login info join!
Forums > Contests > PotD18+ Discussion Thread Search   Reply
first116117118119120121122123last
Photographer
William Jay
Posts: 393
Phoenix, Arizona, US


JoJo, Is there a reason that the photographer or model link under each entry (when enlarged) on the "vote" page has been taken off again?  I thought it was a nice way of looking at the port of the entrant.  Or does that give an unfair advantage to those entrants who network like crazy to garner additional votes?
Sep 19 12 07:43 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Gaze at Photography
Posts: 4,371
Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, US


It actually just recently appeared due to the new programming.

It was not supposed to be there.  It gives unfair advantage due to popularity of the submitter.

Voting should be based on the picture, not who submitted it.

You can visit the winners gallery and see the link after the contest is over.
Sep 19 12 07:50 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stanley L Moore
Posts: 1,511
Houston, Texas, US


Gaze at Photography wrote:
It actually just recently appeared due to the new programming.

It was not supposed to be there.  It gives unfair advantage due to popularity of the submitter.

Voting should be based on the picture, not who submitted it.

You can visit the winners gallery and see the link after the contest is over.

I think is is better without a name until after voting though watermarking and photographic style can be giveaways. And repeating entries can create the association with a certain submitter. OTOH I never vote for a pic I have seen more than twice.

Sep 19 12 08:00 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Gaze at Photography
Posts: 4,371
Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, US


I am one that would like to eliminate watermarks.  It's just like the link, saying "Hey It's Me!!"
Sep 19 12 09:06 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kent Art Photography
Posts: 2,657
Ashford, England, United Kingdom


Gaze at Photography wrote:
I am one that would like to eliminate watermarks.  It's just like the link, saying "Hey It's Me!!"

When I mentioned that a few pages back, JoJo said she had something up her sleeve to deal with it.

Edit:-
I have to admit, I didn't think JoJo had sleeves...

Sep 19 12 09:22 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
SME
Posts: 20,847
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, US


Gaze at Photography wrote:
I am one that would like to eliminate watermarks.  It's just like the link, saying "Hey It's Me!!"

I see your point, but I'm not comfortable submitting photos without my URL on them, as I try not to make my photos available online without that.  I know a lot of photographers who feel the same way who wouldn't be able to participate in that case.

Then again, I'm not a popular contest submitter, so in my case it doesn't stack the deck!  wink

Sep 19 12 10:06 am  Link  Quote 
Model
JoJo
Contest Queen
Posts: 24,398
Clearwater, Florida, US


Mark Leighton wrote:
Tom, I also support your request that the potd be split if the 18+ contest remains split. Male and female models can either be judged along side each other or they can't - what difference to the clothes make?

The butterflies and trees, much like the couples in the 18+ contests, could be entered into one or the other but not both.

But it is "not going to happen"!

:-)

So we split the PotD into male/female - then into colour/B&W - then into PSd/out-of-the-camera
Congratulations, we now have 8 PotD

Come on, we need one more split suggestion - we might as well have 16 contests.

Sep 19 12 12:37 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
JoJo
Contest Queen
Posts: 24,398
Clearwater, Florida, US


Gaze at Photography wrote:
I am one that would like to eliminate watermarks.  It's just like the link, saying "Hey It's Me!!"

The contests are open to any image permitted in your MM port.
(one exclusion - series/composite images are not permitted)
Worksafe images go into the PotD
M/18+ images go into the gender specific PotD18+

So should we just eliminate those gauche flashing Day-glo watermarks?
How about the standard watermarks?
Maybe we could leave just the copyright statement?

Help me out here - justify the removal of some 'verbiage' while still allowing other.

Sep 19 12 12:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stanley L Moore
Posts: 1,511
Houston, Texas, US


JoJo wrote:

The contests are open to any image permitted in your MM port.
(one exclusion - series/composite images are not permitted)
Worksafe images go into the PotD
M/18+ images go into the gender specific PotD18+

So should we just eliminate those gauche flashing Day-glo watermarks?
How about the standard watermarks?
Maybe we could leave just the copyright statement?

Help me out here - justify the removal of some 'verbiage' while still allowing other.

Needless complexity. I figured something like this would happen when the POTD18+ contest was split. Not everyone will be satisfied by whatever is changed. Keep it simple. Who cares if someone's watermark gets them a few more votes? The contest is a trivial amusement and amounts to a hill of beans or a tempest in a teapot to pile on cliches.

Leave well enough alone. The fact thay you JoJo feel the necessity of having to comment on this nonsense when I have no doubt you have much other valuable work to do is a telling point. I for one was happy when the contest was one, still happy when it was split, and will do doubt still enter if it changes again. But from a practical POV IBs technical staff has problems with any changes. Leave well enough alone.

