Juried Selections

[michaelmudd]

Here's an idea I'd like to suggest. How about creating a new category of galleries in line with "favorite artists," "recent," "popular," etc. -- this one called "juried." To make it work, PBase would select a jury of highly accomplished members, perhaps 6 to 12 in number. The jury might serve for a month, a few months, or whatever seems right, and then another jury would be selected. PBase members then could submit galleries for review by the jury. The idea being that the jury -- just like in an art show -- would select the best of the best. The selections could be pooled in a single grouping, or ideally into a variety of sub-groupings such as landscape, abstracts, fashion, wildlife, etc. The selections could also be grouped chronologically -- current, last 90 days, etc.

Definitely would require a commitment from jury members to devote the time needed to review and vote. And perhaps a simple majority of the jury would be needed for a gallery to be selected. Think this idea could accomplish two things. Provide recognition for the best work and serve as an easy way to access the best of PBase. I recognize that "popular galleries" does do that to a degree, and in that instance the "jury" is whole PBase membership. I wouldn't want to lose that feature. But it might also be nice to have a parallel selection process where the jury is made up of a more select group of photographers.

Wonder what others think?

[akmc_in_au]

Here's an idea I'd like to suggest. How about creating a new category of galleries in line with "favorite artists," "recent," "popular," etc. -- this one called "juried." To make it work, PBase would select a jury of highly accomplished members, perhaps 6 to 12 in number. The jury might serve for a month, a few months, or whatever seems right, and then another jury would be selected. PBase members then could submit galleries for review by the jury. The idea being that the jury -- just like in an art show -- would select the best of the best. The selections could be pooled in a single grouping, or ideally into a variety of sub-groupings such as landscape, abstracts, fashion, wildlife, etc. The selections could also be grouped chronologically -- current, last 90 days, etc.

Definitely would require a commitment from jury members to devote the time needed to review and vote. And perhaps a simple majority of the jury would be needed for a gallery to be selected. Think this idea could accomplish two things. Provide recognition for the best work and serve as an easy way to access the best of PBase. I recognize that "popular galleries" does do that to a degree, and in that instance the "jury" is whole PBase membership. I wouldn't want to lose that feature. But it might also be nice to have a parallel selection process where the jury is made up of a more select group of photographers.

Wonder what others think?

I don't see the need. The existing voting system is in no way perfect; undoubtedly a significant amount of vote swapping goes on, and the "best" don't necessarily make it to the top, though that in itself raises the question of what "best" is. You're still going to have the selections based on subjective opinions, just that this time it'll be the subjective opinions of a smaller subset of people.

I think I'd rather see PBase remain as it is, where the primary goal for most people, I think, is merely to take better photos than they themselves have taken before, rather than being in competition with other photographers for kudos.

[mardoli]

Here's an idea I'd like to suggest. How about creating a new category of galleries in line with "favorite artists," "recent," "popular," etc. -- this one called "juried." To make it work, PBase would select a jury of highly accomplished members, perhaps 6 to 12 in number. The jury might serve for a month, a few months, or whatever seems right, and then another jury would be selected. PBase members then could submit galleries for review by the jury. The idea being that the jury -- just like in an art show -- would select the best of the best. The selections could be pooled in a single grouping, or ideally into a variety of sub-groupings such as landscape, abstracts, fashion, wildlife, etc. The selections could also be grouped chronologically -- current, last 90 days, etc.

Definitely would require a commitment from jury members to devote the time needed to review and vote. And perhaps a simple majority of the jury would be needed for a gallery to be selected. Think this idea could accomplish two things. Provide recognition for the best work and serve as an easy way to access the best of PBase. I recognize that "popular galleries" does do that to a degree, and in that instance the "jury" is whole PBase membership. I wouldn't want to lose that feature. But it might also be nice to have a parallel selection process where the jury is made up of a more select group of photographers.

Wonder what others think?

I don't see the need. The existing voting system is in no way perfect; undoubtedly a significant amount of vote swapping goes on, and the "best" don't necessarily make it to the top, though that in itself raises the question of what "best" is. You're still going to have the selections based on subjective opinions, just that this time it'll be the subjective opinions of a smaller subset of people.

I think I'd rather see PBase remain as it is, where the primary goal for most people, I think, is merely to take better photos than they themselves have taken before, rather than being in competition with other photographers for kudos.

"Standing Ovation" for Alan, you could not express it better, I fully agree!
Thank you!
Marisa

[jypsee]

all I have to do is go to any gallery (REAL physical gallery, not self published galleries) or buy any photo book, etc. I can also see "juried" galleries on Flickr (though the "jury" over there is also self selected and have no actual acumen in selecting or understanding what makes a photograph worth selecting).

Mary in SW Florida, USA