Photo Contest- Are We There Yet?

Just wondering ^_^

Same categories as last year?

I don't remember exactly what it was, but didn't a few people request one or two other categories? Maybe fungus...urgh...

Dave I think last year there was alot of talk about some new catagories and maybe doing a split photo for each month so there could be 24. I think most of us are good with whatever you decide Dave but it would be nice to have some more catagories so maybe 24 would be good. There was also some talk about cameras and that it wasn't fair if some had expensive cameras with specialty lenses and some did not. I got the impression that this has been a discussion item for awhile. I think as a contest everyone should go in with cameras ablazing. This is decided by membership votes so I don't really think that cameras matter. If a member feels that a macro is an unfair advantage then they won't vote for it. That of course is just IMPO.

I've Personally enjoyed the Contest and Categories over the past two years. I do believe that Roses should be eliminated and replaced. In all fairness Why should Roses have it's own Category?
P.S. I don't have a hatred for Roses OR the people who grow them!
:)

I seem to recall an interest from years past that members wanted a category with People.
Maybe a category called
Person Place Thing

The Miscellaneous Category Should continue for the plants that just don't seem to fit in the other Categories.

Just a suggestion! No Hate mail please...LOL

This message was edited Oct 2, 2009 8:07 PM

Yes, I agree, I think roses should have their own category! lol! I don't think it's realistic to exclude camera types based on capability, are we judging cameras or images? Just because you own an 8x12 format camera doesn't mean you will be able to take pics like Ansel Adams, just like having Rembrandt's paint brushes doesn't mean you will be able to paint like Rembrandt.

Sorry gardenguykin of course I now hate you because of your comment about the rose category. TOTALLY JUST KIDDIN ^_^ So glad that you expressed your opinion! I too remember that People was one of the new catagories that alot of members wanted.

I don't think roses should have their own category. They are flowers too. I love the contest. My DH always looks over my shoulder while I am voting.

Ahhh, but roses carry an inherent quality of romanticism re-enforced by culture throughout the ages. Shakespeare didn't say 'a Morning Glory is a Morning Glory by any other name'... (JMO of course ☺)

Roses don't need their own category. If it's a beautiful rose photo, it's beautiful. :-)

I love the bug category!! And I'm one of the ones that finally bit the bullet and went out and bought an expensive macro lens because of those wonderful bug photos last year. And I'm proof that the camera equipment doesn't make the photo. :-) My photos aren't really much better or worse than they were before. (I need a class.) So in my case, it's clearly an "operator" impediment that equipment alone cannot overcome.

I don't mind the roses having their own category. That way they don't clutter up the other flower category. ;-)

I like Dahlianut's mention of more categories and a split on each page. That way nothing would be eliminated (read ROSES) and some could be added that were wanted. I know PEOPLE was mentioned and I think there was talk about splitting BIRDS out from WILDLIFE. I would like to see BULBS split from CORMS & RHIZOMES (which also seems to include Tubers/Dahlias). Also, a WILDFLOWER category would be pretty. I think there was also mention of splitting SUNSETS from SCENIC & SEASONAL. I'm sure this group could easily come up with 24 categories if that would work for the calendar.

If there are more than 12 categories, the winners from each category wouldn't necessarily have to go in the calendar--maybe once all the winners are chosen there could be a 2nd round of voting which would determine which ones of those get to go in the calendar? That way you're not limited to coming up with a certain number of categories that matches up with the # of months in a year, plus just speaking for myself I'd rather have a calendar that just has one large picture for each month vs trying to squeeze a couple pics in.

In terms of categories--another thing I remember from last year was that some people didn't think it was fair to have public gardens & individual people's gardens together in the garden landscape category so maybe those could be split into two categories. I'm not sure about splitting out bulbs from corms & rhizomes...in principle I think it's a fine idea but there are a lot of people who probably don't know whether their plant is a bulb or a corm, etc so I think you'll just end up with 2 categories containing images of the same types of plants unless there's something more explicit (like you have to pick the name of the flower in your picture out of a checklist before you can upload it, etc)

Didn't think of the roses crowding other flowers out - keep the roses! LOL

How 'bout a Macro category as well?

How about Birds? ^_^

Here are a few numbers.

Photo contest 2008
There are 1,730 entries.
14 Categories
Average entries per Category is .. 123
(members may submit 2 entries per category)

Future Photo contest
24 Categories
Average entry per Category is...123
(members may submit 2 entries per category)
Total entries would be... 2952

If the Categories increase then Dave may need to limit submitting only 1 photo per Category.

I think going with 24 categories is a fine idea and I think we should do that.

So, ya'll get together and decide what the 24 categories will be, and I'll make it happen! Let's shoot for around October 15th to have the contest ready for entrants.

I'm not sure whether it should be 1 or 2 entries per category per person. Ya'll decide and I'll go with it. :)

I like the idea of 2 entries per category.

I like being able to submit two per category as well because I always have such a hard time narrowing down the ones I want to submit...but we have to remember the people on dialup who want to try and look at all the pics and vote, so if we are going to have more categories then maybe we should just be allowed 1 per category. Or maybe we could limit people to a certain number of total pictures (pick that number with a goal of keeping total # of pictures submitted similar to last year), but you could divide them up over the categories however you want.

2 per category is cool, We don't have lanes for horses and buggies so if you still got dial-up it's time to get with it...

Here's my two cents worth...

Keep two entries per category.
Keep "Roses".
Divide wildlife into "Birds" and other "Wildlife".
Keep "Insects".
Add a "Macro" category.
Add a "People" category.
Keep "Domestice Animals and Pets".
Add a "Water" category. Photos would have to have water featured... i.e. stream, lake, pond, waterfall, beach, etc.
Maybe break off "Seasonal" from "Scenic", and divide into four categories of "Winter", "Spring", "Summer", and "Autumn".
Keep all others not mentioned here.

I still don't think that comes to 24 categories, but I am sure there will be some more excellent suggestions.

That all sounds pretty sensible to me VA_Wild_Rose. I like all of those suggestions. Not only does breaking apart categories like Seasonal broaden the scope, it also allows people to avoid spending time viewing photos they know they won't be interested in. Which in some cases might actually help the guys with dial-up out a bit.

Glad to know somebody gets my sense of humor, KaperC. :-)

Landscapes: ie. A)Spring/ b)summer/ c)winter/ d)fall
People: a) candids / b)portraits
Sun: a) Sunsets/ b)sunrise
Macro: a)insects/ b)flowers
Roses
Bulbs
Other: can subdivide into [water/ sky/ etc]
Gen flowers
Gardens: a) institutional / b) home/ c) container
Wildlife: a)Birds / b)other
Domestic animals & pets

- that's what I've got so far...

Personally, I think 24 is just too many. Maybe around 18 at most. Then just pick the 14 that go into the calendar.

This message was edited Oct 4, 2009 10:28 AM

Vegetables, Fruit, Berries, Trees???

Shrubs, annuals, perennials?

Annuals
Birds
Bulbs, Corms, Rhizomes and Tubers
Container Gardening
Domestic Pets and Animals
Flowers in general
Fruits and Veggies
Garden Landscapes
Insects
Miscellaneous
People
Perennials
Scenic
Seasonal
Trees and Shrubs
Tropicals & House plants
Wildflowers which could include Cacti and Succulents
Wildlife


This message was edited Oct 3, 2009 8:52 PM

... that's strange, how did GGK edit the entry 2½ hrs before it was posted! lol!

To me his edit shows 13 minutes after his initial post.

Edit: Checking for time zone

This message was edited Oct 3, 2009 11:41 PM

Ahh, must be the time zone difference...

Odd, it shouldn't do that, it should show it in your zone, not GGK's . My edit above shows 11:41 and that is correct. It should show 2:41 for you.

It shows as posted at 12:39 pm & edited at 8:52 pm for me

Hmmm...
That is strange! Something Dave needs looking into

I agree with Victor.
I think 18 Categories at the most is sufficient.
I remember when I couldn't afford "High Speed Internet" and the daunting task of going through 2,000 + photos. It became more of a task than a pleasurable fun Photo Contest.

If we have a total of 18 Categories I think limiting 2 entries per category would still be a good manageable number of entries to view.

I also like Ecrane3's idea...
Maybe we could limit people to a certain number of total pictures (pick that number with a goal of keeping total # of pictures submitted similar to last year), but you could divide them up over the categories however you want.

I agree that without high speed internet it is a daunting task, but high speed internet is no longer a luxury but rather a necessity. The phone companies have lowered the price, (at least in NY), to less than $20/mo and in fact is now the same price as Dial-up was. Try finding a modem card now... you're choices are extremely limited. It's as hard as trying to find a computer with a 3.5" bay for floppy disks! Just as 33rpm records & 8 tracks are now collector's items, technology moves on...

IMO the more choices you have the better, 18 is good, 24 more so. What would be the point of depriving the public of 6 more choices when it makes no real difference here or there? If you want to go through 24 categories and vote fine! If you want to go through 18 that's fine too, at least you have the freedom of choice, no one obligates you to look through a certain number. Somehow I'm reminded of Gandhi's quote when he was dismayed how people loved to deprive others of choices. Anyway It's a 'non-issue' with me, I'm cool with whatever Dave decides, if he decides five is enough that's ok, if twenty-five is enough that's cool with me too. What the categories will be would seem to be more relevant...

48, 96, one for every day?!! Hee hee. ^_^

I would agree with ditching roses, but majority rules. I would consider ditching fruits and veggies too - it normally gets the lowest number of entries. Add people, break out scenic from seasonal, and birds from wildlife. Macro is a good idea, though I can see a potential problem in setting the cutoff of what qualifies as macro.

Naww, ditching roses isn't cool, they're too many rose haters out there... (jk☺!)

I also see a problem with Macro. I use macro as just another tool when taking all kinds of pictures which would fall into many of the other categories. Is a macro of a zinnia, for instance, considered a Macro or an Annual? Is a macro of a bee considered a Macro or an Insect?