Is there less variety coming through from the Art Council than from moderator-chosen images? I hadn't thought (till it was mentioned by others) that such could be the case, but I had a quick look for myself.
I looked mainly at the Abstract gallery (being one that interests me personally), focusing on the most recent three pages (108 images in total).
Without knowing for sure which images were chosen by mods, and which were chosen by the Art Council, it seems a reasonable estimate that most images before 1st June 2010 are mod-chosen, while all those on and after that date were chosen by the Art Council. Bearing in mind that there's probably some overlap, the most recent 60 images in the Abstract main gallery are 'Art Council Territory' (covering a 6-month period) and the previous 48 images are 'Moderator Territory' (covering a 7-and-a-half-month period).
I checked to see how much variety there was in the two sections... the 60 Art Council images are all by 14 members. The previous 48 images (Moderator-chosen) are by 24 members. The Art Council promotions in this gallery are made at a slightly faster rate than the promotions by mods.
This doesn't necessarily follow for other galleries...
Looking at the Illustrations main gallery, only four images have been promoted over the past six months (by the Art Council, as I believe). The previous 32 images on that page (presumably mod-promoted) were over a three-month period.
Figures like these prove nothing, as so many different factors are involved, including the fact that the Art Council also promotes older images... and it is often pointed out how few abstracts etc are submitted compared to photographs (has the number decreased even more over the past 6 months?) The mods have removed some images promoted by the AC, and I realize the Art Council process in general is still being refined. But I wonder if the members themselves realize how narrow a diet we (the Art Council) are offering?
I suspect the main weak link is in the nominations. If an image isn't nominated, it can't be voted on. It is annoying when indiscriminate nominating takes place, but restricting the ability to nominate is risky. That's not the only reason, as I remember nominating some images I had real confidence in (in the Illustrations gallery) and they didn't get through.
PS: I didn't post my findings right away, so if any new images have been permed in the past couple of days, they may have thrown my figures off slightly.
I looked mainly at the Abstract gallery (being one that interests me personally), focusing on the most recent three pages (108 images in total).
Without knowing for sure which images were chosen by mods, and which were chosen by the Art Council, it seems a reasonable estimate that most images before 1st June 2010 are mod-chosen, while all those on and after that date were chosen by the Art Council. Bearing in mind that there's probably some overlap, the most recent 60 images in the Abstract main gallery are 'Art Council Territory' (covering a 6-month period) and the previous 48 images are 'Moderator Territory' (covering a 7-and-a-half-month period).
I checked to see how much variety there was in the two sections... the 60 Art Council images are all by 14 members. The previous 48 images (Moderator-chosen) are by 24 members. The Art Council promotions in this gallery are made at a slightly faster rate than the promotions by mods.
This doesn't necessarily follow for other galleries...
Looking at the Illustrations main gallery, only four images have been promoted over the past six months (by the Art Council, as I believe). The previous 32 images on that page (presumably mod-promoted) were over a three-month period.
Figures like these prove nothing, as so many different factors are involved, including the fact that the Art Council also promotes older images... and it is often pointed out how few abstracts etc are submitted compared to photographs (has the number decreased even more over the past 6 months?) The mods have removed some images promoted by the AC, and I realize the Art Council process in general is still being refined. But I wonder if the members themselves realize how narrow a diet we (the Art Council) are offering?
I suspect the main weak link is in the nominations. If an image isn't nominated, it can't be voted on. It is annoying when indiscriminate nominating takes place, but restricting the ability to nominate is risky. That's not the only reason, as I remember nominating some images I had real confidence in (in the Illustrations gallery) and they didn't get through.
PS: I didn't post my findings right away, so if any new images have been permed in the past couple of days, they may have thrown my figures off slightly.