you automatically receive 1 upload per week. In addition, by contributing to critique or screening you are eligible to earn 1 bonus slot.
2.) If you submit a picture and it is published, you can actually earn another upload slot for the week the picture is published. However, if your submission is not published, you then have only 9 not published submissions remaining before your membership becomes a non-uploading membership.
3.) Once you hit a total of 10 rejections, your membership automatically becomes a non-uploading membership.
4.) Recognizing that many of our blue members benefit from the critique forum, the critique process is being modified.
5.) In the past, blue members could not submit to critique without first putting their pictures through screening. This will now change. Each week, blue members will have the ability to submit up to 3 pictures directly to critique, provided the "give-and-take" policy of critique is satisfied. This 3 limit maximum includes the automatic upload slot provided to blue members and the bonus slot that may be earned. It is our hope that direct submission to critique will allow blue members to develop and improve the quality of pictures submitted into screening.
6.) The ability to upload to critique will continue even if the member becomes a non-uploading member. In other words, non-uploading members will be restricted but only in respect of their ability to upload pictures for screening. |
Message edited by author 2010-09-23 14:05:38. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 06:59:05 PM · #2088 |
| Yes, I think that will finish me off there. Though I submit very infrequently, I've long since passed 10 rejects. Good way to encourage paying members, though! |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 07:02:05 PM · #2089 |
P.S. Should we lock this thread?
|
|
|
|
09/23/2010 08:42:14 PM · #2090 |
| Well, we're talking about a lot more than our rejects here, so I think the thread is worthwhile (and Ursula suggested this thread hasn't anything to do with the decision over there). |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 08:48:08 PM · #2091 |
Originally posted by ursula:
It's going forward I understand. So your 10 unpublished images wouldn't count. Maybe I'm wrong about the 10 total. I haven't been paying that much attention really. |
Yeah, I figured that out.
The thing I'm having a hard time understanding: say you've got someone who's had published a handful of images, who submits, say, twice a month. Let's say 2 out of 10 get published. So that means, going forward, that sometime after this person has their 5th image published they will have had 10 NOT published, and from that point on, they are not able to show their work at 1x. Unless, of course, they want to pay.
I suppose it's not that Draconian, though; you can't show ANYthing in DPC (except challenge entries) unless you pay...
R. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 08:58:54 PM · #2092 |
Yeah it looks more like a money grab cloaked as a solution to their screener problems.
|
|
|
|
09/23/2010 09:27:47 PM · #2093 |
I don't know. If it's a money grab, so be it. People have to make a living, and if they can do it creatively on the web, more power to them, I guess. I don't particularly care one way or the other, if it's a money grab or an attempt to help screening crew, or both, or whatever. I just hope it helps bring back some joy to screening.
Screening crew doesn't get a penny for their work, except if you count free membership, then we get something I suppose. It's the same here at DPC, Site Council doesn't get paid, but they get free membership. When I was on SC, Langdon was always very generous in his recognition of the work that SC did, and he tried to recognize the work in other ways too, which I thought was just a really neat thing for him to do. Even now, with my limited participation here, I still have a free membership, and I am very thankful for it. But like I said above, I hope the new upload thingy at 1X helps bring back some joy to screening. It probably won't work. Oh well. It's just another website!
I don't know. I'm probably just sticking my foot in my mouth. Maybe I need to go move out into the country and disconnect the net entirely. Or something.
Message edited by author 2010-09-23 22:04:26. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 09:35:07 PM · #2094 |
| It's a lousy fifty-nine bucks a year for corn sakes. Plus you get a website with unlimited upload space in addition to the other stuff. A real website, not the half-baked profile thing you get with some other sites. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 09:48:01 PM · #2095 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Maybe I need to go move out into the country and disconnect the net entirely. Or something. |
Disapproved. I still want to see your work, and unless you wish to invest a fortune in printing and mailing (which, by the way, I would happily subsidize!), you'll have to keep your 'net connection so you can post pictures. So there. :-) |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 10:06:25 PM · #2096 |
Originally posted by Louis:
It's a lousy fifty-nine bucks a year for corn sakes. Plus you get a website with unlimited upload space in addition to the other stuff. A real website, not the half-baked profile thing you get with some other sites. |
But what if you don't need a personal web site? It's not like they feature those sites on 1x. As a visitor you have to either know the URL or the photographer in order to find it. Mind you, I'm not saying 1x should be generating views for you but it would be a nice value add for the money. There's also the journal feature but if you're just wanting to get published, which I suspect is what most people want then you risk getting absolutely nothing for your money.
|
|
|
|
09/23/2010 10:19:07 PM · #2097 |
| You can also do a URL redirect to the default user.1x.com subdomain if wanted. I don't know if it's a cash grab or not, but I do suspect it will cut down on the amount of dross they undoubtedly get. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 10:27:53 PM · #2098 |
Whatever it is meant to do, one likely effect is to even more limit the scope of the photos published. Only successful submitters will be allowed to submit (unless you pay). If you've been rejected 10 times, are you likely to then cough up $59 so you can continue?
It will turn into a small, select club at which point, I think, the policy will change.
Message edited by author 2010-09-23 22:28:27. |
|
|
|
09/23/2010 11:48:09 PM · #2099 |
The site has a lot to offer those with refined taste for the artistic and dramatic.
I do feel it's shame about the 10 rejection limitation.
We all want to feel connected to something we are proud of...but if 10 is the limit then it is what it is...and I'm glad for the experience.
For those who are willing to pay for more...then I wish them the best of luck to enjoy the fruits of their membership.
Message edited by author 2010-09-24 01:36:53. |
|
|
|
09/24/2010 03:00:38 AM · #2100 |
| I pay. And despite my submission numbers it wasn't because I wanted to gain slots; I used the site a lot, I go there often to enjoy the work published. Because I drew value from it, I was (and remain) happy to contribute. |
|
