[Leica] Re: decisive moment question on PAW: make it your project too

[Andrew Nemeth <azn@nemeng.com>]

Alastair Firkin <firkin@ncable.net.au> wrote:

>
>> Well, I'm truely sorry you were so hurt by your experiences last
>> year. I hasten to add, it was hardly my intention to hurt the
>> feelings of anyone who submitted, but some of what you have said is
>> quite simply not true: look at
>>
>>
>>http://users.netconnect.com.au/~firkin/FOM2%20Folder/YearOneExhibit/source/1001.
>>html


Alistair,

I really think there has been a colosal mis-communication
here.

The original 8 Dec 2001 email I received from you clearly shows
that only one of my submissions - the 360-deg VR - was accepted.

Furthermore, looking at the main URL for the 100 "winners" at:

<http://users.netconnect.com.au/~firkin/FOM2%20Folder/YearOneExhibit/board_fset1
.html>

... it confirmst that only 1 of my submissions was included.  QED.

So the URL you sent above ("1001.html") has come as a *huge*
surprise.  This is the first I have heard of it!  When was this
added?  There is no mention of this anywhere in the FOM2 mails I
have received from you or read on the LUG.

Furthermore, digging around the FOM2 year 1 exhibit, I noticed
(ahem - for the first time!) that there is a "Special Series
Selection" at:

<http://users.netconnect.com.au/~firkin/FOM2%20Folder/YearOneExhibit/board_fset2
.html>

... where indeed 4x of my images (along with two series from
two other photographers) are shown.

!!!!

Does this mean that there were actually *103* "selections" for
year 1?  Jesus man, why didn't you *tell* anyone!

So... (humble-pie time)... My claim that only 1 of my 21
submissions was selected was mistaken and wrong.  Up until
today I had no idea that actually 5 were selected, with 4 of
them grouped into a single page and displayed in a "series"
exhibit separate from final 100 group.

Sheesh, when I'm wrong I'm wrong.  But please in future
find a cleaner method of letting people know that their
"rejected" images have actually been selected somewhere
else!  Finding out 6 months after the fact, in a reply to
a LUG post, is somewhat... inefficient.


Okay - that deals with issue #1 I had with FOM2.
Issue #2 still stands though.  The judging...

> I would welcome comments on how to choose the images fairly

1.  Spell out clearly and unambiguously how the judging is
    actually done.  Is it by popular online vote?  Are
    there actual judges?  A mixture of the two?

2.  If there are judges, name who they are.

3.  Beneath each accepted image, either have links to the
    judges' reasoning for why the image was chosen, or else
    simply show how many votes the image got.

Although I can understand the judges' decision as final, I
can see no reason for secrecy over how the selections were
actually made, and by whom.

The judges' reasons need not be 1000 word essays, just
simple statements like: "We chose this image because we
consider any B&W photo taken with a Noctilux perfect".

This way, contributors are given valuable (and revealing)
feedback as to what is going on "behind the curtain".





Andrew N.
<http://nemeng.com>


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html