Bruce, I clearly remember your pulling your 50+ images with the explanation, if I recall correctly, that you intended to resubmit them to determine if they would be accepted under the current standards. You may have been one who began to submit images early on and at a time, perhaps, when submission were ravenously accepted in an effort to develop a gallery. As time passed and the gallery inventory increased, standards for acceptance seemed to stiffen. It was my assumption that you wanted to "test" your images against the current and seemingly more stringent standards. I recall the respect and admiration, actually expressed by some, you garnered by so doing. >From time to time I checked your gallery in the hope you would be pleased at >the rate of re-acceptance. Haven't done so for awhile.
Jack --- On Thu, 8/26/10, Bruce Dayton <bkday...@daytonphoto.com> wrote: > From: Bruce Dayton <bkday...@daytonphoto.com> > Subject: Re: The Pentax Photo Gallery > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> > Date: Thursday, August 26, 2010, 9:47 PM > I gave up a long time ago and pulled > all my pictures off. Between the very inconsistent > voting and the crazy interface it just wasn't worth the > aggravation. Haven't been to the site in a long time. > -- > Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. > > "Jack Davis" <jdavi...@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > >Yeah, one has to be pretty well adjusted to wait out > the time lag, doubtless created do to lack of interest in > voting. > >Still, it's a healthy incentive stimulated by the > challenge of having their photographic efforts find > approval. > >The proof is in the obvious satisfaction gleefully > expressed by many when announcing their work's acceptance. > > > >Jack > > > >--- On Thu, 8/26/10, Brian Walters <supera1...@fastmail.fm> > wrote: > > > >> From: Brian Walters <supera1...@fastmail.fm> > >> Subject: Re: The Pentax Photo Gallery > >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> > >> Date: Thursday, August 26, 2010, 3:49 PM > >> On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:25 +1000, "Rob > >> Studdert" > >> <distudio.p...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > On 27 August 2010 04:04, Daniel J. Matyola > <danmaty...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > In any event, one thing that bothers me > is the > >> way the size limitation > >> > > is structured. The recommended image > size is > >> 600 pixels high. There > >> > > is no stated limit on width, however. > That > >> means the images in > >> > > portrait orientation are much smaller -- > in both > >> the thumbnail and the > >> > > "full" size -- than images in landscape > >> orientation or even square > >> > > images. I think that it makes it more > difficult > >> to get a portrait > >> > > image in the gallery and worse, it makes > it > >> harder to appreciate those > >> > > in the gallery that are in portrait > orientation > >> and therefore quite > >> > > reduced in size. Has anyone else > noticed this? > >> > > >> > I think the World's gone landscape in the > digital > >> realm, the tendency > >> > towards video and wide aspect ratio monitors > has left > >> portrait > >> > orientated images as a legacy of sorts, > basically > >> suitable for print > >> > only, it's a pity. > >> > > >> > In any case I stay away from the PPG, I find > the > >> interface slow and > >> > hideous and I don't subscribe to their > philosophy > >> regarding selection, > >> > basically it's a crapshoot, if you partake > you have to > >> be tolerant of > >> > the foibles of the system. > >> > > >> > >> > >> I've long since stopped pondering what will make > an > >> 'acceptable' image > >> for the PPG. I just submit images that I like > and > >> shrug my shoulders > >> when they're rejected.... > >> > >> I participate for the challenge but I can't > imagine that > >> anyone would > >> ever go there to view my images, or anyone else's > for that > >> matter. That > >> interface is simply bizzare. Waiting while the 12 > generic > >> images load > >> before you can even look at the gallery can often > take up > >> to a minute - > >> and once you're actually in and viewing, the rate > at which > >> images appear > >> redefines the word 'sluggish'. > >> > >> If you have supersonic broadband, maybe you'd hang > around > >> for a bit but > >> I doubt that many would. > >> > >> Very strange design. > >> > >> > >> > >> Cheers > >> > >> Brian > >> > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> Brian Walters > >> Western Sydney Australia > >> http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> > >> -- > >> http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home > >> and the web > >> > >> > >> -- > >> 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. > >> > > > > > > > > > >-- > >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. > > > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
