/p/hotobook
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
It's time! Best-of-2015 /p/hotobook voting-curated edition!
>why
Because I can print for fairly low cost (estimated $35 USD (worldwide shipping included), I make zero profit) and I like photobooks.
>what / how big
Hardcover, 30 pages, 11.25"x8.75". This is the cheapest decent (read: not a bunch of magazine pages stapled together) option.
>why voting
Because I only have 30 pages. Using every photo will get stupid expensive for a bunch of snapshits. Appointing a curator turns it into a dick-measuring contest. Voting is shit, but it's the least shit for getting physically printed books.
>dates
Two weeks for submissions (until Feb 14), two weeks for voting (until end of Feb). Probably 1 week to submit payments for first round of printing, then the printer should take about a week. I'll do a second round if there's enough interest.
>ok
Go submit 1-3 photos to the url at the bottom. Author/titles are optional, and will not be visible for voting. Image order will be randomized for voting. Submit print-ready photos, I'll deal with resizing for voting and whatnot.
http://pbook2015.pwnz.org/
This is probably the most pathetic and petty thing I've seen on /p/ in a long time.
>>2758691
Because I can print for cheap and want to extend the favor to /p/? T-thanks.
>>2758694
No, because everybody has literally just finished submitting for the annual /p/ book and are waiting to see the results.
>>2758691
>most pathetic thing I've seen on /p/ in a long time
Don't worry, the feeling won't last long; the non-curated /p/ book will be out soon.
>>2758691
Fuck off iggy, this is your fault for being too slow.
>>2758686
where do you find a place that prints and ships that cheaply for a hardcover book?
>>2758722
Costco, because the canadian dollar is dropping like a rock and costco hasn't bothered updating their prices yet.
>>2758686
Will the book be available in a free PDF and will it contain a synopsis of /p/?
>>2758774
As far as I know, the printer doesn't offer any pdf-export options. I'll make the photos themselves available.
I'd be happy to include a synopsis if someone else writes it.
does anyone have a link for the other one? (the non curated one that was done recently)
>voting-curated
lol nope
>>2758898
Gather all your friends on Facebook to vote for you. Like, comment and share your picture.
>>2758906
I don't get exactly what you're trying to say
>>2758898
Second
I'd rather some power-mad un-elected dickhead rejects my snapshit than be rejected by consensus of 1000 autists.
>>2758918
i'd rather focus my rage on a general distrust of this board than on the whims of one individual
>>2758691
what an angry little man
i missed the submission for the main book and it'd be cool to be printed alongside other /p/ photographers, what does anyone have to lose by submitting to this? the respect of a handful of autists who hate some guy for wanting to make a book of his own?
Youre a good guy OP, dont let the cuckold committee undermine your project.
>>2758691
Lol is /p/irc mad cause this is a pee project not run by a namefag cabal member? Literally kill yourself you retarded faggot.
>>2758945
>what does anyone have to lose by submitting to this?
Needlessly dividing the community. We already have a 2015 photobook in the works that has problems, why the fuck start another 2015 photobook with equally as many problems?
>>2758955
>is /p/irc mad
wat
>>2758971
What's wrong with submitting to both? One is a nice PDF to look at of literally "the /p/ census", the other is actually an actually affordable best-of. It won't be perfect, but I'm not buying that $200, 100 page encyclopedia iggs puts out each year.
There is zero reason to dislike OP's project other than fear of rejection (or some sort of jealousy if you're Iggy). You lose nothing by contributing here. Stop trying to mold /p/ into your seekrit photog club and understand that different people are going to do different shit.
>6/10 made me reply
inb4
this new book gets all the good stuff that decent /p/ users didnt bother to even send for the stupid uncurated "book" made by the loser team.
the tears of butthurt are already flowing and this shit will be real awesome.
>>2758918
>he wants to be rejected by one guy so he can use "dickhead" as an excuse, instead of accepting that his photos are shit
>>2758971
Because sometimes, throwing the baby out with the bathwater IS the best solution.
ie maybe it's best if we start from scratch. Or just run the two projects in parallel and see which comes out better.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 1535 Image Height 1535 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition Unknown Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2012:10:03 07:56:54 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1500 Image Height 1500
>>2758902
this.
