1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

APOY leaderboard

Discussion in 'AP Magazine Feedback & Suggestions' started by Doom, Aug 5, 2017.

  1. Doom

    Doom Member

    Ive noticed the leaderboard in this weeks magazine is different from the one posted online, have 2 photographers been disqaulified or it simply a printing error?

    Anyone shed some light on this and if they have been disqualified shouldn't this mean that the top 30 of the rounds they were disqualified from would change too?
     
  2. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    wait 'til Tuesday when AP is in the shops.
     
  3. Chester AP

    Chester AP Well-Known Member

    I have put this on another forum thread - is it relevant to your query? (My AP with the round 3 results arrived today.)

    To return to the 'Rip Off Apoy 2017' subject of this forum thread... is 'pay and display' the real APOY winner this year?

    Marco Tagliarono (from Italy or India depending on the picture) has 2 pictures in the AP issue with round 2 results, and Elena Paraskeva from Cyprus has 3 pictures in the AP issue with round 3 results. In the days when I sometimes entered APOY, I used to agonise which single image to submit. Also, Elena's pictures are all 'exposure unknown' with no camera or lens details. Since AP is a photographic magazine, and not an art magazine, should the APOY rules insist that these details be supplied? I like to know if an image has been created using hardware costing many thousands of pounds (the popular combination of full frame DSLR and 500 mm F4 or 400 mm F 2.8 lens used for wildlife photography, for example), and I am much less impressed than if it was created by hardware costing a fraction of the price. Most of us are doing the best we can with what we can afford.




    Read more at http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...-apoy-2017.133048/page-12#rbL0E3dse9FjOId5.99
     
  4. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Why? Tale out a subscription of it matters that much to you.
     
  5. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I do have a subscription - just thinking of those that don't - anticipating further discussions of the results as they appear in the magazine.
     
  6. Doom

    Doom Member

    As someone has pointed out the leaderboard was published online on the same day as the top 10 were published on photocrowd and doesn't take a genius to look up the scores and work out someone has 3 in the top 30 if they have zero points and suddenly shown as 116 especially as their other 2 results are on photo crowd so on that basis and the fact that I haven't mentioned any names I dont have a problem bringing this top now.

    Anyway back to the matter at hand, after chatting on twitter it turns out the published results are correct and the online results are incorrect as 2 people are shown as having the incorrect scores so nobody has been disqualified and hopefully the scores will updated soon online.

    With regards to the issue off no technical data this really doesn't bother me to be honest unless the reason for this is because the picture was stolen online which isn't uncommon but I'm sure each top 30 image is checked.

    With regards to 3 in the top 30 I do find it annoying as in theory you could win the competition by just entering 2 rounds which kinda defeats the whole idea of it being round based in my opinion but the end of the day its all about money and opening up the flood gates to allow more people to enter to create more money so if you want to win the overall comp you need to pay.

    Personally I'm hoping AP listen to its readers and changes are made to next years APOY format.

    heres a suggestion with regards to the argument of stopping semi-pro and pros entering taken from the International Photographer Awards rules :-We consider professional photographers those who earn, or have earned, the majority of their income from photography, or who sell or publish their work regularly, or belong to professional photography organizations.
    This would be a lot easier to police and keep the competition as what is described as 'amatuer'.
     

Share This Page