PPG mishaps ? :)

AndrewShirley · 02-12-2009, 09:51 AM

So, I'm spending some time voting on PPG lately. I figure its my duty, and quite honestly I enjoy doing it.

Every so often I run across a picture that the author probably loves (or they would not have submitted it) that ONLY the author would love

Photos are such a personal thing - I mean you could easily attach some emotion to a photo that others may not see right away.

And then there's some that are just bad

I mean, technically bad! I had to vote down some great photos because they had a badly sloping horizon, severely underexposed, blurry etc.

Just a few minutes ago I came across a wonderful shot of a bull - beautiful in all respects, except it was sideways. If it was rotated 90 Degrees CCW it would be an easy-in! Argh! And I mean it was AWESOME!

So I'm wondering what other little mishaps you all have seen and subsequently voted a picture down for.

- Andrew

EricT · 02-12-2009, 09:57 AM

I've also noticed several sideways photos, that otherwise was great. I voted them up anyways, I figure the final Pentax judges are able to rotate them.
Other stuff that often gets me is distracting elements that would be easy to crop out, or a great subject and composition ruined by bad exposure, that could probably be fixed in PP.

netuser · 02-12-2009, 09:59 AM

I also enjoy a lot voting on PPG as, on the other hand I learn a lot only by browsing/viewing the pictures.

Common mishaps I encounter and vote NO are as you say, rotated images, horizon lines, and dust SPOTS from sensor on the pictures.

Think those are the main mishaps.

One other thing that seems getting very frequent is users submitting declined images again and again like one it's the third time I see... the "lemon" one

….

AndrewShirley · 02-12-2009, 10:05 AM

Or variations on the same pic

I've voted YES on one variation of a series of the same pic simply because the composition was better.

Yes, dust spots is another one that I've seen from time to time. I quite often glance them over in my shots as well though.

- Andrew

MRRiley · 02-13-2009, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by EricT

I've also noticed several sideways photos, that otherwise was great. I voted them up anyways, I figure the final Pentax judges are able to rotate them.

Sorry but if the photographer cannot be bothered with properly orienting the image he shouldn't get the shot in. Why should Pentax have to make up for his laziness or carelessness?

I also vote NO on extra wide panoramas since the rules clearly state "9. The PENTAX Photo Gallery does not currently support photos with non-standard aspect ratios (eg. panoramic photos)."

Mike

**SCGushue** · 02-13-2009, 09:58 AM

Originally posted by MRRiley

I also vote NO on extra wide panoramas since the rules clearly state "9. The PENTAX Photo Gallery does not currently support photos with non-standard aspect ratios (eg. panoramic photos)."

Mike

Pentax does now support panorama formats that do not exceed the 600mp height requirement. They may not have corrected their entry form, but they did change their policy about 6 months ago.

Stephen

MRRiley · 02-13-2009, 10:05 AM

Thanks for the update Stephen... If thats the case I may have knocked out some worthy entries for which I'd apologise... BUT in that case Pentax needs to update their rules (which I check every month or so for changes).

Last edited by MRRiley; 02-13-2009 at 10:15 AM.

netuser · 02-13-2009, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by MRRiley

Well if thats the case I may have knocked out some worthy entries for which I'd apologise... BUT in that case Pentax needs to update their rules (which I check every month or so for changes).

So, it was you who "killed" my one panorama photo lol

Send them a mail for the update of the rules.

On topic

Other thing I really don't like is pictures for example of subjects with feet cut.
For instance a person, or like yesterday, a very nice picture with a horse framed on the barn entry and then cut by the horse knees

bad bad detail

heliphoto · 02-13-2009, 11:23 AM

I'll relate a "mishap" of my own from my first batch of entries - I exported the photos from Lightroom and downsized 'em to 600 px. tall, but as some of you may know Lightroom (1.4 at least, don't know if it's fixed now) creates awful artifacts around high contrast lines when downsizing on export - they looked like the line's been oversharpened about four times

. Well I didn't notice that this had happened and went ahead and submitted a bunch of nasty looking photos (they looked good in Lr - just not after export). It was very disheartening when none were accepted (till I saw the artifacts

). I've since had several of the same shots accepted (yes I'm a multiple submitter - but because I fixed a problem so I think that's excusable).

