Hello everyone,



I am very happy to announce that an idea we've had in the back of our minds for a good while has finally been brought to life! Today we're officially unveiling the PentaxForums Exclusive Gallery, which is conceptually similar to Pentax's PPG. At first, we wanted this gallery to also appear fancy and have cool effects, but we found that other solutions wouldn't offer the level of integration that this one did. So, let's jump right in to what we're looking at here.

Our Exclusive Gallery will become a collection of only the best photos taken by our users. Only PentaxForums.com users will be able to submit to this gallery. We will also be imposing certain quality standards to make sure the photos are at their very best.

To submit a photo to the gallery, simply click the 'upload' link in the upper gallery toolbar, or click here. The submission form is the same as that in our other gallery categories, so you should already be familiar with the controls. The following will be required of each photo:

• JPEG format and compression at 90%-100% (9-12).
• A resolution of at least 1024x700 (WxH or HxW) pixels; preferably around 1500 or 2000px on one edge
  
• Full EXIF left intact in the file, if digital
• Manual addition of EXIF metadata, if film
  
• A photo description and complete camera/lens fields
• If you choose to place copyright text in your photo, please do so in the lower-right or lower-left corner only
• No added frames, borders, or drawings
  
• Taken with a Pentax camera (no exceptions)
• Limit 2 submissions per user day (to be fair to our judges)
  

If your photo conforms to these regulations, it will then be evaluated by the site staff. If the photo is good enough, it'll be approved into the gallery; if not, we'll simply move it to a regular category. You will be able to submit as many photos as you'd like until 10 have been approved in the gallery. This limit is currently going to be in place so that every photographer gets about equal exposure, but may increase in the future.

Why this is going to be better than the PPG:

• Not a slow flash-based gallery
• Large resolutions will be available for your viewing pleasure
  
• Comments can be made
• More great photos will be posted!
• Feedback on your photo will be e-mailed to you once a decision has been made
• The approval decision will be made within 1 week at most (apply to be a judge)
  
• Status tracking at https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/galleryapprove.php?do=status and updates on status via e-mail
• It's integrated with your favorite photo forum
  

And, best of all:

• If 5 or your photos get approved into the gallery, you will be invited to become an Exclusive Gallery judge

So, why wait? Upload your best now!

A note to newbies: the gallery is accessible through the 'photos' button in the navbar. Simply click it and then select 'User Photo Gallery' from the menu.

Enjoy, guys! I'm very excited to be bringing you this.

Photos accepted into the gallery will also be tagged as "exclusive" in gallery searches and listings, and within the exclusive category, supersized thumbnails will be shown!

[Clinton]

I'm with EyeSpy on the ridiculous amount of editing on some these. I would expect accepted photos to be more natural and less manipulated.

Mine (Desert Nights) is all but right off the sensor, with a little bit of noise removed from the left edge. This shot doesn't look overly natural or realistic but then again, I wasn't trying to create a realistic representation.

As for digital manipulation, our Pentax bodies do a lot of that for us. I shot that in Shade WB. That's all digital. With the digital filters and color balance built in, I can already do a lot of what I might already do in Photoshop.

If the extreme is shoot in raw with direct conversion to JPG only; where would we draw the line?

[ManhattanProject]

Mine (Desert Nights) is all but right off the sensor, with a little bit of noise removed from the left edge. This shot doesn't look overly natural or realistic but then again, I wasn't trying to create a realistic representation.

As for digital manipulation, our Pentax bodies do a lot of that for us. I shot that in Shade WB. That's all digital. With the digital filters and color balance built in, I can already do a lot of what I might already do in Photoshop.

If the extreme is shoot in raw with direct conversion to JPG only; where would we draw the line?

I disagree, yours looks very natural and well within bounds. I'm not trying to single anyone out, but some of the shots are far beyond looking like a photo. It may be less clear to you, but to me there is a very clear line.

[Adam]

If you've submitted to the gallery, you can now track your gallery approval status here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/galleryapprove.php?do=status

Our current average turnaround time for decisions is about 1 day.

