The 1x Reject Club - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

04/25/2009 01:36:26 PM · #1026

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by ursula:
So I sent it to screening after saying this here, and it was published. Weird. Go figure :)

The screeners fear this thread... ;)

Riiiiiight! ;-)

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight!!!

eta: Is this the same Rose that just got DQ'd 38 times?

Message edited by author 2009-04-25 14:39:30.

mpeters

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

04/25/2009 02:51:08 PM · #1027

ummm, i think so

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

04/25/2009 06:12:33 PM · #1028

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by ursula:
So I sent it to screening after saying this here, and it was published. Weird. Go figure :)

The screeners fear this thread... ;)

Riiiiiight! ;-)

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight!!!

eta: Is this the same Rose that just got DQ'd 38 times?

yes.

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

04/25/2009 08:58:32 PM · #1029

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Yep, it is. She was at 1X for a little while more than a year ago, but she stopped entering pictures after about 2 weeks or so. I don't know why. For all I know she never posted a single picture to 1X during the almost a year I was on crew there. She used her real name there.

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

04/26/2009 01:29:32 AM · #1030

And she has more accepted than I do. :-(

dswann

Nikon D7000

04/26/2009 11:47:36 AM · #1031

Well, I've had my 6th reject out of 7 tries. Decided that any future submittals will be either very abstract or B&W or both (since I don't do nudes or travel to third world countries).

Message edited by author 2009-04-26 11:48:13.

Alicia

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM II

04/26/2009 12:11:23 PM · #1032

I'm glad I saw this thread again - I keep on forgetting to submit to 1X. I think I have a few that might be ready for rejection - har!

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

04/26/2009 02:26:33 PM · #1033

Originally posted by Melethia:

And she has more accepted than I do. :-(

Makes you wonder, eh? :)

(PS - I think hers got in via the "novelty factor", or something. Plus, it's changed a lot since she sent those in, I doubt they'd be published now.)

04/27/2009 05:22:17 PM · #1034

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by Melethia:
And she has more accepted than I do. :-(

Makes you wonder, eh? :)

(PS - I think hers got in via the "novelty factor", or something. Plus, it's changed a lot since she sent those in, I doubt they'd be published now.)

I haven't been around 1x that long but most of her images don't look anything like what recently published, from what I've seem except for, maybe 2 images. It was brave of her to use her real name as I'm sure people could make her life as miserable as she has made theirs if they wished to chase her around. I'm sure DPC isn't the only spot where she's drawn disgust and assume some folks could spread negative love her way to give her a little taste of her own medicine. Just for kicks, of course...lolol

Message edited by author 2009-04-27 18:47:24.

04/27/2009 07:42:21 PM · #1035

There's a look that's been driving me nuts lately and that's the crazy overburning of images. 1x screeners seem to dig those, as well. Here's a Slippy sample (not posted to tarnish but as a perfect example of the rage).

It reminds of the very first time I've used PS effects/sliders or plug-in programs. Like the first time I used Neat Image and how my images looked like they were dipped in Vaseline BUT also how cool I thought it looked. Then on a bright note we learn how to use them delicately...right? Apparently NOT so with the Burning Tool. It's taken on a life of it's own...good Lord, when will it end?

Anyway, I tried a little overburn (posted above)on one of my rejects, as a joke. I'd never resubmit it like that because I wouldn't want it published that way (just in case, it slipped through). I actually held back on the burn because my hand wouldn't allow me to go any further without twitching uncontrollably. ;)

Message edited by author 2009-04-27 19:47:08.

04/28/2009 11:45:24 AM · #1036

ETA: I should add (based on a comment received)that I don't mind a deep shadows and heavy contrast BUT the cloudy, blotchy burned stuff left every where from overburning done with a wide brush. That's what I find a bit tacky and amateurish looking. Again, I liken it to the first time I used the tool and went crazy, overboard.

This might not be the best example but I'm sure you'll get what I'm talking about...

mpeters

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

04/28/2009 12:44:52 PM · #1037

IMO, a nicely weathered and rugged face doesn't need the help of over burning and USM or whatever to bring out its character. I think i'm agreeing with you here... :)

04/28/2009 02:19:01 PM · #1038

Originally posted by mpeters:

IMO, a nicely weathered and rugged face doesn't need the help of over burning and USM or whatever to bring out its character. I think i'm agreeing with you here... :)

I'm going out on a limb but it seems like a standard has been lowered where a glitzy, edgy kind of look is born out of what some (ME!), consider poor technique, in many cases.

Here's another, where the skin tones are damaged (mostly, up top) or being created. There's one that I can't seem to find where a lady's cheek had a cloud or blotchy discoloration which was a combination of buring and a sepia/warm color filter on top, that left me shaking my head.

Again, I like deep shadowing and contrast but where the brushing seems extremely reckless, it's like a downgrade, especially when that exact look is also an accident, prone to beginners who don't have control or eye for good technical D&B. All for now...

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

04/28/2009 02:31:09 PM · #1039

Maybe I should re-do my Afghanistan gentleman with a healthy dose of Topaz, tone-mapping, and uber-contrast and try again? (It's sad that I am apparently the only one who cannot get in on the "Third-world-a-liciousness".)