>>2758918
there is no rejection in iggy's this time
it's uncurated, hence the slowdown and the urge to have one with some form of curation
This is an awesome idea :3
it told me to bump so ill bump
>all this self-delusion
>all these plebs thinking that their own work is somehow better than the board average
>all these plebs thinking that they'll "make it in"
my sides.
>>2759216
>implying >30 photos will be submitted
>>2759216
The board average probably won't submit anything, and the board average isn't an extremely high standard to begin with...
This is a good idea either way.
book up
>>2759340
>being this desperate for attention
>>2758955
Iggy's not even on the irc channel
>>2759434
Facebook then.
Ehh... guys, this wasn't meant to be a shit flinging contest.
I'm very happy with Iggy's last few books, and I'm sure I'll be happy with the one coming out soon. I have all the pdfs saved and use them quite often for inspiration. Thing is, while I like physical photobooks, I can't justify a $90 book every year. The whole point of this project is to have a low-cost, best-of, tactile book for /p/. There is no reason the two project can't coexist.
Yes, voting sucks. But voting sucks the least IMO. I'd rather be told by all of /p/ that my photos suck than one guy arbitrarily deciding who gets in the book.
>>2758901
Not that kind of voting. I haven't quite finalized it yet, but what I think it'll look like would be something like: You're presented with a panel of 10 images. You pick your three favorites. Repeat until you've gone through all the photos. Each user gets their own randomized ordering of photos, with no names or titles attached -- so you could be up next to Alex, or some second-day-on-/p/. You could have all three of your photos on one page, or all on different pages... and it'll be different for each voter. Each user cannot vote for themselves (rather, they're already being counted as voting for themselves). To cheat this via the family-and-friends method, you'd literally have to train them on what your three photos look like then convince them to wade through however many pages of pictures to find them.
In other news, we have 18 submitters in just over a day, and all your photos look great! Thanks guys! I'm sure we'll have plenty more over the next little while.
>>2759560
>voting on a community project
>>2759566
Voting is literally the difference between a "community project" and "some dude's project".
>>2759560
>guys, this wasn't meant to be a shit flinging contest.
Then bro you're on the wrong fucking board.
Seriously. Have you been here for more than a week? The ONLY thing we consistently do well is sling shit. Occasionally somebody takes a photograph, but even that's rare nowadays.
>>2759566
>Make an uncurated photo book
/p/ gives tons of shit and claims the book will be terrible because of it. People complaining about it get told to go make their own book, their own way, if they don't want.
>anon makes the book he wants to see
/p/ gives him shit for it.
As always, and with everything, if you don't like it, you don't have to participate. How are you contributing anything positive to the board with your fucking reaction faces and "implying" horse shit? Leave people alone to do what makes them happy. Not everything here has to appeal to you personally, and speaking up every time you see someone doing something that is different than the way you do it to say "I don't personally enjoy that" is worthless.
Can we just finally once and for all admit that /p/ is not about photography, or a community hoping to revolve around photography, and that it is now just a collection of people who come here to argue with people they view as being different from them, and to see exactly what they want to see personally, and to loudly, repetitively, and ignorantly trash literally anything and everything else?
>>2759566
>NG posting a pic of a ginger dog trying to be the alpha male
Keep dreaming, buddy.
>>2759573
I read it more like "this wasn't meant to be a fuck you to Iggy".
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2048 Image Height 1365
>>2759444
It's not even been mentioned on facebook as far as I have seen
Iggy himself doesn't give two fucks about this thread, for sure, and neither do any of the "tripfag cabal"
>>2759578
>inb4 I get fucking flamed for not knowing shit
Who took this?
>>2759624
http://twistedsifter.com/2013/12/traffic-lights-in-the-fog-by-lucas-zimmerman/
The little arrow next to the post number gives a drop-down menu where one of the options is image search. It's helpful for stuff like that.
that's a nice idea, greets for the initiative
I will send some pics if I get to scan negs in time...
bump for best thread atm.