Sep 19 12 03:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Shutterbug
Posts: 202
San Francisco, California, US


I think the topic is watermarks and logos embedded in images.

It is impossible for management to edit these out. Permitting them allows some submitters who think they are "popular" to advertise their brand before voting while the other 99% don't have the same advantage. It is, however also a valid point that photogs concerned about pirating of their images should be able to include a copyright notice. To publish an image without a "c" marking is arguably to waive copyright.

The most workable solution would be to just go back to including everyone's info before the vote. I don't think that made the contest any more or less corrupt than it already is.

And no, I don't think the contests need to be split any more.
Sep 19 12 05:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kent Art Photography
Posts: 2,657
Ashford, England, United Kingdom


If we permit logos on some entries, then we should permit names on all entries.  As noted previously, some people put huge logos on the pics submitted to the contests which the same pics in the portfolio don't have.  A level playing field would be nice.

The voterigging claims are annoying, because they can't be proved.  Is there any evidence that removing names has made a difference?
Sep 20 12 02:44 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mark Leighton
Posts: 132
Lagos, Algarve, Portugal


JoJo wrote:

So we split the PotD into male/female - then into colour/B&W - then into PSd/out-of-the-camera
Congratulations, we now have 8 PotD

Come on, we need one more split suggestion - we might as well have 16 contests.

Actually I was only suggesting that either male and female images can be judged along side each other or they can't.  If they can it makes no sense to have separate 18+ contests. So that would be one LESS contest.  If the prevalent view is they can't then the main POTD should be split, which according to my math(s) is ONE more contest.

Having one for every suggestion would be way too user friendly....

Sep 20 12 05:33 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
William Spear
Posts: 69
Orlando, Florida, US


Hello,

I'm trying to understand why my last three 18+ Photos were rejected.  This is the most recent:  http://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/29236269

Certainly not a rule violator than I can see.  Am I doing something wrong?  Is it not uploading? 

Conversely, my regular POD entries are going through. 

What gives??

Thank you kindly for your attention to this matter,
Warmly yours,
William
Sep 22 12 10:18 am  Link  Quote 
Model
JoJo
Contest Queen
Posts: 24,398
Clearwater, Florida, US


William Spear  wrote:
Hello,

I'm trying to understand why my last three 18+ Photos were rejected.  This is the most recent:  http://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/29236269

Certainly not a rule violator than I can see.  Am I doing something wrong?  Is it not uploading? 

Conversely, my regular POD entries are going through. 

What gives??

Thank you kindly for your attention to this matter,
Warmly yours,
William

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/contest/p … 26-big.jpg
disqualified - violation of "15 day" rule
http://photos.modelmayhem.com/contest/p … 61-big.jpg
disqualified - violation of "15 day" rule

try using this
http://www.sendu.me.uk/modelmayhem/15_day/

Sep 22 12 10:48 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
William Spear
Posts: 69
Orlando, Florida, US


Thanks JoJo, I guess I thought more time had passed!
Sep 22 12 12:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jeffrey M Fletcher
Posts: 4,319
Asheville, North Carolina, US


JoJo wrote:

So we split the PotD into male/female - then into colour/B&W - then into PSd/out-of-the-camera
Congratulations, we now have 8 PotD

Come on, we need one more split suggestion - we might as well have 16 contests.

Film, can we have one for film? It's a whole different set of challenges than digital.

You are nice, we'll have many contests.

Sep 24 12 06:42 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Eye of the World
Posts: 744
Corvallis, Oregon, US


I am not in favor of any more splits, but I would not be opposed to either (or both) of the following:
1. A significant lengthening of the re-submission interval (90 days?).
2. A "three strikes" rule where an image that has not made the top ten after three tries has to wait 6-12 months from the third entry to be submitted again.

There are quite a few images that I swear I have seen enough times to make me ill. With only a 15 day wait the same photo can potentially be entered 24 times in a year. Reducing the amount of repeat entries will help keep the contest fresh and perhaps benefit some of the lesser known photographers and models.

