Submissions Open for the CWAS Astrofest David Malin Awards

[iceman]

Sorry I'm a bit late with this announcement.

"Submissions have opened for the 2016 CWAS "David Malin Awards". Entries can be submitted at the following link.

http://www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/news_events/astrofest/DMA/

At the URL above, click on the link for entry submissions. Note: All entrants must register before they can submit an image. The link to do that is on the same entry submissions page.

Be sure to read the conditions of entry carefully, since there have been several changes from last year's competition.

Submissions will close at 24:00 (AEST) on 31 May 2016.

Clear Skies and Good Luck.

John Sarkissian
2016 CWAS "David Malin Awards"

In addition, as posted yesterday (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=145482), images from the winning and short-listed entries will be used in the Astronomy calendar for 2017.

Good luck to all entrants!

[strongmanmike]

My understanding is that to date the $15 entry fee per image received from all non winning or Honorable Mention worthy CWAS DM entries has contributed to producing the annual exhibition of winning images and this has been organised by a not for profit astronomical society..so, perhaps this is fair enough to many.

So in light of this and unless I am overlooking some details, one issue I see with this new collaborative venture is that now it costs $15 to have an image of yours considered for publication by a commercial operation that stands to make profit from your image and this will only occur if one person (DM) likes your image...is this equitable?

Mike

[Astrovisuals]

Yes, the fee was a slight issue with me. This all happened at short notice, so maybe next year we can negotiate on that. Also would rather have Kiwis included as they are "honorary Aussies"!
My only response is that the calendar is a separate commercial deal with some of the winning photographers, with their permission only. As usual I pay cash for images used, as Astrovisuals is profit making. Hope this answers your concerns.

[strongmanmike]

The entry fees of all DM entrants (up to $75 if you enter 5 images) has helped fund the whole DM competition for several years now, so if entrants didn't pay their $15 the competition would likely not run and it relies on many people who don't (or never) win a thing to enter so there is a money pool to fund the exhibition. To now only give those who are successful in this competition the opportunity of appearing in the Astrovisuals calendar seems a restrictive shame and is by association, thus reliant, at least in part, on the DM funding subsidy to progress.

The beauty of the Astrovisuals/Ice in Space calendar to date was that it provided a quite separate opportunity for all Aussie (and NZ) astroimagers to see their work up in lights in a fabulous product and (quite rightly) due to the commercial connection, it didn't require an entry fee.

The Astrovisual/IIS calendar competition was also peer judged, making it refreshingly different to the DM's which is only judged by one person.

Not the end of the World but still a bit of a shame in my view

Mike

[SkyViking]

Oh well, guess I'll have to sit out this year's calendar competition then :)

[multiweb]

:sadeyes: :sad: oh well... make sure you have a tree in your next picture if you want to win, that'll be more productive. :P

[Astrovisuals]

Sorry Rolf! As I said, I'd prefer Kiwis included. On the other hand it will be nice to be Australian only, as that's how it was originally.
Yes, popular vote was a bit different. Mike and I were occasionally surprised by the winning images though, I think a lot of votes were based on thumbnails rather than viewing full screen!
I think it's a worthwhile experiment to combine the comps. Their publicity machine was much better than ours! Hopefully it will sell more calendars...

[iceman]

I can understand and appreciate the concerns.
There was a lot of overlap between the images entered in both, but the restriction of AU only is the main disappointment for the calendar.

Like we've said, it's an experiment this year and we can definitely change back next year if it doesn't pan out how we, and the community, like.

Peer-judged vs DM judged will definitely result in some differences, but that's certainly not say to say one is better than the other. The standard is always so high that the calendar will be great regardless.