[swag] Re: Summary of Submission Guidelines
- From: "Chris Zaragoza" <czaragoz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <swag@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 19:11:27 -0400
I think you just pretty much nailed what I had been trying to say
earlier....
Also Chris C. I'll go sign up when I first get a chance, just wanted to let
you know that I got the email.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Falconer" <falconernz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <swag@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 5:37 PM
Subject: [swag] Re: Summary of Submission Guidelines
> Hi folks,
>
> catching up again.
>
> Ghost, your summary of the guidelines is excellent in
> my opinion. I agree entirely, although I would say I
> think we can be discerning in what we allow on the
> site even in the open Submissions section. That's why
> we have three Inquisitors after all. I'm not
> suggesting we're hard on would be submitters at
> all,just that the standard, while more relaxed than
> that of Guild application, should still be reasonably
> high.
>
> Dan Swensen hit it on the head when he talked about
> setting a standard that accepts art worthy of
> publication in a WOTC or WEG book or magazine. If we
> as Inquisitors use that as our benchmark, I think we
> won't go too far wrong (thanks for the compliment by
> the way D.) Obviously we're flexible, and as was
> pointed out, we want to encourage and foster new
> artists, but we also don't want a site crammed with
> art we're not collectively proud of, including the
> open subs gallery.
>
> I'm sure that once we launch with our initial range of
> art from Guild Members, the quality level will be
> obvious, and I think discourage the submission of art
> that isn't quite up to scratch. I'd be surprised if
> Ghost, Ronen and I end up turning many people down. No
> one wants to be the worst artist in an exhibition!
>
> I also think it's our job to provide feedback to any
> artist we turn away, telling them why their work
> wasn't accepted and providing helpful advice on how it
> might be improved for potential future acceptance. We
> will be as diplomatic as possible and try to encourage
> and help new artists to be the best they can.
>
> Once again- great work Ghost. I don't know where you
> find the time to do all this great work. I'm lucky if
> I can squeeze half an hour on the internet once a day.
> Keep it coming.
>
> Daniel Falconer (Reverend Strone).
>
> --- Ghost In The Holocron <ghost@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote: > Ahoy, SWAGgies! (or is it SWAGgers, SWAGs?).
> Out of
> > the loop again
> > recently, but I've found some room to squeeze in
> > some SWAGging. So, to
> > recap, here's a summary of points so far, and some
> > additional thoughts
> > from my end...
> >
> > The SWAG Submission Guidelines appear to fall under
> > four general
> > categories:
> >
> > 1. Content
> > 2. Format
> > 3. Artwork Info
> > 4. Author Info
> >
> > For each of the categories above, we have the
> > following:
> >
> > CONTENT
> > 1. must be own original artwork done in any medium
> > 2. subject matter must be related to SW and the
> > SWRPG
> > 3. of a reasonable quality
> > 4. absolutely no pornography or copied work
> >
> > FORMAT
> > 1. GIF or JPG
> > 2. minimun dimensions: ??? x ??? pixels
> > 3. maximum dimensions: ??? x ??? pixels
> > 4. optimized for viewing at 24 bit (true-color)
> > screen
> > resolution (72 ppi)
> >
> > ARTWORK INFO
> > 1. title of piece
> > 2. medium used to create the piece
> > 3. a brief description of the subject (1 to 5
> > sentences)
> > 4. optional: 1-3 web links relevant to the subject
> > (such as a webpage with the more about the
> > subject,
> > including, possibly, the subject's RPG stats)
> >
> > AUTHOR INFO
> > 1. name (or alias) of author
> > 2. author's e-mail address (not to be made public)
> > 3. explicit acceptance of submissions regulations
> > and
> > legal disclaimers
> > 4. optional: public e-mail address for feedback
> > from the
> > general community (may be the same as no.2
> > above)
> > 5. optional: a link to the author's webpage or
> > another
> > site with more of the author's art (SW-related
> > or not)
> >
> > Hopefully the above will help us structure our
> > thoughts on this matter.
> > If anything needs to be added, taken away, or
> > revised you guys know
> > what to do.
> >
> > Also, there's the matter of who evaluates what and
> > against which
> > standard -- bantered about by Dan (DGSwensen) and
> > Derek (Nafai) among
> > others recently. Here's my own recap:
> >
> > 1. The Guild Council will evalute applicants for
> > membership.This
> > is the topmost level of evaluation, with
> > relatively high
> > standards -- since it will determine the overall
> > quality of
> > exhibited artwork on the site.
> >
> > When these applicants are approved and given
> > their Guild
> > License, so to speak, they receive an area within
> > the Guild's
> > site to file and exhibit their artwork. Future
> > submissions by
> > these fully licensed Guild members will then be
> > considerd
> > pre-approved. (Unless, of course, something truly
> > dreadful
> > happens.)
> >
> > 2. The Submissions Inquisitors are to look over any
> > submissions
> > from the general public -- in the spirit of
> > community, shared
> > interest, and promoting SW, the SWRPG, and art in
> > general.
> >
> > This is a more open level of evaluation accepting
> > most
> > submitted images except those that fall under
> > blatantly ugly,
> > pornographic or otherwise overwhelmingly
> > distateful, and
> > those images that are obviously plagiarised work.
> >
> > My apologies if I've rehashed old stuff, but: Is
> > this the way it's
> > going to work? If I've misunderstood or missed
> > anything important...
> > Comments? Corrections?... (Thanks!)
> >
> > - W Don Flores (Ghost I.T.H.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> http://www.sold.com.au - The Sold.com.au Big Brand Sale
> - New PCs, notebooks, digital cameras, phones and more ... Sale ends June
12
>
Other related posts:
