When I first joined DT, it seemed so fresh and exciting. Every photo submitted seemed to be filled with so much potential. And though rejections were rather frequent in those days, they were really exciting opportunities to learn something. I do believe that I managed to collect every refusal reason there was in the book. Frustrating? Oh boy, it sure was.
Especially as I was just starting out I really couldn’t understand what it was all about. I was more interested in the feelings that a picture evoked than in the technical niceties of photography. I mostly paid attention to “art” photography, where bright highlights and dark
shadows only added to the overall ambience. Statements like “incorrect exposure or lighting” just confused the hell out of me. Took me ages to realize that what may be forgiven in “art”, was not always acceptable in stock.
But I comforted myself with the illusion that at least no one was complaining about my compositions… till I got a refusal for that very reason. A very kind reviewer replied to my e-mail requesting an explanation, and since then I really started paying even more attention to what was showing in my viewfinder to avoid any distracting encroachments competing with the principal subject of the photo.
It’s taken a while, but my approval rating was climbing steadily, mainly because I was being really hard on myself to select and
submit only photos that were sure to make it through the acid test. But now, it’s getting even more difficult to get stuff accepted. Not so much because of technical issues but rather because subjects are too well-covered.
Frustrating? Oh boy, it sure is. But then again… So it is time to up the game a bit. What’s the next thing to try to differentiate my submissions from all the rest?
Necessity is the mother of invention. Or in this case, rejection is the mother of inspiration.