[ManuH]

My theory is that things got screwed up when they let all of us start voting (no offense intended). What do you expect from folks that will ask questions like, "Was Ansel Adams or Yosef Karsh over-rated?"

Yeah I understand what you mean, it's just stupid to ask when everybody should know that Ansel IS overrated

So what we got in the gallery is "democratic" art? I just think the vote is necessary to manage the volume of pictures submitted. Since a few weeks I'm trying to vote on every picture, and it's not easy. Fortunately (or not), not many pictures catch my attention for more than 1 or 2 seconds. The problem I have is that I'm starting to hate dragonflies (especially the "libelula roja") and butterflies.

[navcom]

The problem I have is that I'm starting to hate dragonflies (especially the "libelula roja") and butterflies.

Oh can I relate to that one! I completely understand. Now this is no offense to anyone who takes pictures of dragonflies or butterflies. Some are totally incredible! I've taken many myself but mine are not gallery-worthy and I completely admit that! Therefore I don't even try to submit them.

The fact is, in order for a picture to be "gallery-worthy", it should stand out in some way to make it different than everyone elses. This is hard to do with just a centered picture of an insect. It's no different than taking a centered picture of a human. We've all seen them and it's frankly boring. Thus the reason we all HATE spending the evening at Aunt Marjories going over a million different views of the beach taken on her last holiday!

It's the composition of the picture....textures, movement, etc., that make it stand out. Most dragonfly pictures I've seen that really stand out are the ones where the insect itself is not necessarily the object of most interest,

Many of the pictures submitted are not composed...they are just snapped and posted.

[rparmar]

I just think the vote is necessary to manage the volume of pictures submitted.

Maybe so, but it's a poor solution.

Perhaps they should have allowed people to submit a portfolio of six images, but only twice a year. That would be more like how galleries operate. Would have kept out Aunt Marjorie and her 392 identical snapshots.

[Gooshin]

we should start our own gallery

[navcom]

we should start our own gallery

....I have space on my server.

[Lance B]

I think the problem is that everyone has diffrent tastes, ideals and expectations.

What I like is not necessarily what others like and visa versa. Not everyone likes Ansel Adams or Henri Cartier Bresson and I dont think these guys ever asked for a critique. You either like their stuff or you don't. You either buy their stuff or you don't.

The problem with these galleries is that you can end up trying to please others, in order to get your photos accepted, rather than do what *you* like. This doesn't mean that *your* photos are necessarily bad, just that they don't always appeal to others. There are universal photographic ideals that generally appeal to people, but it doesn't always apply.

So, if *you* really like your own work, then there is no point in trying to alter that approach as *you* are the one who has to look at them on your wall, photo album or website. You may take photos that please other's but then it is more *their* work and *their* ideals and not yours.

[rparmar]

We already have places for populist voting, ie. Flickr.

I think what is needed are more realms under editorial control. Sure, we may not agree with a particular curator, but if they are doing their job well they'll bring their own personal "bias" into play and develop a gallery that displays a particular aesthetic, to its utmost. Not everyone should be expected to enjoy it. But those that do will find an undiluted pleasure therein.

The alternative is tyranny of the majority, a result that no-one with any aesthetic discernment will enjoy.

[rmtagg]

very single one of my impressionistic photos have been rejected even with notes explaining that I do not use software or special lenses. Now one would think that pics that are accpeted to upscale fine art galleries and sold at $2,200.00 each would be of interest. Or at least as to what the camera is capable of, well and the artist too, I guess, lol

[navcom]

very single one of my impressionistic photos have been rejected even with notes explaining that I do not use software or special lenses. Now one would think that pics that are accpeted to upscale fine art galleries and sold at $2,200.00 each would be of interested. Or at least as to what the camera is capable of, well and the artist too, I guess, lol

I'm now of the opinion that it may be a badge of honor to be rejected!

Don't worry Rosemary! I love your style of photography! My wife does impressionist oils so I'm partial to the style as well!

[rmtagg]

I'm now of the opinion that it may be a badge of honor to be rejected!

Don't worry Rosemary! I love your style of photography! My wife does impressionist oils so I'm partial to the style as well!

Lol, thank you.
I just think you can't let the opinions of others deter you. I feel that a lot of people may not read the description that goes a long with the pics and most pics that are approved are very traditional. If you are experimenting or developing some thing out side of this realm you will not fit in.
Personally I thought it was very exciting to be able to shoot impressionist art with a camera and not use software or lenses to do it. Luckily some in the art world feel the same way

[rparmar]

Personally I thought it was very exciting to be able to shoot impressionist art with a camera and not use software or lenses to do it. Luckily some in the art world feel the same way

I say -- well done! There are different realms for different photographic artistic forms of expression. Not all realms will acknowledge what you do. But you have found at least one that works for you. That is fantastic!

Many artists do not achieve even this.

[rmtagg]

I say -- well done! There are different realms for different photographic artistic forms of expression. Not all realms will acknowledge what you do. But you have found at least one that works for you. That is fantastic!

Many artists do not achieve even this.

You have no idea how blessed I feel. I pinch myself to make sure it is all really happening. I also work really hard everyday making things happen Hours and hours researching gallereis and then hours on the phone. Trips, visits, networking and always making sure I don't miss an oppertunity either for me or to share with someone else. It's a full time job for me but I love it!
PS: I am also blessed to have my friends here, many who openly share their knowledge, information they come across and their support.

[rparmar]

Big hugs all around!

[Matjazz]

What I dislike is the voting aspect. That in fact renders it less pure. Judging an image on a tiny thumbnail is totally flawed.

You ought to click on a thumbnail to get a full picture.

I agree PPG can be frustrating, but with time one learns to live with it and play it as a lottery. In some way I actually like the way PPG works - my pictures are being judged by people that don't know me a bit and are unbiased in that regard. The picture is then either good or not.
What I found interesting is that "premiere collection" stayed the same ever since they introduced voting. Well almost. They updated it once in July. It grew from 83 to 86 pictures and all the new ones were from the same batch of "recently added" pictures. Seems like premiere collection isn't maintained much. Oh yes and there are images that make you wonder why they got in "premiere", but I believe all of them were added there in the very beginning of PPG. Judges should do an overhaul of "premium collection".

[ManuH]

What I like is not necessarily what others like and visa versa. Not everyone likes Ansel Adams or Henri Cartier Bresson and I dont think these guys ever asked for a critique. You either like their stuff or you don't. You either buy their stuff or you don't.

And you would not even ask each one what they thought about the other I read this somewhere: One time in Arles, someone tried to introduce Ansel Adams to Henri Cartier-Bresson, and Cartier-Bresson just said "Oh, I don’t want to meet a postcard photographer".

The problem with these galleries is that you can end up trying to please others, in order to get your photos accepted, rather than do what *you* like.

That's true, recently I read on some well-known forum that to be accepted in the PPG you have to oversaturate. It's not very true but of course recently submitted pictures seem to have bumped up their saturation a notch (and sometimes more than a notch!).

So, if *you* really like your own work, then there is no point in trying to alter that approach as *you* are the one who has to look at them on your wall, photo album or website. You may take photos that please other's but then it is more *their* work and *their* ideals and not yours.

That's true because the result of not doing that is to have pictures in the gallery but which you don't like and maybe not even proud of.