Okay, I'm alright with the voting process, but I'm not the happiest about the "randomize" process.
What if the photos I want to send in are in a series? If you're letting me submit 3 photos, I was planning on sending a series of 3 that go together. In your randomized voting method, the likelihood of all three making it in is low.
>>2760180
I also am condensed with this.
the problem is i have to give (you) a person i don't know my money before there is even a product. with the /p/ book i buy it from the website not from iggy. i don't know what you what you will do with my cash.
>>2760256
OP should sell them through etsy. Just let orders come in for a certain amount of time then go print the books once he knows how many are needed (can always print more after).
If OP disappears without delivering the hooks just open a dispute on paypal and get your money back
Bump cause link told me to.
I don't get why you fags are hating on a curated edition.
>>2760180
I hadn't considered photo series, it was meant more like "submit your three best photos". If I did put your photos together, what would happen if only one or two of them got voted in? I'd rather not turn this into a "vote for the photog" contest, considering our limited number of pages.
>>2760256
Payments will be via paypal, and they'll be clearly indicated as payment for a product, so you can reverse/dispute with paypal if anything goes wrong.
>>2760278
Does this give us any advantages? Payment will be thorough paypal anyway so I don't see what we'd gain. If I was actually selling this I'd absolutely take nice photos of the product, write nice descriptions, and market this shit out of it, but I'm making zero profit here so there's really no point.
33 submissions as of today!
>>2760369
Doing it through PayPal only give no protection to the buyer if they gift you the money and gives you no protection if it's jot a gift + additional fees and taxes. I'm not suggesting you market it I'm suggesting you do it through another site to protect yourself and the buyers
>>2760369
>33 submissions
Photos or allready 33 x 3 photos submitted?
>>2760369
i think you should be able to veto whatever photo that detracts from the final selection as a whole. popular vote works lots of times, but not ALL the time. consider it.
>>2760371
Interesting. I've never tried to sell anything directly via PP before, but it seems like (as long as I do the actual "invoicing" through paypal), I'm covered under "seller protection" (which just means "we'll actually do the dispute process instead of defaulting judgment to the sender). It seems like the combined Etsy fees would be around 10%, while PP would be closer to 4%. I'll look at this in more detail though, thanks for the tips!
>>2760473
That was number of photos in total. Interestingly, a few people only submitted one or two photos.
>>2761114
well i only submitted one photo that i'd like to see printed. thats also what i did for the uncurated one because of the orientation issues.
what i would consider the 3 best of the year are one horizontal one square and one portrait orientation. so i just sticked with the one i liked best.
will the voting be in categories, will there be any categories at all?
or is it just voting for the best photos and those are then arrangend into the book how it fits best?
Good idea for those that want a curated book, plenty of people asked for one in my thread.
Now I don't have to create one :3
>>2761153
>Now I don't have to create one :3
Fuck off you lazy cunt, you better finish what you already started
>>2761156
Says the lazy cunt who would never be bothered to do this.
>>2761158
What's the status on the non-curated book
>>2761114
You better make sure you send each book recorded delivery, paypal are a bunch of cunts and require a ton of proof if a buyer disputes. It's ridiculously easy to get your money back on a PayPal only sale
BWAHAHAHAHA! THIS TRAIN WRECK OF A THREAD IS STILL ALIVE!
>>2761158
Iggy you worthless Briazilian cunt! You promised me a ride on your yacht! I demand a yacht ride!
>>2761214
reminder that the only reason posters like this aren't banned is because most of /p/ doesn't bother using the report function
>>2761225
reminder that the fact that you have sand in your vagina doesn't mean that a post making fun of something is a reportable offense
>>2761240
purposefully shitting up threads is a reportable offence
if we all worked towards actually using the report system there would be less people that think capslock reaction image is a good post
>>2761270
>purposefully shitting up threads is a reportable offence
Hate to break it to you, but this thread was shit long before that comment.
And you must be terribly new here if you think the report system really does anything on /p/. The ONLY time I've ever seen /p/ band together, use it, and get active janitor/mod participation was around 2010(ish?) when we had this copypasta spamming war related to trips. The mods only came in and did something that time because it was effectively shutting the board down.
We're generally left to our own devices here, which is fine since shit's never really that bad.
>>2761156
I knew this would fucking happen i dont blame him if i put my hard work into a book only to see someone else throw it all back in my face by making their own id quit too.
FUCK YOU OP.
>>2761595
obviously
book up
>>2761469
Been in contact with mods and they said nothing is deleted because hardly anything is reported. The day we talked they said something like 5 reports for the whole board were filed.
For a few days after that myself and several other people reported threads more often but it seems that anything that isn't blatant Photoshop requests isn't understood to be someone shitting up a thread, unlike the time in which one of isi's threads was sent to a mod and they banned one person that was shitting up the thread, deleted a bunch of posts, and banned isi for fanning the flames.
So, the report system does do something on /p/, it's just that people aren't using it. Hence the attempts at trying to get people interested in cleaning up the board because if people actually try then it will work.
>>2762485
Pathetic beta fuckboy behavior. Have you ever considered that what you consider to be toxic shitposting is in fact just the usual board culture on 4chan and that's why no one reports it? If it seems like everyone is driving the wrong direction on the freeway, it might just be you. There are much nicer, much more moderated photography boards on the internet. Go there.
>inb4 you report me.
Snitches get stitches.
>>2762533
post up
>>2762533
It's possible, but it seems not many people report threads that objectively need to go either, judging by how long it takes for them to be deleted. This was up for several hours http://fgts.jp/p/thread/2761708/
It's also possible that rampant shitposting has become the board culture (or just a vocal minority according to the mod) because no one reports it.
You really should sage posts not pertaining to the OP since we're off on a tangent. Slow board etc
>>2762533
P.S. I'm all about making the board a better place, but it doesn't start with being a faggot tattle-tale. It starts with you and me making constructive, positive threads instead of Gear Thread #35028 and Recent Photo Toilet #10229.
It starts with personal responsibility and not responding to the obvious trolls. Trolls don't exist in a vacuum. A shitty post doesn't truly become a shitpost until someone responds to it. An unrequited shitty post has no power. The responder is thus equally as guilty of trashing the board as the troll. Do you ever wonder why Alex's threads are always a place of serene tranquility? It's because he's never responded to trolls. Not once, in the seven or so years he's been here.
>>2762533
>Have you ever considered that what you consider to be toxic shitposting is in fact just the usual board culture on 4chan and that's why no one reports it?
Have you ever considered that that usual shitposting behavior is why this place is a cesspool with no good photos, and a bunch of angry retards arguing about the length of someone else's dick?
>>2762544
Making good posts won't somehow remove all the bad posts, it won't even drown them out because all it takes is one person to get a thread off track according to the mod's observations in the isi thread, and how nice the board was for a few days after the bans that resulted.
>>2762544
>P.S. I'm all about making the board a better place, but it doesn't start with being a faggot tattle-tale. It starts with you and me making constructive, positive threads instead of Gear Thread #35028 and Recent Photo Toilet #10229.
This has been the attitude for a couple of years now, and it gets us nowhere. You can build the nicest room anyone has ever seen, but all it takes is two people to come crashing through the window in the middle of a fight about one person from alabama to destroy it. In stead of just re-building the room over and over again, why not just kick those two people out?
Imagine how great this place would be if everyone had a persistent ID, that you could filter, and never have to see that one guy who goes around fucking every thread again?
A few weeks ago, one guy was banned from the board, and this place was a burgeoning garden of learning and critique for a few days, and then one day, like the flipping of a light switch, every thread was suddenly full of hate and violently subjective attacks again.
Rational non-violent protest does nothing against the mentally ill. Time has proven this. If some people want to report the faggots, let them. How does it affect you in any way, unless it is in fact you who is the faggot, unhappy that his toys are being taken away?
>>2762546
>>2762548
See the second part of my post. It's not just about making good threads, it's about not being a self-indulgent twat who just can't help but argue with trolls. Ignore the trolls, and they have little-to-no power.
