How in the heck do you get a POTD? Frustration reigns DownUnder

[DownUnder Pete]

Hello all,

In the interest of becoming a better photographer, and getting ideas for different perspectives on light, photography and the universe, I have recently been cruising various digital photography web sites, trying to determine the magic ingredients needed for that elusive POTD. Now by no means do I reckon that I have more than scratched the surface of my cameras abilities, and I have lots to learn still (maybe a little less thanks to help from this site, and Peter iNova's book). The photographs that I see winning are in the main stunning, with all sorts of amazing ideas and perspectives, and they deserve to win. What amazes me is how these people so consistently pull off these images (eg. Charlie Brown with his awesome panoramas on DigitalPhotoContest.com).

I have recently submitted perhaps three or four of my best attempts, and had no response, which is a little bit frustrating, so I was hoping that perhaps you veterans and talented lurkers here could possibly post a few of your winners and tell me what I'm doing wrong, or maybe how to do it better. To start things off, here is my first attempt at a macro panorama shamelessly inspired by nite's smelly cologne one!! I submitted it 3 days ago and got no response for it.



Fire away, and don't be gentle!!

DU Pete

 

[DownUnder Pete]

ps other images to shred on:

http://homepage.mac.com/sealord/PhotoAlbum2.html

Pete

 

[Rob Patterson]

I've concluded that winning a POTD is part chance (luck of the draw), reputation, the impossible task of determing what the judges like and a long list of other highly variable factors.

Some sites strictly state that you can't alter the photo. Others limit whether the photo can be portrait or landscape.

I believe the people judging what's best are the main limiting factor. I've won nearly a dozen. Submitted maybe 50. Many of those 38 that didn't make it were of types one never or rarely sees on a POTD site. A grizzled and miserable wino done with extreme expertise and effort is something I'd advise against. Photography sites that offer no prizes will appreciate the wino. Most POTD sites won't.

Take note of what pleases the judges. A little blonde haired girl in a field of daisys has far better chance than a grizzled wino!

At the end of the month when the POTD monthly winners are announced, take note of what photos are winning. Little girls in fields of daisies. Wonderful and beautiful panos of the high Rockies. They're beautiful in their own right. They are known as stock photography.

Stay away from fine art photography that leans towards the abstract.

I conclude, after several years experience, that figuring whether you'll win or not is an impossiblity. I rarely submit anymore. Once in a blue moon.

Hello all,

In the interest of becoming a better photographer, and getting
ideas for different perspectives on light, photography and the
universe, I have recently been cruising various digital photography
web sites, trying to determine the magic ingredients needed for
that elusive POTD. Now by no means do I reckon that I have more
than scratched the surface of my cameras abilities, and I have lots
to learn still (maybe a little less thanks to help from this site,
and Peter iNova's book). The photographs that I see winning are in
the main stunning, with all sorts of amazing ideas and
perspectives, and they deserve to win. What amazes me is how these
people so consistently pull off these images (eg. Charlie Brown
with his awesome panoramas on DigitalPhotoContest.com).

I have recently submitted perhaps three or four of my best
attempts, and had no response, which is a little bit frustrating,
so I was hoping that perhaps you veterans and talented lurkers here
could possibly post a few of your winners and tell me what I'm
doing wrong, or maybe how to do it better. To start things off,
here is my first attempt at a macro panorama shamelessly inspired
by nite's smelly cologne one!! I submitted it 3 days ago and got no
response for it.



Fire away, and don't be gentle!!

DU Pete

 

[Terry27608]

Hello all,

In the interest of becoming a better photographer, and getting
ideas for different perspectives on light, photography and the
universe, I have recently been cruising various digital photography
web sites, trying to determine the magic ingredients needed for
that elusive POTD. Now by no means do I reckon that I have more
than scratched the surface of my cameras abilities, and I have lots
to learn still (maybe a little less thanks to help from this site,
and Peter iNova's book). The photographs that I see winning are in
the main stunning, with all sorts of amazing ideas and
perspectives, and they deserve to win. What amazes me is how these
people so consistently pull off these images (eg. Charlie Brown
with his awesome panoramas on DigitalPhotoContest.com).

I have recently submitted perhaps three or four of my best
attempts, and had no response, which is a little bit frustrating,
so I was hoping that perhaps you veterans and talented lurkers here
could possibly post a few of your winners and tell me what I'm
doing wrong, or maybe how to do it better. To start things off,
here is my first attempt at a macro panorama shamelessly inspired
by nite's smelly cologne one!! I submitted it 3 days ago and got no
response for it.



Fire away, and don't be gentle!!

