Multiple Shortlisting from same photographer

[russbarnes]

Hold on Ben.... this is about the application of your competition rules, or lack of application as the case seems to be. Either rule 2 applies to everyone or it doesn't apply to anyone. I'm perplexed that you have a load of competition entries that have been shortlised by a number of photographers that have clearly won prizes this year in national competitions and you now seem to be looking for improvements for next year? Bizarre!!!

Here's improvement suggestion number 1: Try sticking to the rules next year.

[Ben Brain]

Hi Russ, I’m not going to discuss the specifics of our correspondence with Jim in this thread, except to say that at the time we did not consider the other competition to be a major national or international one.

While we try, we cannot police every single image and research it to see if it’s been entered or won competitions elsewhere and we rely on the entrant to be upfront.

Thank you for your contribution, I will take note of your suggestion for next year. Kind regards, Ben

[russbarnes]

Case closed then. I'm sure Digital Photo magazine and Practical Photography magazine will feel different about that fact especially as there are literally thousands of entries but at least we know where we all stand for next year...

[amk1977]

Originally Posted by Ben Brain

we did not consider the other competition to be a major national or international one.

I am absolutely astounded by this statement to say the least and it is still not a valid explanation as to the decisions made by Photoradar staff. Whether you personally regarded the Photo Answers competition a major national or international competition or not is utterly besides the point. The fact the Photo Answers competitioin received WELL in excess of 500 images, by your own rules, qualifies it as such, therefore rendering any image that won a prize in it, ineligible for submissiion. Your actions unfairly discrimnated against other photographers in similar situatiions and once again you have failed to abide by your own rules.

I bear no ill will at all to any photographer entered into this competition whatsoever, but I object strongly to the blatant disregard of the rules by the competition organisers.

Below is the relevant quote from the Photorradar rules.

An image that has won a prize in a major national or international competition (one receiving more than 500 images) or that has been entered in such a competition where the results are still pending, is not eligible for entry. There is no entry fee associated with the Digital Camera Photographer of the Year 2010 competition, with the exception of the 'Portfolio' category. All entrants agree to participate in any publicity in connection with this competition as required and to the use of your name and likeness for the purpose of promotion and publicity.

[karenoliver]

I think a new thread for suggestions for next year's competition is a good idea. I have a few ideas and will post them when the thread is up and running. Meanwhile, I agree with Andy about photography being a fantastic hobby, and something that should not lead on to stress or hostility.

Karen

[PolaroidSky]

Thanks to you Ben, much appreciated : )

As I have stated, repeatedly here in these forums... pull my submission.

The simple fact that it has been printed in a magazine, albeit ENTIRELY without my knowledge renders it not valid in my opinion and I would rather a valid image was put forwards in place of my image.

Cheers

J A Mortram

(Please, call me Jim... Polaroidsky is so formal ; )

[Amy Davies]

Hi Jim,

As per your request, we have removed your image from the relevant shortlist.

No image will take its place as the shortlists do not require a set number of images.

All the best,

Amy

[PolaroidSky]

Thanks Amy : )

Cheers,

Jim

[AndyStevens]

Now that seems a shame, a great image removed from a shortlist even though it had been cleared as ok by the runners of the competition.

Jim, I feel for you mate, you've entered the competition under the best intentions and have suffered as a consequence of what seemed to be amounting to a witch hunt.

Hope it goes on to win you many acclaims in the future ! Just make sure you enter away from the Jealous Crowd

Cheers
Andy

[amk1977]

Originally Posted by AndyStevens

Now that seems a shame, a great image removed from a shortlist even though it had been cleared as ok by the runners of the competition.

Jim, I feel for you mate, you've entered the competition under the best intentions and have suffered as a consequence of what seemed to be amounting to a witch hunt.

Hope it goes on to win you many acclaims in the future ! Just make sure you enter away from the Jealous Crowd

Cheers
Andy

It is indeed a shame Andy, as is this whole thread, a vast majority of which could have been avoided had THE RULES been abided by, by the Photoradar staff in the first place. That seems to be the point that is being repeatedly missed here and as yet, hasn't been addressed.

My posts have had absolutely nothing to do with jealousy in any way, shape or form and I wish Jim the very best of luck in future competitions. I too feel bad for him that he has been labelled a cheat by some and come under scruitiny, when it is wholly not the case and totally unacceptable.

My issue all along had to do with the fact the rules, that apply to everyone, equally, should not be open to interpretation, or disregarded by anyone, including the judges. The fact that Ben has stated that the Photo Answers competition was not considered as a major national or international competition is in my opinion, a slap in the face to those that entered it, those at the respective magazines and an insult to peoples intelligence. I find it grossly offensive.

I find it immensely hard to believe that Photoradar were unaware that the Photo Answers competition received more than 500 submissions in an otherwise identical format competition as their own, which received 114'000.

A simple admission of error and apology to those affected, by Photoradar, would have gone some way to restoring the integrity of the competition. The fact that the points I and others have raised which undeniably highlight the contradiction of the rules, have been continually ignored by Photoradar staff, speaks volumes to me personally.

Again, I will not put words in peoples' mouths and I will not attempt to speak for everyone but for my part, I do not regard it as a witchhunt. All I have ever wanted to know is why the rules were disregarded by the Photoradar staff and clarification on some grey areas. While the photographers in question should not be vilified, I also believe that those that spot images that appear to be ineligible, should not be vilified by drawing these images to the judges attention, after all they admit that they cannot police every image.

Admittedly, the manner in which the attention was draw to the judges initially, might not have been the best and it rapidly deteriorated after some peoples knee-jerk and ill thoughtout posts labelling those concerned as cheats, which were just plain wrong. With photographers entering so many of these types of competitions, it is very possible that an image is accidentally submitted, that is ineligible under the stated rules. Its not the intention of the photographer to try and do something unethical. The images are however, ineligible and in accordance with the stated rules, should be removed.

If the rules are not applied fairly and equally to all, then it makes a mockery of the whole thing. It also does nothing to instill confidence in the judging process, if those invovled in it have broken the stated rules that everyone else has abided by.

Respectfully,

Aaron