mountmous,

I’m afraid the actions of the editor and publishers do not match their words.  The Fractal Universe Calendar is indeed run using a competition framework.  The editor is actually a screener who prunes the initial submissions down to a more manageable number.  Images sent by the screener are then selected by “the publishing team” who act exactly like judges; they choose the “winners” who will appear in that year’s calendar.  Editors are paid with the standard stipend ($200 for an image or $400 for a cover) and one of their own images is also included in the calendar.  However, editors also have the option of including more of their own art (how much, we’ve asked without receiving an answer) into the whittled down samples that are sent on to the publishers.  Because of this arrangement, editors appear to enjoy insider privileges.  Just over 40% of the art in the Fractal Universe Calendar from 2004-2008 was the work of just four people: three former and one current editor.  Last year, one of the editors had two images included in the calendar -- including the cover.  He also collected $600 -- the largest payment made to any artist that year.  These facts raise questions of propriety tied directly to the manner is which the competition is managed.

If this operation were a professionally-run publishing venture, it would behave like one.  The editor would perform an editor’s duties and only contact artists individually to submit to the calendar.  The editor would then turn the solicited images directly over to the publisher.  The editor would be compensated (as in paid), but under no circumstances would the editor's work be included in the final product (or, in the case of the Benoit Mandelbrot Fractal Art Contest, would judges' work turn up in the exhibition).

We’ve made these points numerous times on our blog.

~/~

Stephanie,

You’re welcome.

But, as much as OT might like to take the credit, I don’t really think you can place your submission and inclusion in last year’s calendar at our feet.  After all, you were the one who made the decision to make fractal art that strictly adheres to the Avalanche Publishing aesthetic.  And do you always make artistic choices out of a need to spite people who are critical of some aspect of the fractal community?  I guess I believe that making art is more of a self-expression -- something that comes from within and reveals an artist’s feelings or thoughts or vision.  You seem to see creation as a vindictive, get-even response to ideas you dislike.

You also seem to imply that we desire the death of the calendar when in fact what we want is its rejuvenation.  We’d like to see the Fractal Universe Calendar run according to competition conventions commonly used in the broader art community.   We’d also like to see the FUC focus back on what it has always indirectly claimed to be: the best of the genre.  Nothing will change, though, as long as the editor(s) continue to subvert the whole process by using it for self-promotion, and the publishing company goes on making a profit through its public promotion of clichéd styles and imagery.

~/~

Beebee127,

Sometimes, it is difficult to discern a person’s gender on the Internet.  However, I have no record of ever receiving a personal email from you.  After reading your message here, I have corrected the mistake in the Orbit Trap post you reference.  I apologize for the error and for any discomfort you may have felt because of it.

The conversation you mention was at deviantArt and can be read here.  Fractal forum readers can visit and judge for themselves if I behaved rudely to you -- or, at any rate, was as discourteous as you are to me in this thread.

And now you say we will ban you before you’ve even left a comment.  I urge you (or anyone here) to comment on Orbit Trap and test whether that assertion is true.  Or perhaps such a claim is just an excuse for you and others not wanting to confront us and risk a rebuttal in our house rather than in this relatively safe forum where you believe your friends have your back.  It’s true we have banned several people -- but only after giving them plenty of time and numerous opportunities to engage in discourse.  I have also been banned from Keith’s MacKay’s blog and forum -- and after just one post.  I'm not upset about it; unfortunately, these things sometimes happen.  I bet some of the mods here at Renderosity have been known to occasionally ban members from time to time.  But if you believe we have a blanket policy of not allowing critical comments, you can disprove that theory quickly by stopping by and sharing your thoughts.  Assuming your remarks adhere to our comments policy, and you aren’t one of the chosen few who had their chance and blew it, you’ll see what you said.  But be aware that we are a private publishing enterprise and not a forum.  Moreover, we reserve the right to challenge what appears on our blog.

I’m sorry you find our pursuit of these “ridiculous” issues “tedious,” just as Stephanie worries that the topic will “reiterate into infinity.”  The editor and organizers have said nothing about our questions and have done nothing to correct any of our concerns.  So, I'll guess we'll keep on pointing out what seems obvious to us.  In the meantime, here’s a task that might help relieve some of the tedium.  Use your time constructively to present a rational, detailed explanation as to why so many people in the fractal art community insist that our art competitions are somehow exempt from using widely accepted practices (like not allowing the work of editors and judges to appear in competitions) -- practices that help insure fairness and professionalism.  I would really like to examine such an argument.

~/~

Please don’t get me wrong.  I am content to read and reflect on the thoughts of any Fractal Forum member.  Still, I’d like to point out that my post was really addressed to the Fractal Universe Calendar editor and/or publishers.  I would like to hear them comment on  the questions we’ve raised -- or understand why they refuse to speak to our inquiries.