DU Pete

These are all losers.
T

 

[log]

...
I have recently submitted perhaps three or four of my best
attempts, and had no response, which is a little bit frustrating,
so I was hoping that perhaps you veterans and talented lurkers here
could possibly post a few of your winners and tell me what I'm
doing wrong, or maybe how to do it better. To start things off,
here is my first attempt at a macro panorama shamelessly inspired
by nite's smelly cologne one!! I submitted it 3 days ago and got no
response for it.

But I've just come from that site, where I was drooling in envy over that panorama....

http://homepage.mac.com/sealord/.Pictures/Soldier%20pix/caterpillar%20pan.jpg:

Fire away, and don't be gentle!!

Oh, if you really want criticism--I think it's spoiled because you didn't get the critter's tail in. The shot is totally ruined--I can't imagine why they selected it.

Happy now?

DU Pete

 

[DownUnder Pete]

I've concluded that winning a POTD is part chance (luck of the
draw), reputation, the impossible task of determing what the judges
like and a long list of other highly variable factors.

Some sites strictly state that you can't alter the photo. Others
limit whether the photo can be portrait or landscape.

I believe the people judging what's best are the main limiting
factor. I've won nearly a dozen. Submitted maybe 50. Many of those
38 that didn't make it were of types one never or rarely sees on a
POTD site. A grizzled and miserable wino done with extreme
expertise and effort is something I'd advise against. Photography
sites that offer no prizes will appreciate the wino. Most POTD
sites won't.

Take note of what pleases the judges. A little blonde haired girl
in a field of daisys has far better chance than a grizzled wino!

At the end of the month when the POTD monthly winners are
announced, take note of what photos are winning. Little girls in
fields of daisies. Wonderful and beautiful panos of the high
Rockies. They're beautiful in their own right. They are known as
stock photography.

Stay away from fine art photography that leans towards the abstract.

I conclude, after several years experience, that figuring whether
you'll win or not is an impossiblity. I rarely submit anymore. Once
in a blue moon.

Thanks Rob, I think you may be right in terms of preferred picture styles, as people seem to gravitate towards the conventionally pleasing, whereas I like to make Petra feel as uncomfortable as possible, and you see beauty in unlikely places!! This one is only slightly larger than life size, Petra...

Having said this, one of my friends just e-mailed me to say congratulations, that I had won a POTD, my first one ever..... Now I'm quite embarassed about my rant. Aren't they supposed to e-mail you? Anyway, shutting up now.

DU Pete

 

[nitecrlwr]

Portrait

-Take a picture of an old lady or young child wearing a silly hat next to a window.

Panorama

-Quit your job, buy and RV and travel the country. It works for Charlie Brown! (Not to take away from his work...I admire it very much!)

Digital Art

-Take a picture of an antique looking setting or object then run watercolor filer in photoshop. (pet peeve) hehehe Think bright and cheery, not dark and brooding. This is a rule for all catagories!

Animals
-Buy a zoom lens and hang out at the zoo or at a butterfly pavilion.

B&W

-This one is tough! Your best bet is a foggy morning in a forest. Lots of contrast between light and dark colors. A dalmation or 2 never hurts.

Still Life

Everyday, simple objects seem to work best. Being old and rusty adds serious points!

Photojournalism

Find a sporting event that is outdoors. Digital cams are horrible with low indoor light. Borrow CF cards from friends and enemies, fill em all up and cross your fingers.

Outdoors
Rainbows and the rule of thirds are very important here!

You should be well on your way to catching up to Charlie Brown if you follow these tips!

sarcastically

n.c.

;-]

 

[Cosmo]

n/t

 

[DownUnder Pete]

Oh No!!

I've just run over my cat with my RV!! Now I'll never get another POTD!!!

Thanks for all the helpful advice, Nite!! Now that I've got one I guess I can move on....

Good night all!!

DU Pete

 

[nitecrlwr]

Thanks for all the helpful advice, Nite!! Now that I've got one I
guess I can move on....

That's what people think when they get their first tattoo, eat their first lays potato chip, take their first hit from a crack pipe...you get the idea.

grin

n.c.

 

[Truelight]

Yeah, I too thought they were supposed to e-mail you when you won, but in one case I only learned I got a POTD when someone wrote to congratulate me. Go figure. Guess you have to check daily to see if you won or not.

Now, since you gave permission for us to "not be gentle", a little critique on your posted shots. POTD material has to be technically excellent. So you cropped out the caterpillars tail, no big deal? Yes, it is. The other shots you posted - the buffalo shot was out of focus and the night shot of the city? Looks like a poor slide scan with dust marks, poor focus and no contrast (the night sky needs to be black, not -almost- black). I agree with the posts about a POTD often being a "formula stock photo", but you'll also notice that most of the winning shots are technically excellent. Charlie Brown may be the king of POTD stuff on the digitalphotocontest.com site and usually wins with the pretty pictures, but do you dispute that his stuff is always sharp, welll-exposed, and technically excellent? I'd cry "sour grapes" to the folks who feel he doesn't deserve the reputation he's earned.

