PPG Submission and Voting

I submitted the photo from the only time I won a competition here and it was rejected!

Never thought to resubmit one though, and I don't think I'll bother. It is just a bit of fun really.

K.

I read somewhere here that there is a particular 'flavour' to PPG, and that perhaps this reflects a US-centric nature?

If that's so, then there may be differing tastes between there and the UK for eg, as to what constitutes a 'good' image. Not sure where that leaves us here in the Antipodes though!

Certainly the peer judging here is worthwhile - and there's feedback.

FWIW, there are plenty of images you have posted here, that would look right at home in a PPG...

Part of the fun is not knowing which ones the voters will like!

I've read stuff by people on the other Pentax forum who submitted what they considered their best ever image, only to have it rejected, and then come out all furious and angry saying silly things like PPG voters are all idiots and they will never submit to the PPG again!

Yes it's a bit puzzling when one of what I consider my better shots is rejected, but that's part of the game

i-berg, I have never had an image accepted on the 2nd try (I've tried a couple of times), but I have had several images that got rejected in colour but accepted in BW.

The same can be said for bona fide judges though, I've had images in competitions that have either won or got top scores, then put them in another competition and they do nothing.

Anyway regardless of wins, marks or even PPG acceptances I know what I like and when its good

But sometimes while voting you see photos.. it really makes you wander how serious they all take it.
Like said how much work is it to straighten the horizon

I have spent the odd 30 mins or so voting - and never got to the end. Like everyone else it seems, I have my favourite subjects that I immediately dismiss. The titles don't often help the photograph either. I had a couple of shots rejected and just resubmitted without any additional work, and they were accepted next time around. Would agree that the software must prohibit the user from viewing their own work. Some great images do eventually appear though

THIS one took 3 attempts. First time was uncropped, second was atighter crop and the third was a portrait crop. I was determined it was going to get in as I really like it.

Nope, vox populi is correct - populi is the genitive (ie 'of the populace'). Sorry, doing Latin at the moment!

As regards the original topic, since a certain (low) number of 'reject' votes automatically ends the voting (ie if the first X people are macro haters, your macro image gets rejected even if the next 30 voting on the merits would have accepted it), PPG voting is more a matter of chance than the quality of the image. I still vote on occasion, but honestly can't be bothered submitting any more given the lottery-like nature of the selection process. If I'm going to post images I'd much rather do it here or The Other Forum and get the benefit of an actual measure of its quality, rather than a random assignation of a binary value

Awesome shot Mike, well done persisting, it should have been accepted the first time.

Thats interesting, where did you find out about the voting?

A thread on the other forum accepted it as gospel, it isn't anything official from Pentax themselves.

The main thing I find annoying about PPG is when I see submitted images that have obviously been taken within a fraction of a second of each other. Agreed about the selection process it's a bit random. Also I think their rules are a bit unhelpful because I find that I do have to PP a fair bit.

I can sympathise with both your points Nass. There is some repetition in that very similar images can be accepted.

Re. the rules against PP-ing - these strike me as nonsensical. First, because they aren't consistently applied - some PPG images have clearly had digital manipulations not available in the traditional darkroom (HDR images to take one example). Second, how do you judge when PP-ing has been in excess of the PPG requirements and how can the judges, except in obvious cases (though even this isn't necessarily enough to prevent an image entering - see point 1), identify whether too much has been done to a particular image? Third, what might be considered an acceptable technique of digital manipulation such as use of filters, sophisticated use of layers & blends, can have substantially more impact than a technique which is explicitly not allowed such as the healing brush or the correction of lens distortion. Finally, this is the digital age and the majority of shots are taken with digital cameras, why not open it up to embrace all great images regardless of how they have been processed. The distinctions they currently make seem absurd and out-of-date, and also more or less impossible to apply consistently.

Hmm I've never given it much thought, but I completely ignore the rules about PP. I wasn't even aware of them until quti recently, but it hasn't changed the images I submit. Most of my images have some kind of cloning or healing, and I have several images in there with massive amounts of PP, including complete background replacements.

Tim, that confirms my suspicions about the fact that Pentax judges would all too often find it impossible to identify whether or not a photo had been digitally manipulated and goes to show how absurd the supposed restrictions currently are! I can't see why they don't just open it up to all images which would gain entry on aesthetic merit alone.