BTW I now use the Lr Mogrify export plugin for Lightroom and it does a flawless job downsizing using imagemagick.

AndrewShirley · 02-13-2009, 03:51 PM

In my mind resubmitting on technical fixes is legit, although I could also argue that they shouldn't have been submitted unless you were absolutely sure they were ready. Of course I would be a hypocrite if I said that lol.

- Andrew

MRRiley · 02-14-2009, 06:20 AM

Originally posted by AndrewShirley

In my mind resubmitting on technical fixes is legit, although I could also argue that they shouldn't have been submitted unless you were absolutely sure they were ready. Of course I would be a hypocrite if I said that lol.

- Andrew

I agree... If there was a submittal error or other technical issue like mentioned above, I have no problem saying YES to a photo that I notice has been resubmitted.

AndrewShirley · 02-15-2009, 10:40 AM

Today's mishaps:
Overcast skies ( just voted down a great subject with an overcast sky

)

Dark subject, ie: levels never adjusted.

Huge Motion blur, OOF

B&W flower pics. Sorry, what's the point of a B&W Flower pic? (this ought to start
something!)

Beautiful landscape taken in bad light

"snap shots" of something someone found walking down the beach.

Someone's kids, which were nic pics and all but had no meaning to anyone else.

More beautiful landscape taken while subject was in shadow.

A boring old building with a bunch of birds on it in harsh light. Then minutes later, same pic but zoomed in. PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD stop submitting duplicate pictures... PLEASE!!

Multiple portraits of same subject doing something a little different each time. (See rant in previous point)

A bunch of OOF stuff which I can't identify. Could be ice.

A bunch of boats that SHOULD be falling off the edge of the world (MAJOR sloping horizon again)

An otherwise great pic that probably should have been cropped to eliminate flare and isolate subject

Some gorgeous birds (looked like herons) that were almost completely black with no detail.

A show-shutter shot of lights where they shook the camera all around. Kinda neat, but PPG material?

Another shot of lights, same as above.

Another shot of lights, same as above.

Another shot of lights, same as above.

Another shot of lights, same as above.

No this is not a misprint, almost the exact same shot, five different times.

Now I know why its taking so long for my shots to be voted on... I just voted on five shots of the same thing

I wish I could say this happens once in a while, but today's voting session involved about six different series of shots with minimal changes between them. My fellow PPGers, would you mind submitting your BEST shots of a series please... pretty please?

All in jest... I'm just having a good time

- Andrew

- Andrew

MSM · 02-16-2009, 12:19 PM

Originally posted by AndrewShirley

Today's mishaps:
Someone's kids, which were nic pics and all but had no meaning to anyone else.

I would respectfully disagree. PPG has a specific category for portraits. In fact, every portrait is an image of someone's kid(s).

I love portraits of people and the emotions they exhibit. Also the lighting, mood, etc. I agree random snapshots are poor (see below) like a child blowing out a candle on a birthday cake at Chuck E Cheese.

In fact it was photos of OPK (other people's kids) on PPG that really impressed me when making the decision to change to Pentax. Especially the portraits of Scott Rylance (sp?) and his kids with the 77 mm Limited. Priceless and inspiring at least to me.

I would definitely agree with your other issues. I can't stand snapshots of anything kids, cats, whatever. I saw an image submitted to PPG with a little boy in a so-called 'Wife beater' undershirt. It was a cute idea. But, so poorly executed. It was oof and poorly composed.