[Adam]

Further improvements have now been made to the way the system works! You can read about them here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentaxforums-com-news/115668-exclusive-ga...rovements.html

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[Adam]

Just a few notes on recent submissions:
1. We've recently been seeing lots of family snaps being submitted. Such photos frequently don't have photographic merit, and will likely not be approved by our judges.
2. Keep in mind that the minimum image dimensions are 900x500 (or 500x900 for vertical orientations)
3. Proper technique is key (exposure, crop, edges, dust, rotation, sharpness! To avoid having to re-submit, please correct minor issues that can be fixed in phootshop prior to submitting!

Keep the photos coming! We currently see several submissions each day, but many haven't been making it through due to the above issues. The community here is capable of great work, and we're looking forward to reviewing and accepting it into the gallery!

[jheu02]

I've gone ahead and reread most of this thread, and wanted to bring up a question as to (again) how photos are to be accepted and how it might lead to submitters' frustrations. I've hesitated to post this, but decided that in the interests of discussion it's best to go ahead and hopefully lead to a better gallery. The comments pertain only to my own work, and since there's a panel of judges, none should (hopefully) take offense.

I'm not a complainer by nature, and hope this doesn't come off sounding like I am, but I've submitted this particular photo within the past 2 weeks, and though I flubbed and submitted the wrong dimensions originally(no gripes with an automatic rejection on this account), the feedback I received on this submission was as follows:

This photo is from my Single in September album and is very close to my original submission. Unfortunately, I deleted it upon rejection.


\nStunning! \n\n The main flaw I see in this shot is the bright 45 degree line in the upper right side. Burn that in or clone it out and this would be an easy YES. p.s. there also appears to be a couple of hot pixels along the right side. \n\n Needs more contrast as image appears flat. \n\n 445x640
Doesnt meet minimum size. \n\n

OK, so I think to myself, "You bozo, you clicked on the wrong file size to upload, but yes, I had a decent shot, Stunning! they said, just a couple things to clear up and it's in."

Went and did the (what I thought should be minor) corrections, and the rejection notice came with the comments:

This (unfortunately) is a resize of a resize, but the 2nd version nonetheless


\n\n This is an improved version from the previous submission in terms of texture, exposure and B&W conversion, however there is loss of impact in the image due to an inherent lack of tonal range - difficult to address here since the flower is all mainly one colour. The composition is also still an issue with excessive unnecessary negative space with central arrangement of the flower. \n\n Your color image works nicely in B&W also \n\n Tried to download a bigger version for closer scrutiny, but nothing happened :-(!
B&W flowers are not really my cup of tea ... \n\n

I don't expect a complete and thorough analysis with detailed comments, but to go from "Stunning!" to "loss of impact in the image due to an inherent lack of tonal range" when just prior to this comment there was: "improved version from the previous submission in terms of texture, exposure and B&W conversion" Huh?? Doesn't a better exposure and more texture generally equate to a greater tonal range? ".also still an issue with excessive unnecessary negative space" I believe I did have a slightly different crop on the original submission, but OK, I can fix that easily "...B&W flowers are not really my cup of tea ..."

Aha, we might be getting somewhere here, but surely "Stunning!" and "Your color image works nicely in B&W also" should mean my conversion process was up to par.

Discouragement setting in...what was originally considered an "easy YES" with some minor burning in of one small area and a couple of p.s....changes has improved but is still rejected for different reasons. So I thought, "one more attempt to deal with the negative space and give a little better tonal range.

Here's the final rejection except I resized it to 800 vertical pixels vs 1400.


"Beautiful image though unfortunately again, the harsh lighting is hard to ignore, causing such high contrast and flattened texture. It is one of those flowers that would appear better in colour.
sorry but this image/photo just doesn't do it for me. Converting color to B/W needs work other than just removing the color. Perhaps the color version would be better here. "

So, our photos are not being judged on their own merits but now are compared to others we have submitted in the process, even after they have been rejected? The reason I converted to B/W in the first place was that I could filter some of the tough lighting (that I knew was present) in the conversion process to bring out more detail in the petals. However, there was never any mention of harsh lighting in the original submission.

For full disclosure: before I noticed the original comments, I thought the rejection could have been due to B/W conversion issues as I'd recently started using different PP software, so I had submitted a color version (as originally taken) and had the following comments in its rejection:

As submitted before I noticed the comments on the original B/W:


\nA fine example of a decent flower capture. Its soft rendition is good and well-suited. It's very good, but not excellent only because of the harsh lighting used in this portrait. The light has tended to overexpose the yellows due to oversaturation. Otherwise a commendable image. \n\n nice \n\n

I agree with the assessment of the loss of detail/oversaturation due to harsh lighting. It was there when I took the photo and I converted to B/W specifically because of this. There was never anything mentioned in the original B/W submission about harsh lighting (prior to the color version), yet, the harsh lighting picked up in the color version, is now a reason for rejection in my re-submissions of the B/W "easy YES." and the original "p.s." comment "needs more contrast" is now rejected because of "high contrast"

I accept the fact that we all have different tastes in photography, whether subject preference, or otherwise. But I fail to see how a photo originally labelled as Stunning! wouldn't qualify in a gallery that's that's supposed to highlight individual photogs' work as long as it's up to a certain level. Doesn't "Stunning!" meet that basic criteria, or are we nitpicking here?

I hope this post brings about a real discussion about the inclusion/feedback process as I'm not trying to ram through a photo or garner sympathy. But, why bother with feedback, if when it's addressed, other reasons will be found to reject? There is no such thing as a "perfect" photo. I could resubmit color, "It is one of those flowers that would appear better in colour...Perhaps the color version would be better here" but why bother, "The light has tended to overexpose the yellows due to oversaturation."

I feel better now! Thanks for reading this far. Now to the discussion...

[Adam]

Please don't post those comments in public in the future. They are meant to be between you and the judge.

Also, I still can't get why the \n's aren't being treated as line breaks. Did they appear like that in the email as well?

Edit: I just tested it, and the new e-mails seem to be kosher. Only old comments would have visible \n's.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[Rory]

FWIW, I submitted a photo and received good advice. I know everyone is busy, but I was happy there was some constructive criticism and would've loved to have gotten a bit more detail; however, that is not the job.

For me, it's back to the drawing board!

[Ash]

John you should also note that the judge comments will come from different judges each time, and as such the apparent contradictions in the reviews are a result of each judge giving their own spin on the rendition submitted.

You'll also find, as I have with my own submissions, that one version that may have been 'close' to being accepted (from the comments) may again not be accepted even if all the apparent flaws are corrected. This is because not all judges vote on all images, and different judges will have their hands in deciding whether an image is accepted or rejected - probably has to do with the total number of yes and no votes already on the image before gotten to by the next judge. Some may not have even been seen by a judge before they're given the flick or the red carpet into the gallery...

[Rense]

FWIW, I submitted a photo and received good advice. I know everyone is busy, but I was happy there was some constructive criticism and would've loved to have gotten a bit more detail; however, that is not the job.

For me, it's back to the drawing board!

Great attitude! thx!

[jheu02]

John you should also note that the judge comments will come from different judges each time, and as such the apparent contradictions in the reviews are a result of each judge giving their own spin on the rendition submitted.

You'll also find, as I have with my own submissions, that one version that may have been 'close' to being accepted (from the comments) may again not be accepted even if all the apparent flaws are corrected. This is because not all judges vote on all images, and different judges will have their hands in deciding whether an image is accepted or rejected - probably has to do with the total number of yes and no votes already on the image before gotten to by the next judge. Some may not have even been seen by a judge before they're given the flick or the red carpet into the gallery...

Thanks for commenting on how the judging is done, as that part was an unknown. As far as I knew, the same judges were looking at the photo and resubmissions, so I couldn't understand why an almost Yes could go to something that seemed far off. Perhaps it would take some of the mystery out of the process and add to everyone's understanding to know what's going on behind the scenes. Maybe we're not meant to know, but hopefully, you could see why I started wondering to begin with.

As to why I included the comments, I didn't want it to appear that I was just ranting on about not being accepted, but honestly flummuxed as to what I perceived as an inconsistency, i.e. "you may want to resubmit after taking a look at these items" taking care of the items, and then having an opposite viewpoint on the corrections. The whole point of constructive criticism is to make the photos and photographer better IMO.

