Old 07-23-2006, 08:59 PM   #26
VirginiaSouthern
Banned
 
VirginiaSouthern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sumter, SC
Posts: 391
Send a message via AIM to VirginiaSouthern Send a message via Yahoo to VirginiaSouthern
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
Granted, having a standard and being consistent in holding shots to the standard is important, and I think the screeners do the best job out there (it's not perfect, sure, but what in life is?). It's a tough job to judge another's work, but when one approaches the situation with a certain level of maturity and understanding, there should be no heartache...
Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but with many of the shots that don't meet standards getting in lately, I'd say the screeners are doing a less than stellar job. If one is going to create a set of artificial standards then they should "lead by example" so to speak. If they find they can't live up to the standards which they created, then there really isn't much point in having them. It matters not whether this is a private site or not. This is the #1 reason why so many hate this site (I'm not saying I am one of those).
VirginiaSouthern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 10:18 PM   #27
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,910
Default

Ween;

If you go back to the thread you linked up, you'll find that I was arguing in favor of the first shot of the Rio Grande unit getting in. It was well lit, just side lit, which normally would have gotten it trashed. But it was a newsworthy shot and I think some leeway must be given.

But in the case of the C&NW first shot, too much leeway was given. I'm not trying to call anyone out. But if that was a shot of any other engine, first, the photog would probably not have tried to get it in this database. And if did and was rejected, you would have been the first to tell him to save it for the "personal collection."

There is no legitimate reason why the first shot of the UP 1995 should be in. (Never mind the fact that shots were already getting plastered on another web site that shall remain nameless.) I'm not angry about it. It doesn't bother me in the way that it might bother others. It was just subpar on all levels.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 03:23 AM   #28
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
If they find they can't live up to the standards which they created, then there really isn't much point in having them.
I agree, and I think if you have standards, it's important to follow them. I guess I haven't seen the lack of inconsistency on the level you and others may have. As far as hating this site, well, again, entitled to your own opinion. But is it really worth it to get worked up over something as trivial as a rejection?
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 04:22 AM   #29
ccaranna
Senior Member
 
ccaranna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VirginiaSouthern
Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but with many of the shots that don't meet standards getting in lately, I'd say the screeners are doing a less than stellar job. If one is going to create a set of artificial standards then they should "lead by example" so to speak. If they find they can't live up to the standards which they created, then there really isn't much point in having them. It matters not whether this is a private site or not. This is the #1 reason why so many hate this site (I'm not saying I am one of those).
I think this is very interesting, because I've come to the conclusion that no matter what the admin and screeners do, they will never please EVERYONE. It is absolutely impossible.

First, (a year or more ago) it was; "This is ridiculous, why are they rejecting THIS shot? It's a good shot, they're friggin' crazy. Don't they accept anything other than a #$*&@ing well lit 3/4 wedgie?"

Now, it's; "I can't believe that they're letting the crap I've been seeing in here lately. Where have the standards gone?"

Triple T, I'm not calling you out on this, but your post just made me think. I know that there are a lot of folks out there that say their "arty" shots don't stand a chance here and often get rejected, but when the site recently starts to accept things that are non-cookie cutter, all of the sudden people start to wonder, where did the standards go?

I'll tell you what, being a screener or the admin of this site can't possibly be as glamourous and powerful as it may appear to be. The job probably ranks up there with Baseball Umpire or Police Officer. Two jobs in which require a keen sense of judgement, thick skin, and a whole lot of patience and understanding.
ccaranna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2006, 08:58 AM   #30
VirginiaSouthern
Banned
 
VirginiaSouthern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sumter, SC
Posts: 391
Send a message via AIM to VirginiaSouthern Send a message via Yahoo to VirginiaSouthern
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
I agree, and I think if you have standards, it's important to follow them. I guess I haven't seen the lack of inconsistency on the level you and others may have.
Sometimes people only see what they want to see. Of course, you could use that same statement as a rebuttal against my arguement. And around and around she goes...

Not trying to bust your chops Ween. Just putting up some food for thought. And for the record, I'm not one that hates the site. If that were the case, I would have simply left. I'm holding out for things to return to the level they were when I first joined.

Chuck,

First, thanks for the new nickname. Never been called that one before, but I'll definitely have to remember it.

I'm more than happy to see artsy shots get in and if anybody thinks I'm saying this because of my own shots being rejected, that's hardly the case. I was happy with the few shots I had on here. I'm not one of these folks that has to submit every shot and usually when a shot was rejected, I left it at that.

My complaint is not artsy shots. Its subpar shots. Shots that usually meet at least two criteria for rejection getting in. Some are backlit, some have the "high sun", some are just plain fuzzy/blurry or suffer from too much jpeg compression. There's been more than plenty of 'em lately. I used to look at all the new pics that came into the site everyday. Looking forward to what new and rare things I might see. I stopped doing so because I was seeing too much of the above mentioned crap.

Last edited by VirginiaSouthern; 07-24-2006 at 09:21 AM.
VirginiaSouthern is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.