| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/29/2012 06:28:57 AM · #51 |
I can see that 500px can be manipulated but I just can't see the point of doing it. The formula gives high importance to the freshness of the image so the score goes down quickly anyway. I have spent some time on 500px yesterday and I have found that really good photographers do not need to cheat. Their images are popular anyway. I have also recognized a few who also have a lot of images on 1x. I don't see a problem with participating in multiple photo sharing Web sites.
To me the recognition is very important. That's why I value Posthumous awards at DPC, sometimes more than the popular score. At 500px I would value the most the comments coming from photographers I admire the most. I hope to get them in future. So far I feel I made a good start that encourages me to continue at 500px. I had 6 images on 90+ for a day, 7 on 80+ after 2 days. I got about 150 new comments, over 2500 views, doubled the number of affections. It is a great encouragement for me to keep on improving. I need that. I cannot take the constant rejection, especially when inferior images get selected ahead of mine.
I have never knocked back DPC. There are some annoying views propagated by some members, there is some nitpicking and narrow-mindedness, but there are also some truly great individuals like Robert, who has given a lot to this site and continues to make DPC worthwhile. I hope he will change his mind and runs another juried challenge (I am mentioning this here as the other thread was closed by SC).
|
|
|
|
03/30/2012 10:59:28 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by MargaretN:
I cannot take the constant rejection, especially when inferior images get selected ahead of mine. |
Isn't this what makes art interesting? It's a matter of personal perspective. What you view as inferior, others may interpret as superior. Personally, I can't stand Rothko, Pollock, de Kooning, and I'm not the only one, yet there's a mob of people who gobble that up.
CS |
|
|
|
03/30/2012 11:02:29 AM · #53 |
Originally posted by cosmicassassin:
Originally posted by MargaretN:
I cannot take the constant rejection, especially when inferior images get selected ahead of mine. |
Isn't this what makes art interesting? It's a matter of personal perspective. What you view as inferior, others may interpret as superior. Personally, I can't stand Rothko, Pollock, de Kooning, and I'm not the only one, yet there's a mob of people who gobble that up.
CS |
While I agree with this I must also concur with what Margaret's saying. While the standard of 1x is very high, I too have noticed several images with basic technical flaws get through that makes me question the panels judgement (e.g. unintentional hdr ghosting). |
|
|
|
03/30/2012 12:51:04 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by cosmicassassin:
Originally posted by MargaretN:
I cannot take the constant rejection, especially when inferior images get selected ahead of mine. |
Isn't this what makes art interesting? It's a matter of personal perspective. What you view as inferior, others may interpret as superior. Personally, I can't stand Rothko, Pollock, de Kooning, and I'm not the only one, yet there's a mob of people who gobble that up.
CS |
It could equally apply to my images ;) |
|
|
|
03/30/2012 01:04:37 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by MargaretN:
It could equally apply to my images ;) |
It could, but doesn't mean you should lose sleep over it. I'd just attribute it to a difference of opinion and move on. Since over at 1x there's a small finite number of curators, it could simply be what you're offering and what their looking for have little correlation.
And this relates to what  HawkinsT posted. When there's a particular kind of image you tend to like, it's easier to overlook the flaws when you otherwise would not have.
CS |
|
|
|
03/30/2012 01:45:30 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by cosmicassassin:
Originally posted by MargaretN:
I cannot take the constant rejection, especially when inferior images get selected ahead of mine. |
Isn't this what makes art interesting? It's a matter of personal perspective. What you view as inferior, others may interpret as superior. Personally, I can't stand Rothko, Pollock, de Kooning, and I'm not the only one, yet there's a mob of people who gobble that up.
CS |
I'm a gobbler...of Rothko anyway
 |
|
|
|
03/30/2012 02:12:06 PM · #57 |
My version of what would they like more from your work... but, I might be way off, they have no brains anyways (with the exception of DPC members there... they are the greatest.) |
|
|
|
03/30/2012 02:27:33 PM · #58 |
nah, my stuff isn't what they're looking for.
i try every once in awhile but it usually doesn't take long for the rejection button to be pressed.
"1x.com Bias and Inconsistency"
not sure about bias but they're definitely consistent...they consistently reject my submissions. :)
Message edited by author 2012-03-30 14:31:29. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/15/2025 01:29:14 AM EDT.