You guys can report all you want, I'm just saying that anyone who's spent even a little bit of time on 4chan can tell you that the faggot mods are all but nonexistent. I also hope that you guys aren't just reporting trolls, but the morons who respond to trolls and enable them.
I also think that you have some confirmation bias about the supposed salad days following isi's shitstorm. You got some people removed, a minor victory on your part, and so you're predisposed towards thinking that the board was suddenly better. I can tell you from my end that the trolling never let up, and that you had the effect of a removing one bucket's worth of spit from the ocean.
>>2762485
Here's why you're full of shit: If the stuff you were bitching about was against the rules, and you were reporting it the way you said, then the mods would've done something.
But one of two things is true: (1) You're not even taking your own fucking advice and reporting, or (2) it's not breaking the rules and the janitors don't give a shit about your whining.
Grow the fuck up.
>>2762552
>Ignore the trolls, and they have little-to-no power.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2012/02/28/dont-feed-the-trolls-is-bad-science/
>>2762565
how many isi threads have you posted this in already lol
>>2762566
If I ignore you, will you go away?
>>2762566
how many isi threads have you trolled and shitposted in?
>>2762569
Too late to find out.
>>2762572
Zero. She craves the attention and the (You)s and I am loathe to grant it.
I have, however, seen that same link posted in a few isi threads and a few general state-of-the-board threads. It makes me chuckle every time, like somehow posting a link to a nothing blog written by nobody counts as a Win.
>>2759566
NG when are you doing landscapes again
Where the fuck is the photobook Iggy was doing?
>>2762727
march
Started a new job, framing a show in April, been busy.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 5D Mark II Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1.1 (Macintosh) Photographer Reagan Davis Pufall Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:12:02 20:15:51 Exposure Time 1/60 sec F-Number f/16.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/16.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Subject Distance 0.56 m Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2762822
not sure if he silently will go on working on it, or if he just threw everything away bc of this thread.
i would be happy to see both books tho.
one that was voted on by whomever ( hows op going to take care of people manipulating others to vote for theirs?)
and the just send your shit and ill print it by iggy.
if the iggy book doesnt get to expensive i might even consider buying both. if anyone of them gets finished before the year ends
>>2762882
Just print a RPT and staple that together.
That's what you're waiting for.
>>2762949
i'm still curious what it will be.
i guess there are enough good peolple who submitted their stuff for the book and i also guess that there are enough people who know theyre shit and didnt submit because of that.
I've submitted to both
what size images should we submit? 1000px too small?
>>2763197
1000pixels at 300dpi prints slightly larger than 3 inches. Do you want your photos printed larger than that?
>>2763199
just wondering because im not sure if i have all my metadata still and some stuff i only saved at 1000px. also wondering because i was planning on making some 4x6 prints may not be able to go back and save some of my shots larger than 1000px.
>>2763214
>some stuff i only saved at 1000px.
goddamn son. you memed yourself good.
>>2763223
all the pics i upload to flickr are 1000px, same with 4chan, didnt have the forsight to think about printing. only been shooting since Christmas
>>2763225
storage is cheap, buy an external, you never know when you might actually learn how to edit the pics you take propoerly and go back and find a gem you tool accidentally. 1o00px is useless for anyhtign except facebook
>>2763232
Or just export your metadata every once in a while. An .xml file is tiny.
>>2763232
i just dont like saving the same file multiple times for different sizes. also, i dont like showing full size shots because my kit lens isnt as sharp as my tele so something like this shot pixel peeped at 6000px wouldnt look that great
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD. Camera Model PENTAX K-3 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Windows) Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 27 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 99999999 dpi Vertical Resolution 99999999 dpi Image Created 2016:02:07 11:51:07 Exposure Time 1/40 sec F-Number f/3.5 Exposure Program Not Defined ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/3.5 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Close View
>>2761153
Thanks Iggy. You should really still do yours though! I'm looking forward to it.
In other news, 54 photos total submitted as of today! We're halfway to the deadline for submissions, voting will start a day or two after. Do you guys think 2 weeks was too long for submissions? (it's not going to change now, but for next time)
>>2763406
If we don't get iggys book you can get the fuck out of here with your costco shit.
>>2763411
Seconded
>>2763411
id be very happy if you dont get that piece of shit book from that unaccountable brazilian manchild. i think OP is a good guy thats doing an amazing work.
thank you OP. thank you costco.
>>2763411
I really want to see Iggy's book
For science
See wich one is the best, the curated, or the non-curated
>>2763503
this. also to know what to do in the upcoming years
I've seen all the submissions to the Iggybook, and it actually doesn't look that bad.
People are better at self censoring than the RPTs have led us to believe I guess.
>>2763855
Plus the RPT represents not the very best that someone has shot in a year. That's what morons seem to forget around here
>>2763855
what percentage is total shit?
My worry is that someone's snapshit of their dog on a couch that they think is great or a troll submitting shit on purpose could make the rest lack credibility
(since /p/ is a well-known bastion of credibility...)
>>2763855
how many are there?
>>2763855
Well I guess that you've got some sort of pressure on you when it's not curated
You tend to send only the best, what you want to represent you as a photographer
But if it's a vote, you might send a third picture instead of just two, because maybe people'll like it and it'll make it into the book
>>2763882
>About 10-20%?
well that would be like the last curated book then.
I'm really looking forward to seeing the result of letting p free hand.
I guess we wont see the Iggy version until the voting for this one is over, to not influence the voting.
>>2763894
its like you are responsible for yourself for the non curated one.
you can go for a maybe as a secod/third one on the voted version, it might even be people find that one to be the better one.
i would'nt like that tho, people telling me which is my best of the year.
/p will tell you you're shit based on your best or worst anyway.
book up
>>2765107
Die in a fire.
>>2765126
Just ignore his faggotry, he got reactions on the last book thread so he continued it here. He's so clearly desperate for attention, don't give him that satisfaction
>>2758686
hows the quality on costco printing compared to blurb?
>>2765131
Book up.
>>2766033
book up
>>2766857
Bump
>>2766902
More people seeing the thread = more submissions = better book. Only two days left for submissions anyway.
>>2766927
>better book. That ship sailed along time ago when it was revealed costco was publishing it.
>>2766928
>he can't afford a costco membership
Poorfag detected.
>>2766931
Enjoy your glossy shitfest designed for mums.
>>2766935
book up
LAST DAY FOR SUBMISSIONS FUCCBOIS
>>2767895
Submitted home slice
>>2758686
So.. whens voting gonna begin for this? cant wait to see what was submited
>>2769278
vote up niggers
>>2769305
Still says it's in the "Accepting Submissions" stage.
>>2769387
If you submitted you had the option of receiving an email when voting begins, no emails yet
>>2769387
not anymore
>>2769688
Ah nice that wasnt there this morning.
Waiting on my email then
I WANNA VOTE
WHERE ARE YOU OP
>>2770455
Almost done, just a few kinks to iron out. I have to go to bed now, but it'll be good to in under 24 hours. Sorry for the wait!
>>2770540
So how many photos were submitted in the end and how many of them are good ?
>>2770567
785
3
>>2770653
>3
Higher than I would've expected.
>>2770540
24 hours is up buddy.
>>2771093
No it's not. 2 hours to go.
>>2771094
2 and a half hours
>>2771097
Well, yeah.
Anyways, why didn't the non curated book happen? I was away for quite a while.
>>2771099
last thing iggy communicated was >>2761153 so no idea.
my bet is that the non curated book will still happen bc there's equaly many people who demand it and iggy still wants to be the one who made THE /p/ book. i guess its not too bad it didnt come out yet because it could influence the voting of this version.
>>2771108
>being late and unresponsible is a good thing guys!
lame.
OP, in relation to the cover, I think the image with the most votes should be the front cover, with credit given on the inside fold with explanation why it's the cover.
Is it too early to tell us how many photos will make the cut? It doesn't seem like a great many were submitted and most of them were of reasonably quality, so it's really going to have to be quite succinct.
>>2771116
>I think the image with the most votes should be the front cover
No