Excellence counts! I'd rather get honest (and sometimes painful) critique because that's when I learn. This becomes the "Mutual Admiration Society" if all we do is pat each other on the back and say what great shots everyone is taking.

Rick

I've concluded that winning a POTD is part chance (luck of the
draw), reputation, the impossible task of determing what the judges
like and a long list of other highly variable factors.

Some sites strictly state that you can't alter the photo. Others
limit whether the photo can be portrait or landscape.

I believe the people judging what's best are the main limiting
factor. I've won nearly a dozen. Submitted maybe 50. Many of those
38 that didn't make it were of types one never or rarely sees on a
POTD site. A grizzled and miserable wino done with extreme
expertise and effort is something I'd advise against. Photography
sites that offer no prizes will appreciate the wino. Most POTD
sites won't.

Take note of what pleases the judges. A little blonde haired girl
in a field of daisys has far better chance than a grizzled wino!

At the end of the month when the POTD monthly winners are
announced, take note of what photos are winning. Little girls in
fields of daisies. Wonderful and beautiful panos of the high
Rockies. They're beautiful in their own right. They are known as
stock photography.

Stay away from fine art photography that leans towards the abstract.

I conclude, after several years experience, that figuring whether
you'll win or not is an impossiblity. I rarely submit anymore. Once
in a blue moon.

Thanks Rob, I think you may be right in terms of preferred picture
styles, as people seem to gravitate towards the conventionally
pleasing, whereas I like to make Petra feel as uncomfortable as
possible, and you see beauty in unlikely places!! This one is only
slightly larger than life size, Petra...

Having said this, one of my friends just e-mailed me to say
congratulations, that I had won a POTD, my first one ever..... Now
I'm quite embarassed about my rant. Aren't they supposed to e-mail
you? Anyway, shutting up now.

DU Pete

 

[PowerPet]

OK, Chris... a question for ya:

Is it good or bad to post the same picture in two (or more) categories at the same time? Like if you have a nice black & white portrait that you post in both the People category and the B&W category at the same time.

Good or bad?

Petra

 

[DownUnder Pete]

Yeah, I too thought they were supposed to e-mail you when you won,
but in one case I only learned I got a POTD when someone wrote to
congratulate me. Go figure. Guess you have to check daily to see
if you won or not.

Now, since you gave permission for us to "not be gentle", a little
critique on your posted shots. POTD material has to be technically
excellent. So you cropped out the caterpillars tail, no big deal?
Yes, it is.

Sorry Rick, I totally agree with what you're saying about the caterpillar, but unfortunately that was the only decent tail shot I managed, due to wind factors. The exercise in stitching was the challenge, and done more for my enjoyment than anyone elses, and winning was fun, but not a major life changing experience.

I cannot comment on the other shots as I did not in fact post them. What I might suggest is to take the time to read each post carefully and determine who posted them as this is easily the most common way of causing misunderstandings online, which is unfortunate for both parties. If you wish to critique more of my photographs, please feel free to check out my website at http://homepage.mac.com/sealord/PhotoAlbum2.html

I had a look at some of your POTD's which were very good, both subject wise and technically, and I see that I am still fairly low on the learning curve, but what better place to learn than here, no?

regards,

DU Pete

The other shots you posted - the buffalo shot was out

of focus and the night shot of the city? Looks like a poor slide
scan with dust marks, poor focus and no contrast (the night sky
needs to be black, not -almost- black). I agree with the posts
about a POTD often being a "formula stock photo", but you'll also
notice that most of the winning shots are technically excellent.
Charlie Brown may be the king of POTD stuff on the
digitalphotocontest.com site and usually wins with the pretty
pictures, but do you dispute that his stuff is always sharp,
welll-exposed, and technically excellent? I'd cry "sour grapes" to
the folks who feel he doesn't deserve the reputation he's earned.

Excellence counts! I'd rather get honest (and sometimes painful)
critique because that's when I learn. This becomes the "Mutual
Admiration Society" if all we do is pat each other on the back and
say what great shots everyone is taking.

Rick

 

[nitecrlwr]

All those pictures that I have crossposted haven't won. My personal experience is that it is better to post to only one category. Others may have had a different experience.

OK, Chris... a question for ya:

Is it good or bad to post the same picture in two (or more)
categories at the same time? Like if you have a nice black & white
portrait that you post in both the People category and the B&W
category at the same time.

Good or bad?

Petra