In addition to what others have said, I automatically reject all images with names like 'bird 1' or 'girl 2', etc. I feel that it is the photographer's duty to submit his or her best work. If s/he can't decide which is the best shot, then why should any of us. I stopped voting for awhile after suffering through at least 20 underwater shots of various fish. You want to talk about having no meaning.

Just my thoughts...

netuser · 02-16-2009, 01:01 PM

Originally posted by MSM

I would respectfully disagree. PPG has a specific category for portraits. In fact, every portrait is an image of someone's kid(s).

I love portraits of people and the emotions they exhibit. Also the lighting, mood, etc. I agree random snapshots are poor (see below) like a child blowing out a candle on a birthday cake at Chuck E Cheese.

In fact it was photos of OPK (other people's kids) on PPG that really impressed me when making the decision to change to Pentax. Especially the portraits of Scott Rylance (sp?) and his kids with the 77 mm Limited. Priceless and inspiring at least to me.

Just my thoughts...

I share your ideas

AndrewShirley · 02-16-2009, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by MSM

I love portraits of people and the emotions they exhibit. Also the lighting, mood, etc. I agree random snapshots are poor (see below) like a child blowing out a candle on a birthday cake at Chuck E Cheese.

Me too, and I've voted yes for quite a few portraits. The ones I specifically was talking about were snap-shots, OOF kids doing typical kids stuff. Hey, I have more of these shots than anyone here - I'm absolutely sure of it because I love my kids and want to remember every moment. But... (and to borrow your phrase since it works so well), I don't submit any Chuck E Cheese moments

- Andrew

02-12-2009, 09:51 AM	#1
AndrewShirley Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 421	PPG mishaps ? :) So, I'm spending some time voting on PPG lately. I figure its my duty, and quite honestly I enjoy doing it. Every so often I run across a picture that the author probably loves (or they would not have submitted it) that ONLY the author would love Photos are such a personal thing - I mean you could easily attach some emotion to a photo that others may not see right away. And then there's some that are just bad I mean, technically bad! I had to vote down some great photos because they had a badly sloping horizon, severely underexposed, blurry etc. Just a few minutes ago I came across a wonderful shot of a bull - beautiful in all respects, except it was sideways. If it was rotated 90 Degrees CCW it would be an easy-in! Argh! And I mean it was AWESOME! So I'm wondering what other little mishaps you all have seen and subsequently voted a picture down for. - Andrew

02-13-2009, 11:23 AM	#9
heliphoto Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Region 5 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,539	I'll relate a "mishap" of my own from my first batch of entries - I exported the photos from Lightroom and downsized 'em to 600 px. tall, but as some of you may know Lightroom (1.4 at least, don't know if it's fixed now) creates awful artifacts around high contrast lines when downsizing on export - they looked like the line's been oversharpened about four times . Well I didn't notice that this had happened and went ahead and submitted a bunch of nasty looking photos (they looked good in Lr - just not after export). It was very disheartening when none were accepted (till I saw the artifacts). I've since had several of the same shots accepted (yes I'm a multiple submitter - but because I fixed a problem so I think that's excusable). BTW I now use the Lr Mogrify export plugin for Lightroom and it does a flawless job downsizing using imagemagick.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PPG and IQ	lavascript	Pentax DSLR Discussion	14	12-08-2010 11:18 PM
PPG	BillM	General Talk	4	09-15-2010 03:11 AM
Got my first two into PPG	davidreilly3207	Pentax DSLR Discussion	1	04-07-2010 11:03 AM
Nature 2 for PPG	sealonsf	Post Your Photos!	3	11-07-2009 01:22 AM
three more for PPG... and for you!	rparmar	Post Your Photos!	0	04-26-2009 09:50 AM

02-12-2009, 09:57 AM	#2
EricT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 484	I've also noticed several sideways photos, that otherwise was great. I voted them up anyways, I figure the final Pentax judges are able to rotate them. Other stuff that often gets me is distracting elements that would be easy to crop out, or a great subject and composition ruined by bad exposure, that could probably be fixed in PP.

02-12-2009, 09:59 AM	#3
netuser Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Azores Islands, Portugal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,236	I also enjoy a lot voting on PPG as, on the other hand I learn a lot only by browsing/viewing the pictures. Common mishaps I encounter and vote NO are as you say, rotated images, horizon lines, and dust SPOTS from sensor on the pictures. Think those are the main mishaps. One other thing that seems getting very frequent is users submitting declined images again and again like one it's the third time I see... the "lemon" one ….

02-12-2009, 10:05 AM	#4
AndrewShirley Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 421 Original Poster	Or variations on the same pic I've voted YES on one variation of a series of the same pic simply because the composition was better. Yes, dust spots is another one that I've seen from time to time. I quite often glance them over in my shots as well though. - Andrew

02-13-2009, 08:42 AM	#5
MRRiley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sterling, VA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,275	Originally posted by EricT I've also noticed several sideways photos, that otherwise was great. I voted them up anyways, I figure the final Pentax judges are able to rotate them. Sorry but if the photographer cannot be bothered with properly orienting the image he shouldn't get the shot in. Why should Pentax have to make up for his laziness or carelessness? I also vote NO on extra wide panoramas since the rules clearly state "9. The PENTAX Photo Gallery does not currently support photos with non-standard aspect ratios (eg. panoramic photos)." Mike

02-13-2009, 09:58 AM	#6
SCGushue Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Pennsylvania Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,449	Originally posted by MRRiley I also vote NO on extra wide panoramas since the rules clearly state "9. The PENTAX Photo Gallery does not currently support photos with non-standard aspect ratios (eg. panoramic photos)." Mike Pentax does now support panorama formats that do not exceed the 600mp height requirement. They may not have corrected their entry form, but they did change their policy about 6 months ago. Stephen

02-13-2009, 10:05 AM	#7
MRRiley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sterling, VA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,275	Thanks for the update Stephen... If thats the case I may have knocked out some worthy entries for which I'd apologise... BUT in that case Pentax needs to update their rules (which I check every month or so for changes). Last edited by MRRiley; 02-13-2009 at 10:15 AM.

02-13-2009, 10:17 AM	#8
netuser Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Azores Islands, Portugal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,236	Originally posted by MRRiley Well if thats the case I may have knocked out some worthy entries for which I'd apologise... BUT in that case Pentax needs to update their rules (which I check every month or so for changes). So, it was you who "killed" my one panorama photo lol Send them a mail for the update of the rules. On topic Other thing I really don't like is pictures for example of subjects with feet cut. For instance a person, or like yesterday, a very nice picture with a horse framed on the barn entry and then cut by the horse knees bad bad detail

02-13-2009, 03:51 PM	#10
AndrewShirley Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 421 Original Poster	In my mind resubmitting on technical fixes is legit, although I could also argue that they shouldn't have been submitted unless you were absolutely sure they were ready. Of course I would be a hypocrite if I said that lol. - Andrew

02-14-2009, 06:20 AM	#11
MRRiley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sterling, VA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,275	Originally posted by AndrewShirley In my mind resubmitting on technical fixes is legit, although I could also argue that they shouldn't have been submitted unless you were absolutely sure they were ready. Of course I would be a hypocrite if I said that lol. - Andrew I agree... If there was a submittal error or other technical issue like mentioned above, I have no problem saying YES to a photo that I notice has been resubmitted.

