So now £8 per entry as opposed to free
AP now get 6 pages of content and charges the photographer for it via yet another stock photography website with very dodge and opaque terms.

Well you just lost my entry and readership.

 

Its free for a single entry per month.

 

Which sort of leads to a suspicion that the more entries you buy the more likely you are to win. Not a problem for me as photo contests are something I stay away from.

 

Well yes, if your photos are any good that certainly is the case.

 

Dont take it for granted good pictures win photo competitions but it helps! Luck plays a bigger part, but putting multiple entries in gives you more of a chance of winning which makes it harder for people on very low incomes like myself, and being a senior oap. does not help. The rules should stand at one entry per person thats the only way this competition can be made fair for all. Photocrowd was a bit of a nuisance on our family computer sending emails that we were not interested in they seemed to be competition mad unfortunately I am not competition mad so we closed our membership down, I shall miss entering though.....

 

Good pictures stand a much better chance of winning than bad pictures. Although a good picture can obviously be a lucky one and not always be down to the skill and vision of the taker..... although it could be

 

Aha the precept that keeps many a lottery afloat. The amount of attention likely to be paid to each entry is rather small, assuming that there is but one photocrowd and this is typical of the appraisal process.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/forums/threads/has-anyone-used-photocrowd.129120/

 

Frances and I have judged photo competitions, and yes, there's an enormous amount of luck involved -- but only among the top 5-10% of entries, or even in some cases the top 2%. At the very least, pictures are sorted into "no hope" and "possibly", at which point the "possiblies" are laid out and discussed. At that point a great deal depends on the persona preferences and prejudices of the judge (or panel of judges); on his or her persuasive powers; and the siren call of the pub.

My own view is that while competitions can be very useful up to a certain level, for improving your skills, beyond that level they are more of a hindrance than a help because they encourage you to dot about all over the place, trying to please judges with a wild variety of subjects rather than pursuing your own vision.

Cheers,

R.

 

Are entries judged anonymously? If so, what if I've entered two images that the judges see are worthy of a top 50 place - what happens then?

 

In all the competitions Frances and I have ever judged or seen judged, yes. Life is not long enough to nworry about who took the picture until after it's been selected: judging takes up several person-hours. Both entries would therefore be in the top 50 in most competitions, though I don't know about AP. At eight quid a throw I can't see how they wouldn't be.

Cheers.

R.

 

Thanks Roger.

 

We have had to change the way we do APOY for a number of reasons and taking it online brings it into line with virtually every other competition and enables it to reach a much bigger audience. It costs money to run and host a competition like this and the option to buy additional entries helps pay the costs. As everyone gets a free entry per round and one great image will always beat 3-4 mediocre ones. But just to clarify, judging is anonymous. There is a panel of about six judges, and if you are lucky enough to get more than one entry into the top 50 then both will score.

 

Dear Nigel,

Thanks for the inside information. As you say, "one great image will always beat 3-4 mediocre ones." Or even ten...

Cheers,

R.

 

5 mediocre images which just might get in the top 50 may get more points than the winning picture.....or have I got it wrong! I know its a long shot but someone will query this soon I am sure.....

 

Mediocre images rarely get into the top 50. The standard is VERY high.

Cheers,

R.

 

Yes the images are of a very high standard that get into the top 50 but it just might be possible when its a low entry.........I was a member of Photocrowd and some of the pictures were outstanding on there, many of them were by professional photographers, which I am not....and I hope my theory wil never be proved, but say if the top 50 are the very best pictures ever and some are multiple entries are from the same talented photographer and there are lots of them who use Photocrowd, now I know I wont win my thoughts with you Roger but my real concern is paying for multiple entries.....and yes I have read Nigels post.....

 

I completely agree that I'd rather see a single, free entry but equally I can't get excited about the option of paying for more entries, the more so if it keeps the competition afloat. I've not entered since about 1975, though. Nor do I believe that there's as much difference between amateurs and professionals as there is between good and bad photographers.

Cheers,

R.

 

I am reminded of the song Is that all there is? https://vimeo.com/28030542

 

One can win every round with a free entry but may not end up as APOY due to lower placed multiple scoring entries??

 

Possible, yes. Likely? Perhaps not. Let's say you decided to do 6 entries a month: one free, five paid for. Across the year that's £480 for a chance of winning. There are probably better ways to improve your chances. And your photography.

Look at it this way. If you are selecting (say) 6 images to submit, you're likely to have two or three you can't decide between, and the rest aren't as good. Why are you going to send in the not-so-good images? I can imagine spending £8 on one extra entry, but "multiple entries"? I really doubt it. My suspicion is that people who can't win any other way will not be able to win this way either.

Cheers,

R.