I also agree that if "some" images are going to be identifiable by watermarks and such, then level the playing field and have all of them identifiable.
Sep 24 12 05:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stanley L Moore
Posts: 1,511
Houston, Texas, US


Eye of the World you have some great ideas. The longer period pf 90 days would cut down on resubmissions. And I do not know how the three strikke rule could be administered but I do see some images so many times it is annoying. At least one photogrtpaher in the Men's contest submits the same image so often it is instantly recognizable. I htink he does it just to boost his recognition factor. It never gets many votes.
Sep 24 12 07:04 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
JoJo
Contest Queen
Posts: 24,398
Clearwater, Florida, US


Eye of the World wrote:
I am not in favor of any more splits, but I would not be opposed to either (or both) of the following:
1. A significant lengthening of the re-submission interval (90 days?).
2. A "three strikes" rule where an image that has not made the top ten after three tries has to wait 6-12 months from the third entry to be submitted again.

good ideas - I will talk with the programmers

Eye of the World wrote:
There are quite a few images that I swear I have seen enough times to make me ill. With only a 15 day wait the same photo can potentially be entered 24 times in a year. Reducing the amount of repeat entries will help keep the contest fresh and perhaps benefit some of the lesser known photographers and models.

You should see it on this end before I validate the contests - same images from the same people (can't say dolts wink) entered every damn day

Eye of the World wrote:
I also agree that if "some" images are going to be identifiable by watermarks and such, then level the playing field and have all of them identifiable.

It's an all or nothing scenario and we're not going to get rid of every watermark, tag or copyright line so I will ask the programmers to put the name of the submitter on every entry.

Sep 24 12 10:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
CamiAnn
Posts: 794
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


JoJo wrote:

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/contest/p … 26-big.jpg
disqualified - violation of "15 day" rule
http://photos.modelmayhem.com/contest/p … 61-big.jpg
disqualified - violation of "15 day" rule

try using this
http://www.sendu.me.uk/modelmayhem/15_day/

I use that now and have had no problems...its a huge help! smile

Sep 24 12 10:43 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Chuckarelei
Posts: 9,268
Seattle, Washington, US


1) What happen to the regular POTD discussion thread?

2) If someone submits a picture that I took, can I vote for it?
Sep 25 12 02:28 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
JoJo
Contest Queen
Posts: 24,398
Clearwater, Florida, US


Chuckarelei wrote:
1) What happen to the regular POTD discussion thread?

2) If someone submits a picture that I took, can I vote for it?

1 - the PotD thread is still around but hasn't been used in weeks/months

2 - a little qualification
In the PotD and PotD18+ you may vote for your own entry or an entry of your work. You may vote once even if you have multiple accounts.
In the PotD-OE and the other forum based contests you may NOT vote for your own work - check the rules for each individual contest first.

We are trying to somehow standardize the rules across all the MM contests.

Sep 25 12 03:13 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tom Clark Photography
Posts: 127
Salt Lake City, Utah, US


POTD 18+ Men appears to have become a competition about schlong size rather than anything to do with the quality of the photography and the modeling. Is there anything on the horizon in terms of a contest where male nudes can be judged on merits other than endowment? This isn't a complaint, rather a serious inquiry into the challenge of trying to be involved in a competition that's become Schlong of The Day rather than Picture of The Day. Many talented photographers of men who I've talked to won't enter the competition anymore because it places their work in a genital contest rather than a photography contest. Can this ever be resolved or is it just the nature of the beast?

Please don't slam me for asking a question that might have been asked before. I did several searches and nothing in this context came up. Thanks.
Oct 02 12 07:53 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stanley L Moore
Posts: 1,511
Houston, Texas, US


Tom Clark Photography wrote:
POTD 18+ Men appears to have become a competition about schlong size rather than anything to do with the quality of the photography and the modeling. Is there anything on the horizon in terms of a contest where male nudes can be judged on merits other than endowment? This isn't a complaint, rather a serious inquiry into the challenge of trying to be involved in a competition that's become Schlong of The Day rather than Picture of The Day. Many talented photographers of men who I've talked to won't enter the competition anymore because it places their work in a genital contest rather than a photography contest. Can this ever be resolved or is it just the nature of the beast?

Please don't slam me for asking a question that might have been asked before. I did several searches and nothing in this context came up. Thanks.

In any contest like POTD18+ that depends on votes...or   like the upcoming US elections-- you have to give the voters what they want. If you don't you don't generally win. There is lots of good nude male photogrpahy out there and I find that usually good quality images do well in voting.

The male-female split was in response to complaints like yours that the males were winning more than they should because it was a sausage fest. Now that males are separate I still see the same type complaint. The contest is what it is. Just take it in a spirit of fun. A trivial daily distraction. Don't take it seriously.

BTW it is just as easy to make a fine quality photograph of a nude male with large equipment as it is to make a fine image of a male with a small one. I suggest you search out models who are well equipped by nature to place well in the voting. I am sure ther are plenty of big ole boys out there in Utah. Yuo just have to find them.

