Onexposure is a photoblog with a difference. The idea behind it is both interesting and problematic. Basically, how it works is this. You join, submit a photo, and if the powers that be think it is good enough, it goes up on the blog under a category. The idea behind this is clearly to achieve and maintain a certain level of quality to the images. But the problematic part of it of course is that the four screeners are putting themselves in a position of judging what is good and what is not. They further put focus on that judgement by having a section where you can see what percentage of your submitted photos have been accepted. And depending on that rating, they allow you to upload more or fewer pictures for submission.
I joined and submitted some pictures to see how the process worked. Of course I submitted stuff I thought was of a decent quality. Many of my initial uploads were accepted but then when some shots were not accepted it made me start to think about the process. Did I really want to have these 4 people sit in judgement on the quality of my work. Where was the line and how could I know what they would think was good. Of course I wanted more exposure for my work, but at what price? I then started selectively uploading different types of shots to see how they would be received. When a photo is rejected, there is a process in which you can appeal a photos judgement. The screener then tells you why a picture has not been accepted. It was here that I lost my interest. I felt the screeners’ judgements were very flawed and I found I didn’t agree at all with what they were saying. I found examples of other pictures on the site I felt were hugely inferior to ones of mine they hadn’t accepted. In the end I realised I wanted nothing to do with the place and of course that’s what I did.
But the question then is what others think. Is this way of engaging in community based photo appreciation a good way? I think not. I think it’s extremely problematic because of the very small number of screeners. If there were 50 screeners and they all ranked a picture, then averaged out that ranking, that’d be a more consistent and reasonable way of doing things. But 4 people sitting in judgement over hundreds of photographers work and thereby getting themselves a very nice looking website in the process seems a bit… cheap. I know of others who have also had problems with this site and those that run it.I have also heard that they re-use the photographs on another of their sites, nowords. I don’t remember seeing this in the terms and conditions when I signed up, but I suppose it was there. If not, it’s unacceptable. Maybe I should go and check…
An alternative way of doing things is weeklyshot. Run by Brandon Stone, this site accepts submissions on a theme, and the users themselves rate the photo in 5 areas. Those that rate highly get featured on the home page. A much more democratic system I think, and a very enjoyable and productive way of getting and giving productive critique.
Basically it boils down to this: It’s hard to have a photo you think is really good rejected. If three people reject it, then it’s easy to think they just don’t have any taste. If 100 people reject it, it’s easier to accept there is something wrong with it. We all know it’s hard to be objective about our own photos, so it makes sense to get feedback on them. But by seeking out the widest possible feedback will give you the most balanced view of how people generally view a photograph. And even if 100 people hate your picture, remember there will probably be someone out there that loves it.
Those are some superb images, wish mine were that good!
Geoff,
Welcome back.
/ Jacob
I’ve decided to give Onexposure another go. As Jacob said, there’s been a few changes over there, the best one I can see being screening from the photographers themselves. Expanding the screening base gets rid of most of the issues I originally had with the site. So while I stand by my original misgivings with the site, I’m always ready to review my attitudes when changes are made. So.. Onexposure, here I come!
Geoff,
We can agree to disagree. The point with my post is simply to inform your visitors that the site has changed a lot since you left. Some of the problems you are pointing at no longer exist.
See you around.
/ Jacob
Obviously Jacob, it’s all about the critique, and the best way in which to give and receive it. I am well used to critique having posted hundreds of images on forums such as fredmiranda.com and weeklyshot.org and many other such places, as well as my own blog. But with OE I don’t think your method works well at all. We’ll have to agree to disagree. Good luck with the site, I’m sure there are many,
many people who have no problems with it at all.
Hi Geoff.
Just an update – a couple of months ago we implemented a member screening feature were members with 2 or more photos published can decide whether a photo should be on OE or not. We also put almost all appeals there, if they have not been in the member screening before. So, the 4 screeners in our screening team only have the final word (of course they instantly accepts photos of very high quality and rejects photos that doesn’t have anything).
I am still surprised how a relatively small site like OE can trigger so much anger and hard feelings. Seems like either you love it or you hate it depending on personality.
I think there is a place for Onexposure.net on the web. We don’t say we will give advanced feedback to the most professional photographers. We don’t claim to be experts at photography. But, every day our contributing photographers receive superb feedback on rejected photos in our photo critique forum and we publish many awesome photos daily that our members want to see there that also recieve comments and critique. As long as our users continue to appreciate how we run the site we will not change this concept. A rejection does not mean that the photo is bad – it just means that it is not yet ready for publishing on OE. Good ways to handle a rejection is to either learn from the critique or just ignore and go on. Not take it personally.
About your post – I don’t agree that your rejected photos was better than the published photos you pointed at. Feel free to post them here together with your photo if you want others opinion. As one of the founders of Onexposure I agree that screening is a process that has problems, but this is what makes us unique and different out there. So far the project is going extremely well and we are very happy about it.
Good luck with future photography and just send me an e-mail if you want to have another look at the site (your account is still there).
/ Jacob
It says clearly when you sign up that nowords.no is part of the stable and that they’ll use the images on there. That’s not really my issue with the place. To me, it’s the structure that’s troubling, not so much the end results, cause they can obviously vary quite a lot.
Hi Vernon – I respect your photography a lot, but do you really think you get good feedback from OE? I mean worth the effort of supporting the site?
hehe, this OE thing makes the round
there were some small “fights” in the google groups and on some blogger forums as well. both sides tried to argue and it ended with a “draw”
“nowords” was and is still a part of OE (folder)
nowords.nu domain just points to that folder.
thats all I know and is for interest for me.
with all the other things, I don’t care. if someone don’t like my pics and they got rejected, it’s ok and normal.
it shows that you have something special with a restricted amount of fans or is not “mainstream”.
for me is like a study, to find out how my images affects on the viewer, too “artsy-fartsy”, too abstract, too bla-bla
cheers and regards
v.t.
Fully agree with you about Onexposure. An interesting idea stunted by control freak mentality on the part of the site owners. Additionally the criteria and vision used for evaluating images seemed very limited if the screening comments were anything to go by, consisting mainly of “balanced composition, nice lighting” sort. I eventually got barred from the site for voicing opinions that they didn’t like. That’s fair enough, it’s their site. However I did have a lot of problems getting them to remove my images from the site afterwards. They claimed rather hopefully that the terms of joining gave them permission to show the images in perpetuity. I also was told about the “nowords” site which was using some of my images as well.
I’ll haven’t seen weeklyshot, but I’ll give it a look. Thanks for the heads-up