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

04/28/2009 02:37:39 PM · #1040

I haven't been active over there but I wonder if it's more of a case of them just liking the subject matter and giving a pass to the questionable techniques used. On this site, it seems the more wow factor the subject has (ex landscapes with auroras) the more voters are willing to let other things go such as sloppy editing so long as the image itself is sharp you can do almost anything to it including burning a hole into another dimension and having little green men come out. I'm sure I've been guilty of this.

mpeters

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

04/28/2009 02:42:36 PM · #1041

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by mpeters:
IMO, a nicely weathered and rugged face doesn't need the help of over burning and USM or whatever to bring out its character. I think i'm agreeing with you here... :)

I'm going out on a limb but it seems like a standard has been lowered where a glitzy, edgy kind of look is born out of what some (ME!), consider poor technique, in many cases.

Here's another, where the skin tones are damaged (mostly, up top) or being created. There's one that I can't seem to find where a lady's cheek had a cloud or blotchy discoloration which was a combination of buring and a sepia/warm color filter on top, that left me shaking my head.

Again, I like deep shadowing and contrast but where the brushing seems extremely reckless, it's like a downgrade, especially when that exact look is also an accident, prone to beginners who don't have control or eye for good technical D&B. All for now...

The back story on this image is pretty interesting, and the other picture of this gentleman with his dog is a little more subtle in its processing, while still very gritty.

hihosilver

Nikon D200

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

04/28/2009 02:52:39 PM · #1042

Ahhh...I see

Pawdrix has his portrait panties in a bunch today...

Perhaps a little Spring Break would be good for us all...;-)

04/28/2009 03:00:36 PM · #1043

Originally posted by mpeters:

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by mpeters:
IMO, a nicely weathered and rugged face doesn't need the help of over burning and USM or whatever to bring out its character. I think i'm agreeing with you here... :)

Here's another, where the skin tones are damaged (mostly, up top) or being created.

The back story on this image is pretty interesting, and the other picture of this gentleman with his dog is a little more subtle in its processing, while still very gritty.

I do like that image BTW. Great character and true expression...oh but for that processing. LOL.

eta; I should re-edit that one and give it a try...maybe?

There 's a sizable Homeless problem in Paris and that shot I took was on the Seine, in the center of town, right under one of the bridges where many people were taking up residence. You can see draped blankets where they section off areas and sleep in stacked levels/compartments of the bridges design...almost like in some weird futuristic post-apocalyptic movie. I thought the garbage can table with umbrella and flowers was a nice touch or a stab at feeling civilized in such harsh conditions.

Message edited by author 2009-04-29 07:33:08.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

04/29/2009 04:26:32 PM · #1044

Whoa! Big congrats to Jennifer Short (

njsabs2323) for getting the primo spot on the front page. I think she is now banned from posting on this reject thread...

Olympus 17mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko

05/02/2009 07:22:07 AM · #1045

Originally posted by zeuszen:

I had my share of rejections with 1x. Fine. If I was their screener, the images they did accept would definitely not have made it past my scrutiny. Some of the rejections would have enjoyed priority. But I don't screen for 1x. I have no idea what they're doing there.

I've got a pretty good idea why they're doing what they're doing, and I'm ok with how they're doing it. I wouldn't do it that way, but it's easier to improve something that already works reasonably well than making it better to start with.

If I did screen or had any editorial input, I'd invite, at least, three submissions at a time, so as to be able detect some coherence between several entries and to steer any member critiques in the same direction. Of course, when you submit a single entry, a subtle aesthetic or a quirky composition can easily go unrecognized, which, IMO, is a shame when the overall (site-) ambition is to assemble excellence.

This is less critical for an challenge-based social environment like DPC. For 1x and sites with a like purpose, it is, the way I see it so far, somewhat regrettable -and this despite the fact that much fabulous and exciting photography is showcased there.

Not surprised. It is a noisy, rat shot, after all but probably my favorite shot in a while.

With the exception of my last 3 published (that I'm not sure I have much use for or even like that much, myself) what they've accepted represents me only partially which is a minor problem. Many of my rejects are better and dearer to my heart. The Rat is actually a good representation of what I look for and he represents me as well...sneaking a potato chip.

The resemblance is uncanny.

Message edited by author 2009-05-02 08:24:52.

ubique

Olympus PEN-F

05/02/2009 07:34:08 AM · #1046

Give this BS up Steve. You're obsessing about it, and its unseemly. Next thing you'll be trying to win DPC ribbons. If someone wants power of veto over your work, they'd better be paying you for it. Otherwise, screw 'em.

Olympus 17mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko

05/02/2009 07:47:06 AM · #1047

Obsessing? Nahhhh. Just drinking my second cup of coffee and airing some thoughts. Believe me when I say that I didn't give a damn (or a rats's ass)when I saw two in the reject bin, this morning.

It's only that 1x is a little nearer to me (in concept and style) yet still in the mainstream, compared to anything else I've found on the internet. So, it's good fodder for discussion. I post here because DPC folks know most or all of my work, not only 10 images.

Message edited by author 2009-05-02 09:27:27.

ubique

Olympus PEN-F

05/02/2009 07:57:05 AM · #1048

Okey Dokey. I've had too much coffee. Or not quite enough. I might start my own site. 1z.com maybe. I'll be the only screener. If a photograph makes any sense at all, it's out. Reject.

Mephisto

Nikon Coolpix A

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

05/18/2009 12:05:32 PM · #1049

yay, just got my first rejection :D

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D