02-15-2009, 10:40 AM	#12
AndrewShirley Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 421 Original Poster	Today's mishaps: Overcast skies ( just voted down a great subject with an overcast sky ) Dark subject, ie: levels never adjusted. Huge Motion blur, OOF B&W flower pics. Sorry, what's the point of a B&W Flower pic? (this ought to start something!) Beautiful landscape taken in bad light "snap shots" of something someone found walking down the beach. Someone's kids, which were nic pics and all but had no meaning to anyone else. More beautiful landscape taken while subject was in shadow. A boring old building with a bunch of birds on it in harsh light. Then minutes later, same pic but zoomed in. PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD stop submitting duplicate pictures... PLEASE!! Multiple portraits of same subject doing something a little different each time. (See rant in previous point) A bunch of OOF stuff which I can't identify. Could be ice. A bunch of boats that SHOULD be falling off the edge of the world (MAJOR sloping horizon again) An otherwise great pic that probably should have been cropped to eliminate flare and isolate subject Some gorgeous birds (looked like herons) that were almost completely black with no detail. A show-shutter shot of lights where they shook the camera all around. Kinda neat, but PPG material? Another shot of lights, same as above. Another shot of lights, same as above. Another shot of lights, same as above. Another shot of lights, same as above. No this is not a misprint, almost the exact same shot, five different times. Now I know why its taking so long for my shots to be voted on... I just voted on five shots of the same thing I wish I could say this happens once in a while, but today's voting session involved about six different series of shots with minimal changes between them. My fellow PPGers, would you mind submitting your BEST shots of a series please... pretty please? All in jest... I'm just having a good time - Andrew - Andrew

02-16-2009, 12:19 PM	#13
MSM Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Alabama Photos: Gallery Posts: 994	Originally posted by AndrewShirley Today's mishaps: Someone's kids, which were nic pics and all but had no meaning to anyone else. I would respectfully disagree. PPG has a specific category for portraits. In fact, every portrait is an image of someone's kid(s). I love portraits of people and the emotions they exhibit. Also the lighting, mood, etc. I agree random snapshots are poor (see below) like a child blowing out a candle on a birthday cake at Chuck E Cheese. In fact it was photos of OPK (other people's kids) on PPG that really impressed me when making the decision to change to Pentax. Especially the portraits of Scott Rylance (sp?) and his kids with the 77 mm Limited. Priceless and inspiring at least to me. I would definitely agree with your other issues. I can't stand snapshots of anything kids, cats, whatever. I saw an image submitted to PPG with a little boy in a so-called 'Wife beater' undershirt. It was a cute idea. But, so poorly executed. It was oof and poorly composed. In addition to what others have said, I automatically reject all images with names like 'bird 1' or 'girl 2', etc. I feel that it is the photographer's duty to submit his or her best work. If s/he can't decide which is the best shot, then why should any of us. I stopped voting for awhile after suffering through at least 20 underwater shots of various fish. You want to talk about having no meaning. Just my thoughts...

02-16-2009, 01:01 PM	#14
netuser Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Azores Islands, Portugal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,236	Originally posted by MSM I would respectfully disagree. PPG has a specific category for portraits. In fact, every portrait is an image of someone's kid(s). I love portraits of people and the emotions they exhibit. Also the lighting, mood, etc. I agree random snapshots are poor (see below) like a child blowing out a candle on a birthday cake at Chuck E Cheese. In fact it was photos of OPK (other people's kids) on PPG that really impressed me when making the decision to change to Pentax. Especially the portraits of Scott Rylance (sp?) and his kids with the 77 mm Limited. Priceless and inspiring at least to me. Just my thoughts... I share your ideas

02-16-2009, 01:07 PM	#15
AndrewShirley Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 421 Original Poster	Originally posted by MSM I love portraits of people and the emotions they exhibit. Also the lighting, mood, etc. I agree random snapshots are poor (see below) like a child blowing out a candle on a birthday cake at Chuck E Cheese. Me too, and I've voted yes for quite a few portraits. The ones I specifically was talking about were snap-shots, OOF kids doing typical kids stuff. Hey, I have more of these shots than anyone here - I'm absolutely sure of it because I love my kids and want to remember every moment. But... (and to borrow your phrase since it works so well), I don't submit any Chuck E Cheese moments - Andrew