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 think one problem is what's available to be nominated. I find the new images noticeably less interesting to look through than they used to be, and I've said before that photographers seem to be taking over the site. Birds of a feather ...

Wow. One might be inclined to connect the dots there, and misread that you think that the site's less interesting because it's got a higher percentage of photographers. But surely you couldnt possibly mean that, right?

Perhaps a more constructive stance would be to ask for a higher quality of images posted, and/or allowed on the site, regardless of whatever medium the image was created with.

The topic here is variety, not quality. There are lots of photography sites out there.
Yes, I do find it less interesting when it's mostly photography - I like variety! There was more when I first came.
Where did all the others artists go, and why aren't more coming? I submit that one reason is they're so outnumbered.

And the latest contest results illustrate my point.

I find it hard to accept that the statistics mentioned could be blamed on the variety of uploads... that would mean that the number of good illustrations was suddenly reduced to around an eighth of what is was when the art council was introduced (for example). I believe that the problem is that most people are only nominating images that are uploaded by people they know... maybe because they tend to look at their friend alerts more than browsing the galleries and being exposed to work by people they don't know.

Personally I always used to set aside a specific time for promoting images, rather than happening across something and deciding to promote it. This wasn't a conscious decision but maybe it is the best way to go about nominations... in any case I really don't think the current system most people are using is right, there is definitely a bias towards certain "popular" members and other deserving work is clearly being overlooked. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise if the stats quoted above are correct.

PS Akeriouos: You are correct that there are a lot more photographs on the site than other forms of work; that's why when promoting images we always tried to make sure that illustrations and digital work had a fair representation when doing the promotions. Personally I don't believe that the same can be accomplished when it is being done through a voting system such as we have now, it needs to be an organised process by a group of people working in cooperation with each other. The same applies to the problem of promoting multiple images by the same artist of very similar scenes. I hope I can be proved wrong on this point but I believe some degree of mod editing (such as removing images which have just been promoted) is needed to accomplish a balance. Unfortunately many members seem to see this sort of thing as an attack on their judgement, on on themselves if they are the ones who have had their images removed, and this is why it currently isn't being done (at least by me. I have also stopped promoting images myself as I feel there are already too many being promoted by the council and I don't want the main galleries to become even more cluttered than they already are)

As just 5 of the last 36 New Images are genres other than photography it would seem a true statement that photography outnumbers others.
There is nothing photographers can do about this - we all do what we do and some of us try other things as well but I don't see the point in complaining there is not enough variety. It is up to the artists who produce their art through computer generation to provide more.
Yes there are lots of other photography sites out there - is it being suggested ceades photographers migrate to them to balance the numbers here?
I thought we were all here for the same reason - to create desktop wallpapers, not to quible over which category has most images.

In the last contest White on White, of the 32 entries all but 5 of them were photographs, so maybe if more computer artists had entered the results may have been different.

For the record I voted for two abstract entries so it is not always a case of 'birds of a feather' . . .

I was disappointed and surprised not to see them placed but that was the result of the votes.

There's no need to take things personally. A majority of photographers draws more photographers and fewer other artists. Birds of a feather.
I don't know what can be done about it, but it is a fact, and it will be a loss if this becomes yet another photography site. I've looked for another site like this used to be, and I couldn't find one. I've looked for somewhere to get critiques on my CG work, and I couldn't find that either.

I hesitate to say this, because some people get all defensive at the suggestion, but it's a fact. Basic photography is easy. Nearly everyone has a camera now, and can easily shoot and post pictures. Basic photography and minor editing was all I had done before I came here. But I found lots of other art here, and tutorials on how to make some of it, so I branched out and tried some other things. I wouldn't have done so, it probably wouldn't have even occurred to me, if the galleries I found were mostly photography as they are now. And I don't think there's much encouragement for the people coming now to try anything different.
(Some of) the good photographers have stayed, (most of) the good CG artists have left (or aren't posting much anymore). Possibly some people not completely in love with photography could try branching out a little. Some people chose to specialize in photography, some just never think of anything else, or assume it's too hard.

Promoting more of the non-photographs (not just abstracts!) might help a little. Other than that I don't know.

P.S. We have a new CG artist in the last month, and his works keep ending up on the "Lonely Images" list ...

I have to say that I haven't been very impressed by the few fractals that I have seen nominated by the council... IMO they were not up to the standard of the majority of those in the main galleries and the ones I can recall were by artists who I think have uploaded far better quality work previously. Again I tended to get the feeling that these images were being nominated because of who they were by, rather than the quality of the images themselves.

As far as comments go, I actually find it easier to critique CGI than photography as the persona who created it has full control over pretty much every aspect of the image; I don't have to think about the possible circumstances in which it was created as much as I do for photographs. Of course the opportunity doesn't come up as frequently...

I look at the Computer gallery for images to nominate, but there's less than a page, and not many that are Main Gallery material. And then there are all the photos that end up in there too.

Well I can deal with the second issue, at least.

Remember there is a lot of CG stuff under "abstract" as well.

And I can't begin to tell you how many sunset images with darkened trees on the horizon get nominated either. Unreal.

At least trees are better than power lines ;-P

Speaking from a personal point of view, I have nominated images for admission to the main galleries by people I don't even know. AC members are limited to promoting only 2 images a week, so even if we see another great post after that, we can't nominate it.

And personally speaking, I haven't been given any images to vote on for many weeks. I guess that is because the voting from the AC is rotated through the members and there are 135 members? Also, if fewer than 30% of our nominated images are not promoted to the main galleries, we can be bumped off of the AC. So, you see, I would expect that most AC members are saving their nominating abilities for only the very best images posted here. It might be interesting to know how many AC members are CG artists or fractalists and illustrators.

It makes sense that if the majority of AC members are landscape artists, then landscapes are what make it to the main galleries more than any other genre. I hope that isn't the case, but if so, it is like a catch-22 in that AC members have their images in the Main galleries and vote for future admissions; kind of like a good old boy's club.

The system is hardly perfect and does give photographers an advantage over the other arts, but I don't really know the answer as to how that could become more balanced.
Some of us have tried CG or fractals, but I wouldn't request that fractalists, etc. try photography. I don't believe that photography is necessarily that easy as was mentioned and I know that the other art work is involved and very time consuming and takes a lot of creativity. I know this because I watched as my daughter just finished a course in CG.

Somewhere there has to be a resolution..