View Single Post
Old 04-22-2021, 03:35 AM   #8
Senior Member
Mgoldman's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,704

Inconsistency has always been a prime issue here, but again,
better to be inconsistent in letting more in then less.

It's never bothered me what gets in, but rather, what does not,
especially compared to what does. I think we all agree with that?

I think if you can present an example of a shot accepted that
has the implied issues of your own rejected shot, it should be
accepted, assuming, say, the compared image was accepted
within the last, I dunno, 12 months?

Again - you can always scroll quickly and easily past images
you dislike.

Back to your shot, Doug -

I like it. I through it into Photoshop expecting "Auto Color" to show "us" what
we didn't see - it looked worse. I ran it through NIK software's "Pro-Contrast"
which has contrast and color cast sliders (amazing filter) and saw a slight
improvement but not the difference between an acceptable shot and a reject.

I don't get it - looks perfectly fine to me, the first one. The second is to orangy,
but I don't see the issue with grain. Perhaps two coincidental wrong rejections??

Along with inconsistencies - as noted in my "Suggestions to Screeners", I suggested
to admin - "just lighten up!" Rejections are fine. The scrutiny in the appeals process
needs to be eased up. 700,000 photos - it's worth keeping patrons if it means a couple
of images within the 700,000 "might" not be up to par. As noted, Tom's image got lots
of views, and even more noteworthy, an above average count of favorites.

Regarding copyright - there are several images on RP that are not originally taken by
the poster. Many are "from the estate of...." or "the collection of....", while others are
properly given credit which should suffice, especially when you consider none are earning
money for the patron posting.


Last edited by Mgoldman; 04-23-2021 at 03:31 AM.
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote