[BigDave]

I thought both images were great, but the first, with the horizon, was more like two images in one "print" with the split in the center. I can see where a more defined point of interest would solve that issue.

As for the second one, crop it for symmetry and resubmit it! If you had an edittor, that's what they would have done, without your approval! Great color. Was this with a filter or playing with the color balance?

Regards,

[Prieni]

Dave,

no filter on the second one. WB was set to cloudy IIRC, that brought up the colour. A bit of overlaying with a black to transparent layer with layer mode soft light and a curves adjustment boosted the colours. The impression I had at the time of taking this was similar but with the colours less vibrant.

And no, I won't resubmit a cropped version as I just don't like it that way. And if an editor would do that to one of my pictures without approval it would be an ex-editor of my pics.

Prieni

[jbuck92]

Poor image quality. Multiple distracting elements to the image. Subject too small and central in the frame.


I had already cropped a bit off of the left side to change the "too central in the frame" part. But the rest of the image is exactly the same as when I submitted it.

[jbuck92]

Judge's comments:
Nice color in the center area, but not very dynamic. Needs more to the composition.

Plain, uninteresting foreground without a clear subject or point of interest.

I'm confused at the "no clear point of interest" comment. I thought it was fairly clear in that it's a sunset picture.

[JeffJS]

Thanks for trying! Keep in mind that a single comment in the rejection notice represents the view of one judge only, so it leaves in question why the images weren't accepted.

No question #1 is a clean composition, although I would argue that the texture of the water surface is a significant component of that. So I think this misses on being "strong and obvious". As simple as it is on first blush, it's actually quite a subtle image, and lacks that hit-the-viewer-with-a-hammer obviousness of what the image is about. All of which is to say, I really like this image, but don't consider its rejection to run counter to my "guidelines".

#2: subject out of the center is one of those basic rules, indeed. Although here I guess the judge is saying the subject is the symmetry of the two trees, hence is a case to break that rule to emphasize this symmetry.

I haven't submitted any myself since my above posting, not because I don't intend to, but because I haven't had the time or, indeed, inspiration for it. I'm unlikely to come up with what I see as a suitable image in my normal run of shooting, so I'll have to make an assignment of it. Unless I want to try with a bird pic.

That is exactly what it meant. . Composition 101 is not a hard fast rule. It's a guideline. Follow it as a hard rule if you wish but when breaking that rule enhances the aesthetic for the viewer (Me in this case), it's fine to break it. You're opinion of course differs and that's fine. 'Testing' the judges is no way to get an image into the gallery. Post your best and if it passes muster with all who see the photo, it will get in. All photos are not viewed by All judges by the way. Some are in the gallery that I had never seen before.

[Prieni]

That is exactly what it meant. . Composition 101 is not a hard fast rule. It's a guideline. Follow it as a hard rule if you wish but when breaking that rule enhances the aesthetic for the viewer (Me in this case), it's fine to break it. You're opinion of course differs and that's fine. 'Testing' the judges is no way to get an image into the gallery. Post your best and if it passes muster with all who see the photo, it will get in. All photos are not viewed by All judges by the way. Some are in the gallery that I had never seen before.

It's also exactly how I took that comment. I'm also fine with my opinion differing on this point and I appreciate that the judges decide what goes in and what doesn't.

'Testing' the judges is the only way to get an image in the gallery. That is what one does with every submission.

I did post what I (and many others) consider some of my best photos, it just seems that my best is not good enough. It could be that I'm just not good enough, on the other hand some of my submissions were accepted by PPG Premiere collection or at 1x.com (which for me is the second hardest to get in after the Elusive Gallery here). So they passed muster with some judges (and usually some forum folk here and there) before but it didn't get in.

As it is quite difficult to get in threads like this are started to find out what the difference between accepted and rejected shots is. And that is hard to see in many cases. On the other hand it keeps submitting exciting (at least for the first hundred submissions After that I guess it is getting too predictable).

By the way, thanks to you and the other judges for taking on the job of judging. It is not an easy one, I do appreciate that. And looking through the Exclusive gallery I do see mostly wonderful photos.

Prieni

[jbuck92]

My thoughts exactly, Prieni. I've submitted a few of what I feel are my best shots. I haven't submitted random images left and right, if I had done that I'd have submitted a few thousand by now! While I haven't had any images selected for the PPG Premiere gallery, I've had a few on just the regular PPG gallery. Never heard of 1x until now. But I do feel that the only way to have a chance of getting in to the Exclusive gallery is to "test" to judges to see what they like the most. Of course, test them with some of what you deem your best work.

I do appreciate what the judges do for the gallery though. They work hard to keep it at a high standard, and as a result it becomes quite difficult to have a picture selected for the gallery.

[Voytech]

I think often the content is the determining factor. For me at least that's the case. Not to take away from anyone's skill as a photographer, but sunsets are just sort of there for the taking. It's an event that is beautiful to look at and take a shot of but its hardly an exclusive thing. To me, the photos I'd love to see in the gallery should be both expertly executed AND depict a highly engaging subject.

But that's just my criteria. You may get excited with a shot of a bird that you tracked for weeks and finally caught on camera but when you strip that photo of any commentary it becomes just another shot of a bird. Unless we're talking some rare thing that is commonly known to be rare. So you see my point?

[fg-one]

Bumping into this thread the other day gave me the idea of submitting a pic to the exclusive gallery, so I could have one for posting here ()

[BigDave]

To me, the image needs to be well presented (exposure/composition etc.) and have a uniqueness about it. Yes, sunsets are just "there" as you say, so are sunrises, though sunrises do not seem as easy to get (hard to see the color or what is going to happen when the light is not in the sky yet). But if the sunrise/set is unique in color or cloud formation, it can be an exciting event. Like the cliffs of Dover red with the sunrise!

Regards,

[loco]

Some great images in this thread. Let me say I'd hate to be one of the judges. I appreciate that this gallery is so difficult to get into. Maybe one day I'll be good enough. It's nice to have something to aspire to.

I've submitted several images and had them all rejected. This one is probably the only one I was truly disappointed about. I feel this is possibly the best shot I've taken since I started this hobby last year. I got good helpful, positive feedback. Maybe I'll try this shot again, but I really kind of like it how it is.

[Tamia]

This one didn't make the cut, but I got some encouraging feedback from the judges:

Lily Pads Cut in Their Prime



This is a smaller copy of the original I submitted. One judge mentioned that it was a bit noisy, though this didn't detract much from the image. I agree about the noise, and it was one of the things that made me hesitate to submit it. Though I shot at 100 ISO, my K200D (mounted with a Pentax 50-200mm telephoto, focal length at 190mm) doesn't produce crisp dark areas in low light. It was a dark overcast day, and the water was a bit murky and moving and difficult to capture. I only got chance to capture a photo because the lily pads parted and drifted away from sight.

Another mentioned that the line of the "stalk" (the green grass stalk?) was too horizontal, and that he/she would clone out the the "distraction" above the stalk. I think that the distraction the judge spoke of is the little raft of bubbles, and that was the other thing that I puzzled over before submitting it. On the one hand, it could be viewed as a distraction, but on the other hand -- and this is why I retained it -- the bubbles make it clear that the black field is water.

Overall, I'm a bit disappointed, but as I said, I was in two minds about this one, so I can't really take exception that it didn't make it.

[BigDave]

Wow, this is really a nice image. What stalk is "too horizontal"??? Perhaps the judge's monitor was at an odd angle. Not every line has to be at a severe angle to make the image dynamic. There is a nice subtle feel to this. And the bubbles pull the eye to the image while creating a bit of nice contrast to the dark background. I get the sense that some judges want to see images that they LIKE and how they would see it. Many times an image can be a great image, even if you do not have a personal liking for it. If so, this would be quite closed minded.

Good job on this one.

[Dr Orloff]

It's natural to feel hard done by if an image is turned down. Prieni makes a very good point. I've also had images accepted in the PPG premiere collection and 1x.com but turned down here. If you disagree with the decisions here then why not try for those other exclusive galleries instead or see how it gets rated with the likes of 500pix? There is nice light on the lilypads but the blackness is a bit overwhelming for me.

[Prieni]

Comment: "nice, but too much water (dark foreground). More sky would be more dynamic or longer exposure to give more reflection effect light from the buildings.

Flat colours with ineffective use of negative space below. But still a very nice photograph.

I like it a lot. But it feels a bit abruptly cut off left hand side."

The last sentence I do agree with. Not sure, though, that the colours are flat or the water dark. It might be a bit too much of the water, though, that's a fair comment. I'm not sure that more sky would be more dynamic (I would have gotten an "ineffective use of negative space above" most likely).
This time round, for the first time, I have the impression that the judge really thought about the picture. (Ok, longer exposure would have resulted in overexposure and if I would crank up saturation it would like shot by a Canon )

It remains the "elusive gallery" for me. Have to try harder...

Prieni