I have won the ocntest 4 times in the past year. One was with a small penis, two were average, and one was large. I don't claim to be some super photographer but you can win without a long penis. You cna see for yourself on my profile page I have links to the 4 winning pictures.

You can enter and you can win with any image. There have been a number of winners that were rear shots. Just keep plugging away.

Oct 02 12 09:03 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stanley L Moore
Posts: 1,511
Houston, Texas, US


As an addendum to my previous post look at the winners of October 1 contest announced today.
Out of the top 10, four including the winner don't even show a penis.
Three are small to average and remaining three are on the large side but not huge. That is a pretty even split so I doubt  the big guys have all that much advantage.

Most of the top ten are well posed, well composed, and well exposed. So I think photographic quality is not being compromised by the voting public.
Oct 02 12 09:25 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tom Clark Photography
Posts: 127
Salt Lake City, Utah, US


Stanley L Moore wrote:
BTW it is just as easy to make a fine quality photograph of a nude male with large equipment as it is to make a fine image of a male with a small one. I suggest you search out models who are well equipped by nature to place well in the voting. I am sure ther are plenty of big ole boys out there in Utah. Yuo just have to find them.

I would never consider searching out a model for my work based on penis size. That falls more along the lines of erotic and porn work, which is what the POTD 18+ Men has become. My query is about the possibility of a competition where we're actually judging the image rather than the dick.

Oct 02 12 09:32 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kent Art Photography
Posts: 2,657
Ashford, England, United Kingdom


Given two similar pics, similar models, similar lighting set-up, similar pose, etc., if it's a full frontal shot the model with the biggest cock will win.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, either.

Let's not ever have a "Mull of Kintyre" rule on MM.
Oct 02 12 10:12 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stanley L Moore
Posts: 1,511
Houston, Texas, US


Tom Clark Photography wrote:

I would never consider searching out a model for my work based on penis size. That falls more along the lines of erotic and porn work, which is what the POTD 18+ Men has become. My query is about the possibility of a competition where we're actually judging the image rather than the dick.

I can understand your policy. I do not seek out big penis models either. But if they happen to have one I use their images preferentially for the POTD18 contest. I much prefer to emphasize  muscularity and not penis size.

I dispute the contest has become porn or erotic oriented since we have the completely flaccid rule. To me no erection means not overtly erotic. And the images have to NOT emphasize the genitals. That is also a rule. I have had a couple of DQs for that reason. So POTD18+ is well policed to keep it out of the porno slash erotic zone.

To implement you idea they would have to get rid of vioting and put in a jury to judge entries. And I expect IB will not do that. This trivial contest is very low on that radar screen. Anyway there would still be complaints that the best images were still not winning.

Oct 02 12 10:18 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stanley L Moore
Posts: 1,511
Houston, Texas, US


Kent Art Photography wrote:
Given two similar pics, similar models, similar lighting set-up, similar pose, etc., if it's a full frontal shot the model with the biggest cock will win.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, either.

Let's not ever have a "Mull of Kintyre" rule on MM.

It is because voters want that sort of winner. I completely agree. There is nothing wrong with catering to the voters. But for my part I do not vote on penis size. I vote on what pics appeal to me on that particcular day.

I never heard of Mull of Kintyre. Must be a European thing.  I think this contest is OK the way it is.... well except for the flaccid rule. LOL.

Oct 02 12 10:23 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kent Art Photography
Posts: 2,657
Ashford, England, United Kingdom


Stanley L Moore wrote:
It is because voters want that sort of winner. I completely agree. There is nothing wrong with catering to the voters. But for my part I do not vote on penis size. I vote on what pics appeal to me on that particcular day.

I never heard of Mull of Kintyre. Must be a European thing.  I think this contest is OK the way it is.... well except for the flaccid rule. LOL.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mull_of_Kintyre_test

Asking JoJo to rule on that would be too much for the poor girl.

Oct 02 12 10:30 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mark Leighton
Posts: 132
Lagos, Algarve, Portugal


Well I agree with you Tom.

Of course the contest is what it is and of course we can find exceptions to the "length of the day" winners but generally, it is those that win and if you enter a non frontal nude the chances are very low. I believe a lot of members who do not enjoy looking at frontal nudes (especially those that stretch the non-flaccid rule to the limit) and so they don't visit the contest or vote in it. There is an issue about broadening it's appeal.

Personally I would prefer to see the 18+ contests limited to implied nudes and the segregation of the contests removed but I think I am very much in a minority on this.
Oct 02 12 11:16 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mark Leighton
Posts: 132
Lagos, Algarve, Portugal


Kent Art Photography wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mull_of_Kintyre_test

Asking JoJo to rule on that would be too much for the poor girl.

