«

On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 16:16:37 +1000, D-Mac <> wrote:

>tony cooper wrote:
>> On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 12:51:02 +1000, D-Mac <> wrote:
>>
>>> There seems to be a few antagonists in SI who think they can invent
>>> rules as they go or just ignore existing standards altogether and SI
>>> will percolate along nicely with some of the entrants kill-filed by
>>> other... Here's the flash: That ain't going to happen.
>>>
>>> I don't know if any of you can see the mockery of an excuse for a
>>> competition
>>
>> Since when is the Shoot-In a competition? To me, a competition is
>> where the entrants compete against each other for a prize or some sort
>> of recognition.
>>
>> In this last Shoot-In, there was no competition and there was no
>> prize. It was simply an assembly of photographs submitted for review.
>> There were no judges, and the critiques were voluntary.
>>
>> I don't know if the Shoot-In was a competition at one time, but this
>> last one wasn't.
>
>There is comprehension and there is understanding of the English language.

Yes, there is. You are far enough along to recognize that these are
important in communication, but you pay mind to neither.

>Read it again Tony. I did not say the SI was a competition. I said it
>was an excuse for one.

Saying "An excuse for a competition" is a statement that there is/was
a competition, but it is/was significantly lacking in some aspect. We
might say "He's a poor excuse for a wedding photographer" with the
same intent: he calls himself a wedding photographer, but he's
totally inept at the job.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 16:16:37 +1000, D-Mac <> wrote:

>tony cooper wrote:
>> On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 12:51:02 +1000, D-Mac <> wrote:
>>
>>> There seems to be a few antagonists in SI who think they can invent
>>> rules as they go or just ignore existing standards altogether and SI
>>> will percolate along nicely with some of the entrants kill-filed by
>>> other... Here's the flash: That ain't going to happen.
>>>
>>> I don't know if any of you can see the mockery of an excuse for a
>>> competition
>>
>> Since when is the Shoot-In a competition? To me, a competition is
>> where the entrants compete against each other for a prize or some sort
>> of recognition.
>>
>> In this last Shoot-In, there was no competition and there was no
>> prize. It was simply an assembly of photographs submitted for review.
>> There were no judges, and the critiques were voluntary.
>>
>> I don't know if the Shoot-In was a competition at one time, but this
>> last one wasn't.
>
>There is comprehension and there is understanding of the English language.

Yes, there is. You are far enough along to recognize that these are
important in communication, but you pay mind to neither.

>Read it again Tony. I did not say the SI was a competition. I said it
>was an excuse for one.

Saying "An excuse for a competition" is a statement that there is/was
a competition, but it is/was significantly lacking in some aspect. We
might say "He's a poor excuse for a wedding photographer" with the
same intent: he calls himself a wedding photographer, but he's
totally inept at the job.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

D-Mac wrote:
> The idea you can get a pair of scissors and attack a picture until it
> has all the offensive bits cut out without regard for the aspect ratio
> is about as logical as the poor composition that encouraged it in the
> first place.
>
> A quick Google for "photo competition aspect ratio" produces the usual
> 50,000 results with a surprisingly common thread in all of them. Aspect
> ratio must be unchanged from the original.

Since English is apparently not your first language, I'll kindly explain
it to you that the excerpts from Google results you provided (see below)
clearly state that it is perfectly allowable to change the aspect ratio
of the image, as long as the image does not get excessively "elongated"
in either direction. This is exactly what the standard "must not exceed"
wording is intended to convey in the quotes below.

(BTW, it is "ratio", not "ration" as you often spell it in your messages
for some reason. "Ration" is a completely different thing.)

> A mere 2 references from the 50,000.
> -----------------
> From: http://vsni.co.uk/yourvsni/gallery/terms.php
>
> Photograph size - aspect ratios and dimensions
> A photograph's aspect ratio is the ratio of its height to its width. If
> you do not crop your photographs or use your camera's panoramic setting,
> the aspect ratio should conform to the required standards automatically.
>
> Please ensure all submissions conform to one of the following aspect
> ratios: Portrait format must not exceed a height-to-width ratio of 2:1
> Landscape format must not exceed height-to-width ratio of 1:3
>
> Please note that if your photograph is not in one of the required aspect
> ratios it may not be displayed as you intended, or it may be rejected.
>
> -----------------
> From the BBC no less:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/apictureof...mp_rules.shtml
>
>
> Photograph size - aspect ratios and dimensions
>
> * A photograph's aspect ratio is the ratio of its height to its
> width. If you do not crop your photographs or use your camera's
> panoramic setting, the aspect ratio should conform to the required
> standards automatically.
> * Please ensure all submissions conform to one of the following
> aspect ratios:
>
> Portrait format must not exceed a height-to-width ratio of 2:1
> Landscape format must not exceed height-to-width ratio of 1:3
> * Please note that if your photograph is not in one of the required
> aspect ratios it may not be displayed as you intended, or it may be
> rejected.
> --------------------