Perhaps, a way to address this would be to have the initial judge look at the re-submissions in light of their original comments. Just a thought.

[falconeye]

Please don't post those comments in public in the future. They are meant to be between you and the judge.

Adam, you and judges are trying too hard to be nice. A rejected photo is a rejected photo. Except you absolutely want it in the PEG and then you should accept it and ask for the minor modification.

Otherwise, the merits of an artistic work can be discussed forever. Not every work fits every gallery. Better then to submit to another gallery.

Also I don't like to see resubmissions of a rejected photo after minor modifications (except the resubmission was asked for) or even worse, the submission of entire series a case which the artist should have done the selection first in. I've seen both in PPG and stopped participating there. However, I appreciated that PPG rejects w/o comment.

[Adam]

A rejected photo is a rejected photo.

The sad reality!

[jheu02]

Adam, you and judges are trying too hard to be nice. A rejected photo is a rejected photo. Except you absolutely want it in the PEG and then you should accept it and ask for the minor modification.

Otherwise, the merits of an artistic work can be discussed forever. Not every work fits every gallery. Better then to submit to another gallery.

Also I don't like to see resubmissions of a rejected photo after minor modifications (except the resubmission was asked for) or even worse, the submission of entire series a case which the artist should have done the selection first in. I've seen both in PPG and stopped participating there. However, I appreciated that PPG rejects w/o comment.

I agree here. If the photo's not good enough, that's fine. I guess I was under the impression though, that the feedback received on the initial photo was such that it would fit in your 2nd case, though the "invitation" was in the form of "you may want to resubmit..." In fact, that's the only reason I re-submitted, but I guess I read too much into the comments.

The sad reality!

True. But as I said in the original post, I was trying to bring up a discussion over not only perceived inconsistencies, but also hoped the discussion that ensued would make for an even better gallery.

So, instead of just criticizing, how about a suggestion to toss around and do whatever with it you want:

Photos can only be submitted once. No chance for resubmission (would not apply to a new photo of the same or similar subject which the photog shot in response to the feedback). If this was implemented, the constructive comments on the rejection could go into the photog's "bag 'o tricks" and still and be useful for improving his/her photography in the future. It may be considered harsh, but if all knew going in there was only one chance for that photo, it would hopefully lead to very polished entries.

Or perhaps, if resubmissions are to be allowed, it would be a situation like Falk suggested, a conditional acceptance based on "thus and such" edit. This would give the photog the option to take the suggestions and implement them, or decide that his/her work was submitted as desired and no further submission would be made. To make that work, however, the judges would have to be in consensus that, if the suggestions were implemented, the photo WOULD be accepted. The tricky part here is the subjective nature of judging, which is why the judges would need to be in agreement, and the changes suggested for acceptance would need to simple enough to implement, that the subjectivity at that point is removed. That way, the final acceptance is more a matter of formality ("did he/she xxxx it like we suggested? Yes - accepted, No - rejected") rather than open to more subjectivity ("he/she did xxxx to the photo like we suggested, but I would have done it differently - rejected.")

Just some ideas.

[Adam]

Or perhaps, if resubmissions are to be allowed, it would be a situation like Falk suggested, a conditional acceptance based on "thus and such" edit. This would give the photog the option to take the suggestions and implement them, or decide that his/her work was submitted as desired and no further submission would be made. To make that work, however, the judges would have to be in consensus that, if the suggestions were implemented, the photo WOULD be accepted. The tricky part here is the subjective nature of judging, which is why the judges would need to be in agreement, and the changes suggested for acceptance would need to simple enough to implement, that the subjectivity at that point is removed. That way, the final acceptance is more a matter of formality ("did he/she xxxx it like we suggested? Yes - accepted, No - rejected") rather than open to more subjectivity ("he/she did xxxx to the photo like we suggested, but I would have done it differently - rejected.")

This sounds great- and is ideally how things should be. However, the way I've set up the system right now, I think, is better than the two systems that preceeded it.