I am European and I had never heard of either, other than for a ghastly song. Anyway, it seems some of the entries have gone past the Mull of Kintryre and are virtually Italy.

Oct 02 12 11:19 am  Link  Quote 
Model
JoJo
Contest Queen
Posts: 24,398
Clearwater, Florida, US


Remember, this site is American.

Most Americans are going to look at the Mull of Kintryre map and ask what Scandelnavia has to do with the price per kilo of grade A shlong.

The CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) made a very similar proposal governing ‘dongle dangle’. In a public statement a spokesperson for the CBC stated the new ruling “just wasn’t going to hang well” with the Canadian viewing public.

When the US Congress decided to tackle the problem they spent 4 months debating what brand of latex gloves would be used when they handled the problem.

Everyone reading this is here by the grace of what we can’t see on MM… a non flaccid penis. wink
Oct 02 12 12:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stanley L Moore
Posts: 1,511
Houston, Texas, US


JoJo, I have never laughed so hard as when reading your last post. All that punning about hanging wit he public etc is hilarious. I always thought Europeans wer much more tolerant of nudity that we prudish Americans. How true of our Congress to dither and dally over non relevancies.

I must say the Mull of Kintyre shows almost NO tumnescence. I agree we must never adopt that rule here in MM. I most like what  we could call the Italy Rule. LOL.
Oct 02 12 03:15 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mark Leighton
Posts: 132
Lagos, Algarve, Portugal


JoJo wrote:
Most Americans are going to look at the Mull of Kintryre map and ask what Scandelnavia has to do with the price per kilo of grade A shlong.

Which might confirm what most Europeans suspect... as the Mull of Kintryre is in Scotland, UK! :-0

Oct 03 12 12:17 am  Link  Quote 
Model
JoJo
Contest Queen
Posts: 24,398
Clearwater, Florida, US


JoJo wrote:
Most Americans are going to look at the Mull of Kintryre map and ask what Scandelnavia has to do with the price per kilo of grade A shlong.
Mark Leighton wrote:
Which might confirm what most Europeans suspect... as the Mull of Kintryre is in Scotland, UK! :-0

I know the Mull of Kintryre rather well - did a three day clothing shoot in the ruins and on the cliffs at Keil in April 2006 - took a tumble on the cliffs, almost broke my leg - froze my ass off the entire time I was there.

Oct 03 12 01:18 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kent Art Photography
Posts: 2,657
Ashford, England, United Kingdom


If only Lake Michigan was the other way up...
Oct 03 12 02:43 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tom Clark Photography
Posts: 127
Salt Lake City, Utah, US


Kent Art Photography wrote:
Given two similar pics, similar models, similar lighting set-up, similar pose, etc., if it's a full frontal shot the model with the biggest cock will win.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, either.

Let's not ever have a "Mull of Kintyre" rule on MM.

I totally agree - no Mull of Kintyre here. At the same time it's quite entertaining because guys with big dicks can be fully erect and they still point downwards. I see guys all the time here on MM with full erections but because of the angle they're safe from the penis-police. I don't there will ever be a solution to that and I'm not really concerned with it either.

I have no idea who votes in the 18+ Men contests but given that there is such a voting bias for big cocks it's likely that it's mostly gay men. And again, that's cool. I'm gay, I get it. But I'm wondering if a contest that was more mixed in its approach and attracted voters from across a wider spectrum would perhaps bring the focus back to the picture more than the cock size.

Oct 06 12 12:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mark Leighton
Posts: 132
Lagos, Algarve, Portugal


Tom Clark Photography wrote:
But I'm wondering if a contest that was more mixed in its approach and attracted voters from across a wider spectrum would perhaps bring the focus back to the picture more than the cock size.

Seconded

Oct 06 12 01:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Stanley L Moore
Posts: 1,511
Houston, Texas, US


I too agree. In fact JoJo said as much on another thread in General Industiy a few weeks back. If more folks voted instead of complaining perhaps the emphasis would change. I myself am more concerned with the muscular aesthetic of the body and the overall quality of the image than dick size. But since I enter nearly every day and I want to win I put in those with the biggest dicks I have. My enteries with Vienna Sausages seldom get many votes... not enough to hit the top ten. So I go with the flow in my entries but not in my voting.

I never understood why so many of us gay men are obsessed with size. It can look out of proportion in a picture and often times just ridiculous. Not to mention the aforesaid problem taht very large ones weigh too much to get erect.
Oct 06 12 08:05 pm  Link  Quote 
first116117118119120121122123last   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers