Best Wedding Photo of 2009 Contest--Size of Images and Comments

[picturesque]

<p>Submissions have ended and we are now in the judging phase.</p>

<p><strong>About size of entries.</strong></p>

<p>There have been comments about the fact that some people have ignored rules and posted images that are larger.</p>

<p><strong>Ken Papai--</strong><br>

<em>There are 48 images here, most followed the rules; however, 14 of these 48 posted images beyond the 500 px wide limit that was asked for. 10 egregiously so.</em><br>

<em>A lot of good work no doubt, but cannot judge fairly if the rules don't pertain to all.</em></p>

<p><strong>David Schilling--</strong><br>

<em>I think Ken makes a very valid observation and is simply verbalizing what many others are thinking. IMO, image size can make a difference in judging the subjective impact and technical merits of an image however, the difference may enhance or in some cases diminish the merits of the image. Surely, presentation merits would be negatively impacted for not following submission guidelines.</em><br>

<em>But in the spirit of keeping things light and fun.....please delete my comments along with Kens'.</em></p>

<p><strong>Francie Baltazar--</strong><br>

<em>We all know this a fun contest we do each year... however, if this were a "real contest" any submission that did not follow guideline would be disqualified. I am not suggesting that happen here, however, I agree with David that there is a difference in "impact" by the size of the photo... just look at the difference between torsten's two photos... the larger on has a different impact... and I trust the judges discression - and if a larger photo wins... oh can't wait for that discussion ;-)</em></p>

<p>Typically, 700 pixels is the limit for the width of a posted image. I asked, at the beginning of each submission thread, for entries to be 500 pixels wide, and that no other comments beyond a caption (typically a title) be submitted. Some people have ignored this as well.</p>

<p>I anticipated that this might happen, and I have not removed successful posts or asked that they be re-submitted at the right size because that would make things difficult for people, and some people have had trouble just successfully posting. I will not be doing anything about this situation on this last day of submissions. Here is why:</p>

<p>1. As stated, this is the last day of submissions. If I removed images and asked for people to re-post now, that would indeed not be fair. Also, if I did that, I would also have to remove the images belonging to people who made comments other than a caption/title.</p>

<p>2. Even at 500 pixels, a vertical image will be larger than a horizontal one. So 'egregious' is not correct, in Ken's statement. Perhaps next year we need to limit the 'long side' of image entries.</p>

<p>3. This <strong>is</strong> a fun contest. This is why I posted the paragraph about the spirit of competition. "Let's keep this on the lighter side."</p>

<p>Last but definitely not least:</p>

<p>4. The judges are all highly visual people. They know that a larger image can appear to have more 'impact', but that impact is due to size, not visual elements. The 'impact' mentioned in the judging criteria is not the impact of size. The judges know the difference.</p>

<p><strong>Impact<br /></strong>Strong point of interest<br />Compelling subject matter<br />Tells a story</p>

<p>There are no 'presentation merits'. The guidelines for judging are just as stated in the non-submission thread posted as a 'sticky' at the top. The guidelines are all about the visual elements <strong>in</strong> an image, not about the size of an image.</p>

<p>I am removing extraneous comments from the submission threads to keep them as free of text as possible. If you have any comments about these contests, you can comment on this thread. However, I will repeat that this is just a contest, and a highly subjective one, not a do or die situation.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I forgot the following:</p>

<p><strong>Ian</strong><br>

<em>Vertical submissions are allowed to show images more than twice the size of horizontals. (Assuming same 2:3 ratio). Is there a reason for that?</em></p>

<p>The guidelines for posting images always stated a width in pixels without mentioning the orientation of the image (whether vertical or horizontal), so vertical images end up larger overall. As stated above, maybe next year we will mention the long side of an image.</p>

[missy_kay]

<p>Thank you for posting Nadine! I was a little upset about the larger size horizontal submissions but I think the judges will judge fairly either way. :)</p>

[William Michael]

<p>We discussed this at breakfast this morning.<br>

<br>

My Daughter has been following the competition, but I have not. <br>

<br>

I understand she has made a comment regarding this issue (most likely quite blunt), as she asked if she could use my login and I said that was OK, provided she identified herself.<br>

<br>

WW </p>

<p > </p>

 

[mitch_w1]

<p>William, your daughter's comment was funny and sweet at the same time! She's no holds barred... when talking about Dad!</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I am moving William's daughter's comments to this thread to keep the submission thread as free of text as possible.</p>

<p><strong>William W Jan 27, 2010; 03:22 p.m.</strong><br>

<em>hi, im bills daughter i am using his login. ive been watching the entries but bill wont even look at them until the competition closes. i told him this morning that there was arguing about the sizes of the photos and he laughed. he said he was going to save the whole web page as files then load the images only he wont even know who posted what or be able read any comments attached to any photo and he can look at all the photos at about the same size. dad is really screwy like that but i love him for it.<br /></em><br>

Thanks for commenting!</p>

[neilambrose]

<blockquote>

<p><em>dad is really screwy like that but i love him for it.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Dad is a switched-on guy.</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p><em>"The 'impact' mentioned in the judging criteria is not the impact of size. The judges know the difference...."</em><br>

<em></em><br>

I'm also aware of the difference. In my comment I made mention of the "subjective impact" of the image. I disagree with Bill's daughter's observation that people are "arguing", I think the comments about image size were valid....as I said in my comment, I would also guess that there were others with the same thoughts who, in the spirit of keeping things on the lighter side declined to write a comment. I do agree however that "Dad is really screwy but that [we all] love him for it." ;-)</p>

[William Michael]

<p>She is at school. I doubt she'll respond to you David - she's only been looking at the photos thread so she can argue with me later, as to if I get it right . . . or not. <br>

<br>

To be frank she was angry - but that is of no consequence, really. She was being aggressive / defensive as her interpretation of the comments was that validity and integrity were being questioned.<br>

<br>

I did laugh - most likely that inflamed her more as I should have been angry too . . . such is the way of the highly charged high achieving folk – they do not like it if one laughs at these “serious matters”.<br>

<br>

For the record: for me it is a non issue. I understand the comments that were made. I agree that they are comments only and that there was no argument.<br>

<br>

I like being screwy, and I like that you like me that way too, thanks for that :)<br>

<br>

BTW she does refer to me as "Bill" - I only get "Dad" when she really needs me - or when she is really steamed up.<br>

<br>

WW</p>

[picturesque]

<p>David--I did not say your comment wasn't valid. I just don't agree. The judges will be looking at each image for more than a few seconds. Subjective impact quickly dissipates after study, particularly since the judges are aware of some people's discontent on this matter and will be judging based on the previously mentioned criteria, not on size.</p>

<p>Also, as you see, William W. will be looking at images of the same size, at least. Unfortunately, I have to see the images to moderate the threads, but I can tell you that the size of the image will have no effect on my judgement.</p>

<p>Speculating about the others agreeing with you while refraining from comment is, well...speculation. Anyone wishing to still express an opinion about this or any other aspect of the contest is welcome to post a comment here.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I will also oblige anyone who wishes to drop out of this contest based on the size issue. If you do, please contact me by noon tomorrow, January 28, Eastern time, USA.</p>

[markonestudios]

Wow, I guess this is a good lessons learnt thread ;-) I'm sure future competitions will be a lot more streamlined. Imagine if the prizes involved '000s of USD? It would be cut-throat in here :)

<p>I look forward to the outcome and am happy to let the judges exercise their professionalism and discretion.

<p>Nadine, my comment is actually about archiving. I think there should be an archive section created, for posterity and future reference, with all the entries and of course with the winning images and the judges' rationale for selection.

<p>Thanks to everyone for sharing their photos and their views. I've thoroughly enjoyed looking at the scores of submissions :)

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p><em>"David--I did not say your comment wasn't valid. I just don't agree. The judges will be looking at each image for more than a few seconds. Subjective impact quickly dissipates after study, particularly since the judges are aware of some people's discontent on this matter and will be judging based on the previously mentioned criteria, not on size...."</em><br>

<em></em><br>

I don't mean to beat a dead horse and I'm more than happy to drop further comments in the spirit of keeping things "on the lighter side". However, I think you are minimizing the issue by stating that the judges will not be influenced by the size of the image. I would suggest that print competitions typically request a standard size for entries in an attempt to level the playing field and that they do so for a valid reason. For example, asking that all submissions be in a size such as 8x10, there is no relative advantage to using a portrait versus a landscape composition. Big is not necessarily better however I do believe that the subjective, immediate, first impression of an image which occurs within the first moments does indeed effect the subjective impact of the image. I also believe that bigger is typically better in a well crafted photo and that technical flaws can be somewhat minimized at smaller sizes. IMO, the "first impression" does matter as does the "curb appeal" in the form of presentation details. However, I also believe the debate about whether or not "size really matters can be a personal/subjective issue that's open to varied opinions.</p>

[g.e._masana]

<p>I first posted at 500 px wide, but the subjects and details in the image appeared so small how would it be able to be seen and judged fairly?</p>

[KenPapai]

<blockquote>

<p><em>I first posted at 500 px wide, but the subjects and details in the image appeared so small how would it be able to be seen and judged fairly?</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Then pick an appropriate image/subject matter that works well in the Highly Publicized 500 px width rule limit. Judges set the rules and entrants are bound to follow them (I cannot understand, esp. in the 4 years and more category why so many just don't get or follow such a simple, ultra basic rule).</p>

<p>Napa Valley Mustard Festival has a highly marketed annual photo contest with specific rules. You miss out on a rule and your image is filed away forever not to be judged. Size matters in photo contests.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>David--I am minimizing the issue because I don't believe it has any influence on the judging. </p>

<p>I would also say, in response to your comment about other photo competitions--the fact that say, an 8x10 is required, for instance, can be perceived as 'unfair', since that limits the proportion of an entry. Perhaps an image has a different proportion to reach it's potential. In other words, every contest has it's rules to try to level the playing field. Any one of those rules can be perceived as fair or unfair, just as bigger and smaller can each be perceived as better or worse. Notice that some people entered smaller images than requested. Do I throw those out too, in the interest of fairness?</p>

<p>As for the subjective impact issue, I believe I stated my opinion on that matter. I do not agree with your idea that the 'first impression' colors subsequent study of the image, particularly since that study is for the specfic purpose of judging the visual elements in the image, and the specific visual elements and their use have been verbalized (the criteria).</p>

<p>As previously stated, I am not going to throw out any of the entries at this point. It is too late for that.</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p>Geeeesch, No, I never suggested that any images be thrown out.</p>

<p>I also believe that understanding and appreciating the process is likely more valuable than which images are chosen as winners. It was in this vein that I made my comments aside from believing that Ken deserved some validation for what I (and maybe just a few others) were thinking. I also don't mind the issue of "size" being minimized but I do believe it was a fair element of concern and not one to be dismissed as if it were a "non-issue". Perhaps future contests might specify that vertical compositions be limited to 500 pixels in width while horizontal entries be limited to 700 in width.........or, maybe just let people do their own thing and post within the constrictions of the forum. Personally, I'll state for the record that I did selectively look for vertical presentations in favor of horizontal because "I" thought that it could be an influencing element. Lest anyone think that I have any personal investment in which images are chosen as "winners", please instruct the judges to eliminate my image from consideration.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>David--when talking about 'throwing out' I was talking about Ken's comment, above</p>

<p>I have not dismissed the issue as a non-issue. I consider every comment made about the contest, and reply to the best of my ability, as I have here. I also again invite anyone wishing to air any concerns to post here</p>

<p>I agree, if I have any input for next year's contest, I will suggest a very specific size rule. I still don't think it makes any difference in judging (with the criteria laid out) but the clearer, the better. And you can't take the easy route out, David... :^). Unless you tell me otherwise, your image is in the contest, because it's size will not influence the judging.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Not directed at any one person's comment in particular, but rather a broad shotgun comment about this thread, from us two down here:<br /><br />1 She reckons even if it wasn't before: <em>it IS ARGUING now </em>. . . <br /><br />2. I agree.<br /><br />WW</p>