Hello Jack, The method of determination of peer rejection vs. judges is based on speed of rejection. For the past couple of months, the judges have been taking 1-3 weeks to reject. Peer rejections are mostly within a few days. So if something has sat there for a long time (more than a week) and eventually gets rejected, that is most likely a judge. It is also easier to tell if there are several submissions. So an example would be that 10 are submitted. 7 of the are rejected within two days. The remaining 3 sit there for 3 weeks and then are all rejected at once. This would indicate that the 7 were peer rejections and the 3 were judge rejections. Makes sense, no?
-- Best regards, Bruce Friday, February 29, 2008, 3:25:00 PM, you wrote: JD> Bruce, JD> In need of self validation? The comfort you will feel if the majority JD> are accepted upon re-submission will be easily worth the risk. They JD> certainly don't deserve the fate the eleven re-submitter images have JD> experienced. JD> How are you able to determine if an image is accepted/declined by peer JD> voting vs the judges? JD> I gather you have many more images to re-submit.(?) JD> Jack JD> --- Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Well, I did the unpardonable - I took down all 53 of my photos. I >> had two in the collection. >> >> I have been slowly resubmitting my shots with the new voting in >> place. So far, the two that were in collection have been accepted, >> but not in collection. 9 that were in the gallery have been >> rejected. Most of those rejections have come on the peer voting - >> maybe 2 or 3 were rejected by the judges. >> >> In a weird sort of way, I feel better having almost all my work >> rejected. Before, I'm thinking that I had 53 in there and now >> everything is rejected. Now, I can just think that almost everything >> of mine is rejected, so at least it is consistent. >> >> I still haven't quite figured out the voting yet - it appears that if >> there is a huge wow factor, it might make it, but anything else, is >> very iffy. >> >> In some respects, this seems to be following a larger trend. One in >> which art is transcending photography. Try looking at all the photos >> on photo.net galleries based on popularity. Almost all the shots are >> soooo dramatic that they just don't hardly look like our planet - >> even people shots have heavy doctoring of lighting. Extreme skies >> and wild, saturated colors are the norm these days - even though >> where I live, I see that kind of thing maybe once every few years. I >> seem to be rambling...must be one of those days. >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Bruce >> >> >> Friday, February 29, 2008, 10:50:35 AM, you wrote: >> >> JD> 'prox 4000 images divided by 1900 photogs = 2 images ea. >> JD> ' " " " " " 680 " = 6 " " (seems >> more >> JD> logical). >> JD> If there are some 4000 voters, the yes/no vote should be >> considered on >> JD> the basis of the ratio and not the count, as was initially >> stated. >> JD> May help explain the high reject level. >> >> JD> Jack >> JD> --- AlunFoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> A couple of observations: >> >> >> >> Bunnell writes: 1900 photographers. >> >> Photographers list in gallery counts 680. Which means there are >> more >> >> than 1200 *unpublished* photographers casting votes. Interesting. >> >> >> >> Bunnell writes: max submitted photos from one photographer: 133 >> >> No photographer in the gallery have that many published. Some guy >> has >> >> at least 70 photos in the voting queue, and I'm dead certain it's >> not >> >> me... >> >> >> >> (yeah, I've got one of those days again... too much time and too >> >> little to do...) >> >> >> >> Jostein >> >> >> >> 2008/2/28, Brian Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> > Just noticed that Ned Bunnell has posted some statistics (pdf >> >> files) about the gallery on his Blog. >> >> > >> >> > http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2008/02/pentax-photo-gallery.html >> >> > >> >> > One file shows a break down of contributors by Country. Not >> >> surprisingly, the USA is well out in front but Oz contributors are >> >> doing well and bringing up third place. >> >> > >> >> > The other file lists the most popular lenses used. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Cheers >> >> > >> >> > Brian >> >> > >> >> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> > Brian Walters >> >> > Western Sydney, Australia >> >> > http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> JD> >> JD> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > Get a free email account with anti spam protection. >> >> > http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/2 >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >> > PDML@pdml.net >> >> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly >> above >> >> and follow the directions. >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ >> >> http://alunfoto.blogspot.com >> >> >> >> -- >> >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >> PDML@pdml.net >> >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >> >> and follow the directions. >> >> >> >> >> >> JD> >> JD> >> JD> ____________________________________________________________________________________ >> JD> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. >> JD> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs >> >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >> and follow the directions. >> JD> JD> ____________________________________________________________________________________ JD> Be a better friend, newshound, and JD> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. JD> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
