PPG - yet another thread!

Well I hate to raise this thread from it's peaceful slumber, but having spent some considerable time of late on voting I have to say I am getting fed up of people who can't do something as simple as read the submission rules, I'm talking in particular about over manipulated shots and submission of several similar images.

It seems now that voting is done entirely by ones peers with just the added rights of the gallery host to remove images at their discretion, obviously the gallery hosts don't seem to be doing a very good job!

Rant over..

It's handy to use as a storage facility now a days - but it's not any good for using to gage ones progress. I tested by uploading several 'duff' photos a while ago and they were accepted, I deleted them from the gallery myself.

'tis a shame, before it changed "twas very difficult to get photos accepted which gave something to work towards.

That is my bubble well and truly burst I was quite chuffed at getting some pics accepted as I haven't had my camera a year yet. I was under the impression that somebody somewhere liked them. I wont bother now and will just leave it to the experts. Obviously when I submitted them I was comparing them to the worst entries and was thereby fooled into thinking I'd managed something not too bad. Another avenue of pleasure closed.

I was talking about my photos - not yours Stan.

Half of my photos shouldn't be there and they wouldn't have been accepted under the old system - that's all I was saying.

I'm not very good with words and I'm sorry if I've offended you but I was trying to express my disappointment with the loss of a useful tool to check my progress against. 'tis all.

I'm hardly an 'expert' I've only had my camera a year.

Charlotte, my posting was not a direct reply to yours. It was just an opinion formed from reading all the posts in this thread, where the consensus was photos should only be submitted if they are of The London Salon quality, which thinking about it, it should be. Then again judging a photo, apart from the really obviously bad technically, is so often biased by what the judge likes/dislikes that the technical side is secondary. My own main criteria is would I hang it on my wall at home? Then I look to see if it's in focus etc etc. What scares me is that photography becomes a chore in the strive for excellence, when it does there'll be some bargains on ebay

ps: how do you get the link to PPG without it showing the whole address in plain text

I agree about the lack of quality, but only in the endless parade of pictures waiting to be voted on. Recently I've had one or two marathon voting sessions and in the vast majority of cases I gave the thumbs down.
But if you look at some of the galleries of our better photographers on PUF you will see stunning images that have been accepted. You have to know their names to call up their galleries.
In the old PPG you could view recently accepted images, that section seems to have vanished since the revamp.
David

PS: Stan you have nothing to worry about with your pictures. There's some fine work there. And don't regard the London Salon as the high water mark in photography. Its good for pushing the boundaries with contemporary thought provoking images but it isn't to many people's taste.

PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout

I haven't submitted anything to PPG since I got to 100 accepted images, nor have I even looked at it for months. The last time I voted there were an incredible amount of average and worse images. I'll go and have a look again and maybe start submitting again.

I agree with David, though, there are quite a lot of photographers with vey good images on there, many from this site, though the general standard does appear to have dropped, in common with 500px.

Sorry to open up the hornets nest again folks.

Charlotte, you can now upload larger copies of images that were accepted before the site revamp, they don't go through the voting process but are reviewed by the gallery mods, as long as the images are the same and you don't do any more PP there should't be a problem, unless of course it's one that shouldn't have got in. Doing that may reassure you of your talent.

And I wondered who's all the dodgy macro's were, I certainly didn't give them the thumbs up

I'd completely forgotten about the PPG, haven't been there for a very long time. Perhaps I should submit larger files of the ones that are there.

K.

Inspired by this thread I've just spent an otherwise dull Sunday afternoon clicking through the various categories in PPG.
My verdict: Its absolutely incorrect to say it's not as good as the PUF Gallery. There's a lot of amazing work in there, some of it by people who are members here, or past members. In my opinion the overall quality is better than the PUF Gallery, although like here not all the images are of the highest standard.
David

PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout

Acceptance time seems to be getting longer again too.

Uploaded a few resized images today too, we'll see how long they take to be processed.

Thought you PPG'ers would be interested to know, my upgraded images were approved fairly quickly, about 4 days.

So, let's have an update.

Anybody got any fresh shots in PPG since the last post?

I've just put 5 up for voting and sit with baited breath waiting (not!)

It's fits and starts I think. A couple seemed to get through quickly then a bit of a wait. Had a reject fairly quickly too and on pixel peeping I wasn't surprised

I have uploaded a few batches of 5 photos and on average it takes 7 to 10 days for approval. Of the last 10 images I had 9 approvals and 1 rejection. The question is, am I getting better or the quality on PPG poorer? Why don't you, the readers, have a look and tell me?
Regards.