Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty
Got mine ordered too  I have to admit, I was a bit of a jerk on this contest, for not accepting any photos that fell short of the required resolution. I've rejected a couple of amazing photos. I learned my lesson last year, I accepted a lower resolution photo and as my luck would have it, it scored the cover. It was the Disa foam. I then had to magnify it few times to 'stretch' it over the page. It lacked sharpness and I had to do some major work on the photo to make it half presentable.
not this time...Everything in the calendar is crisp and at full resolution. We've mustered a good one this year... I can't wait to see it. Please post back when you get your orders and tell me how it looks in real life.
|
Thanks for the honesty, Marty. I wasn't going to say anything till you mentioned it, but I had come to the same conclusion. You really need to stay 'focused' on only accepting the best quality photos. While not National Geographic, still we want the best quality. There are some really great image makers out here in our midst. Even this year's cover has a disturbing "blob" of an out of focus leaf right at the top where it is most distracting. I still voted for it. But it could have been better. I have seen some awsum photos from Mauro and was stunned that he submitted the one he did. He has submitted much better over the year. So, hopefully we can get folks more provoked over the next year to submit great photos.