| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/20/2009 10:49:57 PM · #751 |
| Your bar will be around 10% if you get the immediate heave-ho by a screener. That, to me, is not a 10% but a score of 1/10. I wonder if when it gets to member screening that a thumbs up is a 10 multiplied by your "coolness factor" or something like that. |
|
|
|
02/20/2009 11:19:11 PM · #752 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Your bar will be around 10% if you get the immediate heave-ho by a screener. That, to me, is not a 10% but a score of 1/10. I wonder if when it gets to member screening that a thumbs up is a 10 multiplied by your "coolness factor" or something like that. |
Sounds more like a progress bar than a popularity indicator. |
|
|
|
02/21/2009 02:21:01 AM · #753 |
missed on this one-- the popularity bar was at 40% or so.
Too centered,
common compostion
wierd colors
etc.
I don't really disagree, much. ;) |
|
|
|
02/21/2009 03:08:48 PM · #754 |
reject #6 (out of 6)
 |
|
|
|
02/21/2009 03:50:26 PM · #755 |
Originally posted by bvy:
Originally posted by njsabs2323:
Originally posted by bvy:
Curious, how is screening popularity calculated? Is it truly a percentage? Am I the only one getting really low numbers on certain entries? |
Heck no...some of mine are in the 5% range. |
5% ??!! Really??? I know your work. I can't imagine you entering anything so ill-fated that only 1 in 20 people thought it was worthy of publication. I wonder about the math over there... |
Thanks....I have had some that have completely flopped over there...and some that surprised me that they were published. I am at 40% acceptance rate with 65 published and 101 rejected. I bet so far I have had the most rejected. However, I have a leg up on everyone because I probably have been there longer than most (14 months). Ha.
Message edited by author 2009-02-21 15:51:39. |
|
|
|
02/21/2009 08:11:55 PM · #756 |
Two rejections
 
|
|
|
|
02/22/2009 12:33:11 AM · #757 |
Trying this one now, my 4th attempt, it's in screening. Wow, that is a ton of images,  njsabs2323, good job!
 |
|
|
|
02/22/2009 11:44:25 AM · #758 |
Rejected (6 of 6):
Comments from members:
* This is a nice architectural abstraction but it misses something extraordinary to stand out.
* I like how the rectangles look almost like stairs i could walk down, they realy take my eye around the photo. Well done!
Additional feedback: Of those who voted against your image, ten indicated that there is a problem with impact, five noted motif as a weakness and four selected composition as a reason for not publishing the image. |
|
|
|
02/22/2009 02:41:12 PM · #759 |
Originally posted by lynnesite:
Rejected in screening, incredibly low percentage, no reasons given. Now that is frustrating. This shot was juried into a physical (non-digital) Denver show last summer.
|
|
|
|
|
02/22/2009 04:06:03 PM · #760 |
That's it - I've read my way through this thread and I demand to be rejected by them as well !
Is it worth submitting a picture - or would it be quicker for them to just reject me on principle ?
:- ) |
|
|
|
02/22/2009 04:37:13 PM · #761 |
Originally posted by Jedusi:
That's it - I've read my way through this thread and I demand to be rejected by them as well !
Is it worth submitting a picture - or would it be quicker for them to just reject me on principle ?
:- ) |
I've been asking myself that for a few days now ... I keep trying to think of any pictures in my portfolio which would pass muster and I haven't really been able to ... :-( |
|
|
|
02/22/2009 06:03:14 PM · #762 |
Well that was easy enough! I registered and sent in my first image yesterday. I just got my formal rejection email today.
Dear Shutterpug,
This e-mail is sent out to update you on screening results for pictures you uploaded.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately the following picture(s) were not published:
* #110839 (Willow's Denali)
Message from screener about #110839: Your picture has been evaluated both by the site crew and the members. The common decision was to not publish.
The above photos will not be published. This does not mean they are not good
photos, just that they are not what we are looking for. Uploaded photos are
evaluated in terms of affect, originality, aesthetics and technical quality.
Carefully look through our collection to see what kind of photography
onexposure is intended for. Then select your absolutely best work and upload
again. The reject reasons are suggestions about what to look for to improve
the photo. If you want more feedback, paste the photo in the photo critique
forum.
Here's the image they rejected:  . Note the one I sent them had no border and was a larger file size
Message edited by author 2009-02-22 18:03:25. |
|
|
|
02/22/2009 09:40:49 PM · #763 |
| Looks Like ErinM got one published, congrats! Linky |
|
|
|
02/22/2009 09:44:03 PM · #764 |
First try, first rejection, no reasons given...
|
|
|
|
02/22/2009 10:07:45 PM · #765 |
I've been rejected! I'm in the club!
This seemed to be in character with the "Everyday" gallery, but apparently a screener thought otherwise.
A new, less harsh edit of this also didn't pass muster either...
I'm working hard now on my next reject... |
|
|
|
02/23/2009 03:07:00 AM · #766 |
I really like 'Lunch Rush' BVY.
Message edited by author 2009-02-23 03:09:08. |
|
|
|
02/23/2009 07:20:28 AM · #767 |
Originally posted by Iraklis:
I really like 'Lunch Rush' BVY. |
Thanks, Iraklis. Maybe I should have gone with the "harsher" edit (!). If I think of it, I'll post what I submitted later on... |
|
|
|
02/23/2009 12:45:39 PM · #768 |
My horsey is sunning himself now out in the Pasture of Rejects...
 |
|
|
|
02/23/2009 02:32:10 PM · #769 |
Rejection #4 - my most informative reject yet!
"Of those who voted against your image, eight indicated that there is a problem with impact, seven noted motif as a weakness and one selected composition as a reason for not publishing the image." |
|
|
|
02/23/2009 03:17:00 PM · #770 |
I have two or three more shots I may try but after that I think I'm done.
I'm curious how powerful the screeners are in terms of choosing or overiding what gets published. Just my opinion but the screeners or the screener concept is the sites saving grace without that it would be another exercise in mass appeal.
I have one shot that I'm sure would get published but the technicals are slightly weak and I'd love to see it get published for that exact reason. Not sure whether or not to bother but it might be worth seeing where the sites heads at...
Message edited by author 2009-02-23 15:18:15. |
|
|
|
02/23/2009 03:37:12 PM · #771 |
| Just had another published.......... |
|
|
|
02/23/2009 04:52:17 PM · #772 |
I have a bronze account with 10 extra slots - so I just tend to throw a few up there - not a good recipe for adding to the two I have published. However, I thought these two had merit:
 
and here is a nice monochrome portrait I thought might do well (it made it through to member screening but was then knocked back):
My favourite reject is my Free Study entry for this month, but I'll share that after voting has finished.
Any thoughts (I know I can post them on 1x for critique, but I'd rather post them here)?
|
|
|
|
02/23/2009 05:11:03 PM · #773 |
|
|
|
02/23/2009 07:28:36 PM · #774 |
Holy Cow - I DID IT!
After 9 rejections I got one through ... 
Maybe I should stop now - GRIN!
Congratulation to ErinM I believe she got her first through too ... as it should be - she ROCKS! |
|
|
|
02/24/2009 12:30:05 AM · #775 |
Two more rejections today - that makes all three for three week (seems you can only submit three a week)
Here are the two that just got rejected:
 |
|
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: 07/21/2025 05:16:57 PM EDT.
