View Single Post
Old 07-12-2016, 02:55 PM   #3
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Rene, you have quite a lengthy statement and I might respond to more later. (BTW, I am not a screener and have no connection to the site; I would expect that pretty much everyone that ultimately responds to you will have the same status. Screeners/admin participate here rarely.)

Yes, it would be nice to have 25-50 screeners. That seems completely impractical to me; it increases the work by a factor of 25-50 and I don't see that happening. But it is up to admin to say why they don't do it that way, and I would expect you won't hear from them. It seems like a huge amount of work, in fact, with written comments!, and I'd be very curious to hear from the admin of that website how they manage to make such a system work. How many screeners do they have, how many hours/month does each spend screening, is there some form of compensation, etc. You are making that website a "norm" in your argument, but to me it seems rather extraordinary, compared to the RP setup and compared to my vague sense of the time it takes to do an active website (such as my long-ago lapsed one).

The question of rejections is always interesting and that is what this forum is about, really. But there is not much we can say without knowing what the rejections were, which is why the norm here is to post the link to the rejection so we know what the screener's view was. Sometimes a rejection is due to a (perceived) need for a minor adjustment. Sometimes major, and sometimes a shot is just not what the admin of the site want to accept. We can't tell without seeing the rejection reason.

Back to the "minor" - sometimes a shot is rejected because of a (perceived) need for a minor adjustment - a slight shift in exposure, not quite sharp enough. Sometimes the crop is not what the screener thinks is the right crop. These sorts of rejections are easily correctable, but to some, especially to those new to the site, they have the emotional impact of a complete rejection as lousy. Often a "rejection" is merely a request for adjustment. And that adjustment may seem to be unnecessary; that is what catches a particular screener's eye and it really isn't more than that, it is the single screener only, as shaped by the desires of admin - and one of the two co-owners does the majority of screening.

You have some nice shots, but, again, hard to comment on them without the rejection reason.

One more thing, photography is subjective. Having a shot accepted at one site does not mean it should be accepted at another. And some people's tastes are narrower or broader than others - I think most people have a strong opinion as to which way RP tilts! Don't take it personally. Ultimately, RP is just one site, with one set of preferences. Don't make it into more than that, and certainly not into an "other side of the pond" discussion. RP represents what its two co-owners want it to be, it does not represent all of North America.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots

Last edited by JRMDC; 07-12-2016 at 03:00 PM.
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote