chips n gravy

to foodgawker

Posted on: August 4, 2009

dear foodgawker,

you may be snotty enough to reject me for so many times. BTW, WTH is bad composition? =.= are you telling me how to plate my food now? Not everybody can afford a DSLR and I am pretty happy with my point and click digital camera. if you do not want me, i do not want you too.

Thank you tastespotting for accepting my photos. Good to know your site is still about food not about who can take better photograph. If everybody rejects people that shoot with point and click, what is the point of a website like foodgawker?


6 Responses to "to foodgawker"

I loved your post! I also have had rejections from foodgawker and tastespotting from time to time. Sometimes I’ll submit the exact same photo to both and only one publishes it. The last comment I received from one of the rejections was “photo composition”. Not bad photo composition, just photo composition–what does THAT mean exactly? Maybe I’ll just assume that they meant GREAT photo composition and they were too intimidated to publish it–ha ha! I would be nice if they maybe explained a little more about what they mean so that amateur photographers could improve. Wow, sorry for going on and on–your post struck an AMEN from me! 🙂

YES! It was the same for me. “Photo composition”. why? they need to elaborate more, if not how would i know what to do in the future to correct my mistakes? so vague and not helping. again, i feel an urge to tell them what i feel on twitter.

Wow, way to be snotty foodgawker!!!

yeah i know! i know prettily shot photographs is a good way to attract people, but they seemed to have lost the plot. They are more concerned about the photos rather than promoting the blogger’s food. i have an urge to go to their twitter and abuse them LOL! hell hath no fury when a woman is scorned! 😀

Haha yes!! You know what’s so ironic? Back in the day when I didn’t put in alot of effort and had “crappy” shots (at least compared to now), they always accepted my photos. I guess now that they have a large following…

Anyway, your box in the above photo is great! I actually started laughing but, I think I’m going to make something similar. The thing is, it’s tough to get natural lighting in… Some people have suggested using something translucent, although that kinda defeats the purpose of a white background.

thanks for visiting.

yes, i find them losing the plot a little. but as i experiment with how to do food photography, i will continue to submit to them. just to see what is it that they wanted to accept. but i am not losing sleep over it. just that it seemed a lot of the Daring Bakers have theirs on there, and I thought it be good to have some exposure for my site.

yes, it is very hard for me to get natural lighting too, and especially with the stupid sun setting at around 530pm. That not to mentioned my house does not have the best location for it too. translucent? nah, opaque is a much better choice to diffuse light for a soft glow. You might laugh now, but its actually quite useful. I actually the idea from a photography student friend.She said to use stuff like these or even just a used cardboard box and cut them up and use portable clipped on light source as a lighting. good tips without busting my wallet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


Twitter Updates

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

This site has been viewed:

  • 10,302 hits
%d bloggers like this: