Elitist Gallery?

Chas · #1 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 10:15 PM

Hello everyone out there. Help and advice needed please. I tried to post this image earlier on in the main Gallery and it was rejected, obviously the reasons are not open for discussion but.......I ask you!!!!! I have to say that it is about the best photo I have taken and I am chuffed with it. I labelled it properly with all the dots and dashes in the right place but still didn't make into your exclusive Gallery. So have a look at this image and tell me why. I have to say that I am pretty upset about it and probably wont try to upload any more. Just what is going on? You all seem so elitist, or am I totally wrong?

Tormentil · #2 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 10:20 PM

Its 3pixels short on width. Pics must be at least 800 x 600, otherwise they are automatcally rejected, without the mods even seeing them.

Kayleigh · #3 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 10:23 PM

It looks to me a very good image. Sometime it takes the Gallery mods a while to look an images..I can't see what's was wrong. There is nothing wrong with the image. Are you sure you had the correct names and everything..

I have have pics in the Gallery far less quality than this. It is not elitism..

Meta menardi · #4 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chas

Hello everyone out there. Help and advice needed please. I tried to post this image earlier on in the main Gallery and it was rejected, obviously the reasons are not open for discussion but.......I ask you!!!!! I have to say that it is about the best photo I have taken and I am chuffed with it. I labelled it properly with all the dots and dashes in the right place but still didn't make into your exclusive Gallery. So have a look at this image and tell me why. I have to say that I am pretty upset about it and probably wont try to upload any more. Just what is going on? You all seem so elitist, or am I totally wrong?

My Missus is an aspiring artist and submits her best to loads of places. Some come home and others don't. They can all take weeks to create. Part of aspiring to be an artist.

There is so much of your photo that is really good, the feathering on the back is so clear. My criticism of it (and it is mine and not anyone elses) is that the focus on the head, and the eye is drawn to the head, is softer than the focus on the back.

I am really struggling at the moment to get any kind of photo that I can even like from my new camera, and I am very aware because of this that it is important to be self-critical.

Van Gogh sold one picture in his lifetime. Don't cut your ear off yet. I would love to have taken that photo, but I would have that thought in the back of my mind "could do better", mainly because that was all I got at school.

Chas · #5 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 10:54 PM

I am not saying it is a perfect pic just that it is as good as lots on the Gallery at the moment and if it has not been included because it is a pixel or two short well! The truth of the matter is this is Wild about Britain, this is an image which is clear, well composed and well constructed of a wild bird in it's wild environment and yet it is considered not up to standard for your the Gallery....so I rest my case. What am I to think, there must be an agenda that I am not aware of?

pressld2 · #6 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tormentil

Its 3pixels short on width.

Except it's not Ben. It's 1086 x 1600. At least the one in the archive is.

It's a cracking shot Chas, one I'd be equally proud of if it were mine. I agree with Meta menardi that the sharpest focus is on the back and not the head but, IMO, that just downgrades it from perfect to excellent! I can only think that, although you thought you had all the dashes in the right place there was maybe something missing. I had two shots rejected from my last batch of uploads but I'm pretty sure it was my mistake in the name/keywords fields. I've re-uploaded them very carefully and they've both been accepted now.

Please don't be put off by this. Have another go and make sure you have "Shag - Phalacrocorax aristotelis" in the title (without the quotes) and "Shag Phalacrocorax aristotelis" in the keywords (also without the quotes). I know that the insistence on strict adherence to the naming standards can seem petty at times but I assure you, as someone who develops database applications for a living, it can be crucial to the smooth functioning of the site.

Dave P.

pressld2 · #7 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chas

if it has not been included because it is a pixel or two short well!

If the version you tried to upload to the Gallery was a pixel or two short then, as Ben said, it would have been automatically rejected by the software without a mod even seeing it. This is not elitism - it would be the same for any of us from the newest member to the Knight Commander with over 2000 pics in the Gallery.

Dave P.

Tormentil · #8 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pressld2

Except it's not Ben. It's 1086 x 1600. At least the one in the archive is.

Oops, I looked at the properties of the "unexpanded" pic.

Chas · #9 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 11:12 PM

Thanks for your support Dave P. I can assure that this is the same image I tried to upload to the Gallery. I can also assure that I included all the dots and the dashes in the right places as well. What I didn't say before because it wasn't relevant then, was that I took the picture hanging over the edge of a 200 foot cliff and it was hand held so little wonder the head is not as sharp as the back. I am still chuffed with it and despite having my feelings hurt I will continue to enjoy my hobby but perhaps I will keep my pics to myself in future. I didn't post it because I wanted to be criticised just wanted to share it with like minded people who I thought would enjoy it.

JennyS · #10 (**permalink**) 03-05-2008, 11:20 PM

Hi Chas - don't be put off - thats a beautiful shot

Quote:

Please don't be put off by this. Have another go and make sure you have "Shag - Phalacrocorax aristotelis" in the title (without the quotes) and "Shag Phalacrocorax aristotelis" in the keywords (also without the quotes). I know that the insistence on strict adherence to the naming standards can seem petty at times but I assure you, as someone who develops database applications for a living, it can be crucial to the smooth functioning of the site.

Did you remember to put the Latin name in as well when you were uploading as the lack of that could have been the problem?