This is likely completely obvious to some... but it's something I just "got" in the short while I've been on this site.

I'd always imagined photographers to be more or less very similar in personality for some reason and when I see evidence that this is completely false... I've met it with annoyance and aggravation.

After reading many of the critiques and forum posts... watching the inconsistency with what images are published and which are not, it appears that photographers fall heavily into two different camps with the minority vacillating somewhere in the middle. One side seems to be made up of people who are more conservative in their photographic philosophy... might tend to be more conservative in their political/religious beliefs... and feel there is some established rules regarding composition, natural coloring, subject matter, etc. that define to them what a good image is. If an image does not fit the established mould, the image is deemed unacceptable to them.

Then there's the opposite side with a more liberal perspective and approach that tends to ignore convention and established rules with a focus solely on how the end result effects the viewer willing to explore with a completely open mind. If the collective representation of light and shadow moves the viewer... it's a complete success and it matters not if the image is completely out of focus, full of grain/noise, or completely abstract. These folks seem to also have more liberal political/religious views as well.

Of course there are exceptions and those who waver somewhere between the two, but for the most part and in general... photographers seem to be much more polarized that I'd always thought they were. I'm not claiming either side is more "right" or "wrong". It's just a simple observation. I find it fascinating in that for some odd reason, I'd always sort of expected all of us to be far more similar than we evidently are. And, it really explains what appears to be inconsistent results with regard to what gets published here. I don't completely understand the screening system here, and thus far has not favored a handful of my own attempts, but from what I can tell... the system appears to be very sophisticated and heavily weighed on one side or the other.

Shoot! This system won't let me edit... I haven't even edited once and it says I can't edit... ARGGGGH!

That last sentence should read, "I don't completely understand the screening system here, and thus far has not favored a handful of my own attempts, but from what I can tell... the system appears to be very sophisticated and NOT heavily weighed on one side or the other."

Don't worry, nobody does!!

Your observations are actually quite the expected. If you take a random sample of 10k or so from any subset of the population whether it be by occupation, education, or hobby, you would most probably find the same observations to be true.

It is my opinion that the inconsistency many sense in the published images comes from the fact that there is a larger screener "crew" with obviously diverse taste.
There is also a MUCH larger group of active member screeners. On any given day this group of active screeners will vary greatly and therefore the "taste" will be VERY diverse. I can submit an image today and it will get handled by one randomly selected crew screener and voted on by a random group of member screeners. Next week I can submit another image of similar quality and subject and a completely different crew and member screener group will decide. The results can be very inconsistent with a system like this.

@Clyde... Yes, I'm certain these observations are true for any subset... but it's a real eye-opening discovery for me for some reason. I've made images for a good while and always sort of thought of photographers (in general) as being more or less of the same artistic ilk. So, when I'd find one that I completely disagreed with... I would dispel them as just being wrong. Now, I think I understand a bit better and surprised it took me this long to realize this. ;-)

I do think there was a day when I first began, when photographers were a bit more similar in philosophy and taste. That was a long time ago and the game is completely different now with opinions so much more diverse. The photographic world has really exploded over the last decade with some clinging to what came before, and others tossing out what came before... for complete acceptance of anything and everything different and new. And then there are those attempting to reclaim low-tech, toy camera looks. It seems the general aesthetic is completely all over the map now!

I suppose my own philosophy has morphed as well. It's confusing. I began making images about 30 years ago. I've shot almost all of the formats except large format Polaroid. I've gone from established standards to all rules should be broken... to the point that I'm at this moment where I'm trying to strike a balance between what was accepted before with all that's accepted now. Ultimately I think I'm going to stick with what ever moves my personal perspective and hope there are others who happen to share my same aesthetic taste. It's true I would like to have an audience that agrees with me, but if the target is a larger audience by complying with whatever aesthetic is popular at the moment... it just seems futile.

Regarding the screening system... I can't really think of one on any other site that would be better for producing a well rounded gallery. Sure, it appears to be a crap shoot regarding which screener/crew person you happen to get, but that's consistent with a real audience. If ALL of the screeners fell into the same rigid, aesthetic line... and, it was easy to decipher what they collectively would like, then the work here would all look pretty much the same. Thank goodness it does not!

I don't think any bad images make it through. But, I do think some that make it through seem bland and cliche' to my taste. And, an equal amount are absolutely stunning to my taste. So, I guess what I'm saying is... given the predictable alternatives, I can't think of a way this 1x system could be improved to yield better results. Overall, the end results seem very balanced to me.

Skip you just gave us a brief but precise synopsis of the human race! Thank god its not any different here! as for how images are selected or not well that's totally down to the fact that (thankfully) we are all different & what is is more art is like music sometimes we find ourselves liking something that a half hour ago we might have thought was average or unbearable but after looking at it longer we decide we like it! Perhaps if you continue to be so perplexed by the fickle nature of the choices made here you will continue to be driven to be posted here. Why not just continue taking images that you enjoy taking & maybe (just maybe) in that frame of mind you may get more published?

And Clyde bad images do make it through because if good images make it through so do bad images but then what you think is bad may be someone else's good & vis-a-versa. It is intrinsicly flawed to continue to see art as bad or good because this is a circular argument that only you can win I will never loose!

@gerard... I think you might have misread the gist of my comments. They are in total... an observation, a realization, and the very reason why I applaud this site and it's system!

Wow, another good misunderstending thread :-)

@Rui... heh, yeah... likely a language thing. I think in an attempt to try and make myself perfectly clear... I'm getting too verbose. ;-) Perhaps I'll try paring the verbiage down a bit.

Anyhow... hope it's clear that this thread was merely a personal observation regarding photographers in general and a better understanding of this site.

I tend to agree with your philosophical position as regards shooting for yourself and hoping someone else gets it, rather than for a particular presumed audience. I don't think it will get you published more often or any less often but you will feel better about your work. . . probably :-) 1x is a good place to make contact with like minded ( at least in as much as there is a shared interest ) people. I hope you enjoy it here.
Interesting thread ;-)
Jon

@JBA I already am warming up to this site. It actually helps to finally come to the realization I've cited in this thread. It's basically the same with regard to showing in galleries. Some shows get no response or sales. Then you'll move the same show to a different venue and everybody raves about it and starts buying. :-)