Hi Damien, yes I got the email but it does not tell me which one on the list the photograph is guilty of! This photograph has been on this site for over 2 months why should it suddenly be flagged now, a fair few people liked it and voted for it. If my images are going to be deleted ater this length of time then I will have to think twice about contributing any more. Brian D.

Thanks Damien, unfortunately I have deleted all but one of my images from this site, which is a shame because I was really enjoying my time here. It is a good site and I will still visit, I thought the image was of high quality, but then I would think that. Thanks for your time and help, it is really appreciated. Brian D.

I would add that this image is unedited, I cropped the shot so that the podium describing the site was not in view. So whoever objected to this shot may well have an image that is more up to date than mine. This shot was taken in the spring of 2009! Thanks again everyone and so sorry if you voted for my other images and lost reputation as a result. B.

Colour looks very warm.  Was the sun setting at the time the photo was taken?

Hi Dan

yes it was late afternoon in early spring and the sun was very low in fact the place was just about to close which was why there were no other tourists about.  It was a great time to visit this wonderful place. Thanks for looking and commenting. Brian D.

sorry ! I prefer french ! Nous sommes ici, au coeur du sujet ! De là l'importance de renseigner au maximum une photo ! Où ? Quand ? Quelle heure ? Quelle ouverture ? Quelle vitesse ? Perso, j'avais voté pour cette photo. Il n'y avait pas de tricherie et Brian est sincère. J'ai perdu des points mais, je m'en fous ! Et je suis désolé pour Brian, car c'était une magnifique photo ! Et s'il la remettait en ligne, je voterais toujours pour elle !

Thank you Andre - very much appreciated. Brian D.

Hi,

I think the photo is pretty good.

It might be edited a bit but i would still call it an enhancement.

But then there are photos I've come across which are just too badly flashed or almost editted to distortion or poorly composed and still they are there with too many votes. If the aim is to have the best of photos only in fotopedia, then we should start removing the worst of pics. That way, if some pictures are removed because all the others in fotopedia are so much better, the person, including me, would not mind so much.

But, just picking up any article randomly and removing photos is not too healthy in my opinion. For some reason, different articles seem to have different levels of tolerance of  standards. 

I had posted some photos which were featured in the Jesus article and got flagged in the Barcelona article for quality. This is just my experience and I don't want to go digging up the links for the pictures coz I'm sure most users have had a hint of this already.

Best Regards, 

Abhijeet.

Hi Abhijeet

thanks for your comments. From what little experience I have had on this site I did notice a little inconsistency across various themes. Images being removed from items/subjects that in my opinion the complainants knew very little about, but then you expect that on a site where people's tastes and levels of photographic ability vary. I had a fair percentage of my images featured in articles and received votes so assumed my work was at least pleasing to some. I accept constructive crtitiscm it is how we develop, so I put my short time on fotopedia as a learning curve. Thanks again - Brian D.

I think it's a great picture, and it has been removed for absolutely no reason!

Thank you Tim - really appreciate your comment. Brian D.

The photo's nice! Let's be honest, how many of the photos here are not edited someway or another? Unless it is absolutely obvious, definitely not in this case, the benefit of doubt should be given to the contributor and not the flagger. Just my thoughts.

My thoughts too! Thank you. Brian D.

Hi Damien and everyone who has contributed to this forum. 

A big thank you from me - it has been a good insight on my behalf as to the way this site works.

I appreciate the democratic way this exercise has been conducted and I will remain a member. Some of the work displayed here is exceptional and the whole concept is very inspiring and educational.

Brian Denton.

I think orange can look more intense, on a blue background, which can make the photo look over-saturated, even if it isn't.

Obviously, colours take on a different appearance according to what color is next to them.

I feel that this photo is a good photo I don't think is too much edited, on my calibrated monitor, but probably I really like saturated colors.

But if this is the problem I can ask you: you don't accept also DESATURATED photos, and then any monochrome one, since in the digital workflow they are FULLY DESATURATED and HEAVILY POST PRODUCED (they lost their original colors)...

With the basic principle  you use to flag (on the focus/sharpness for example) you should reject the "G-day" Robert Capa's Photos since they are "Slightly out of focus"?

The main thing is that the photos should be encyclopedic.

To me, it should not matter if a photo is a little over-saturated, or under-saturated, so long as the colours haven't been messed around with, e.g. green channel only, increased.

In the case of Robert Capa's D-Day photos, they would all be encyclopedic no matter what, because they are famous photos, and are on wikipedia.