The 'discriminatory-nature' of capture-date stipulations!

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
xml6000
Junior MemberPosts: 34
Like?
Re: why put in requirements at all?
In reply to tko, 6 months ago

tko wrote:

All your arguments apply to ANY restrictions. The fewer restrictions, the larger the gene pole.

Why limit to one camera brand, when I have a good photo taken with another?

Why limit to tele or wide angle, when I have a good photo taken with the other?

Why not allow the same photo to be entered again and again? Then I don't have to take as many photos.

Why limit to portraits, when I have a perfectly wonderful body shot?

Some people just don't get it. You WANT to reduce the talent pool, so everyone has a chance to win. A simple "enter your best shot taken at anytime" will always have the same group of high achieving winners. Putting in restrictions, so matter how silly they seem, allow others to have a chance.

The hidden agenda behind posts like this that that people think removing restrictions will increase their chance of success by allowing that one wonderful photo of theirs to win. In reality, it's the other way around.

So go ahead. Enter your photo in the "National Geographic Photo of the Decade" contest and see what your odds are. Or you could enter the "best photo of an egg taken in July" contest here, and actually have a chance.

Hmm; I think W. A. Foster's words (see below) pretty much encapsulate the ethos of my argument against DPR enforcing non-inclusive 'date-capture' rules upon those who would otherwise be only too glad, to share their art as and when they are able.

"Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high intention, sincere effort, intelligent direction and skillful execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives"..

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
yupNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow