November 12, 2012 at 6:25 pm #1987
Proposal for 2013-2014 Season
The Print and PDI competition classes are different with prints having 3 classes General, Nature, and Mono. PDI have only 2 classes Nature and General.
At present a member can enter 6 prints in each league competition 3 Mono and 3 either Nature or a mixture of general and nature but no more than 3 prints in total. So in a year a member can enter 18 prints in leagues and a further 6 in the Portrait competition giving a total of 24 images.
At present a member can only enter 3 PDI images in each league competition a total of 9 images in the year.
Some members do not enter any Print competitions at all so are being put at a great disadvantage as they do not get any comments on their work and so may not improve at the same rate as those who enter both types of competition. One of the other considerations to is the cost of entering competitions with prints, even using recycled mounts it will cost probably £2 an entry at least, where as PDI’s have no consumable costs. This combined with the hassle of getting images printed could be the deterrent to members entering Print Competitions
I would therefore propose that we alter the entry criteria to the same as the L&CPU, with 2 Mono, 2 Nature, and 2General images in both PDI and Print competitions.
We now have some 30 plus members contributing to PDI Comps so we would have possibly some 180 images to judge, this could be a problem in the time available from 8pm to 10pm but could we not start at 7.30pm and finish at 10.15pm on competition nights, or have a combination of prints and PDI on all competition nights.
How long should a judge comment on an image? Some waffle on it seems to put in time with not much to say. They could get a move on and limit each dissertation to say 1 minute which may be then manageable.
My point is to try and have more Mono images and to give an even playing field to all members.
I know this would probably cause Administrative mayhem but the number of images could be limited to one per category if too many entries came in, I am sure a way could be found to give it a try.
What do members think?
.November 12, 2012 at 7:15 pm #1989
I agree Wallace that the prints outnumber the PDIs and that those members who don’t enter the prints are at a dissadvantage and therefore something needs to be done to redress the situation, even if members decide not to enter the prints they at least have been given the opportunity to enter. The cost factor for the prints is another issue, because of printing and mounting.
I would certainly back any ammendment for next years programme, by levelling out the dissparrity between the competitions is a good idea. But I think it may take a while to get everyone to agree to the details.November 12, 2012 at 7:43 pm #1990
You’ve raised some valid and interesting points there Wallace.
If members want advice on their photographs but don’t want to enter competitions the forum is the ideal tool for that.
I don’t think we would be allowed to run over to 10:15 and we’re often told we need to be out for 10 sharp. I think members who work may struggle to get to the library for 7.30, but 7.45 might be better?
I agree that I’d like to see more black and white work, but not many members seem to do a lot black and white photography. It would be good if the club could find a way to encourage members to do more black and white work. Someone recently suggested to me that we should have an 4th competition night instead of one of the open nights. Perhaps it could be dedicated to black and white.November 12, 2012 at 7:55 pm #1992
I have been saying recently how hard it is to narrow down an entire years work into just 9 images if I only enter PDI’s. Pro rata it would take over 2 1/2 years to display the same number of PDI’s as prints allowed in 12 months and it is frustrating and does feel unfair. In some way those 9 images become so important that I loose the plot and inevitably make the wrong choice at the last minute because I have lost the will to live. I am sure it will get easier as time goes on but I cannot be the only beginner who finds it hard.
I would heartily support an increase in the amount of PDI’s that can be entered in any individual competition in order to redress the balance with prints. Possibly we could have a portrait PDI competition? I will attempt to try to enter prints but at the moment am finding the cost a problem. I cannot afford to make any costly mistakes either. I have a decision to make in the next few days on the print score.
I am sure the workload is already heavy for those who organise the competitions and we must of course have consideration for this (maybe some help could be given to spread the load)… but of course only those who wish to enter more images need to do so. Entering the maximum number allowed is never compulsary.
Thanks for bringing this up Wallace.November 13, 2012 at 12:52 pm #1996
Newer members may not realise that we have to put proposals for major changes to the members at the AGM, so any changes will not take effect until next year.
If we present a large number of images to a judge we clearly will not get as long a commentary about each image, but the quality of the comment may suffer too. Also, if the judge is marking on the spot it is very difficult to assess a large number satisfactorily.
I see no reason to change the rules for the prints. We should be proud to be able to put on a good show still, some clubs have abandoned them! Of course we would have to reconsider if numbers declined but at present we are OK.
In the survey of clubs conducted last year we were asked how many images a judge should be presented with, as a maximum. The average was 86 and the maximum 150. 90-ish is a good number, it fills the evening and allows a reasonable time for each image. 150 I personally think is too high – and remember that this answer may come from a club which has more time.
I think we could increase our entry number – we have a built in way of reducing the numbers if we need to.
I would be against any move to limit entries in a section. I think it may force people to enter and images obtained like that are rarely people’s best.
Marking is another thing we could discuss. Some clubs have a 1st, 2nd and 3rd, highly commended, commended, and then nothing. It means that 75% of people get no mark, just a comment. What do you all feel about that? It is still possible to do a League total using this menthod; 1st gets 20, 2nd 19, 3rd 18, HC 17 C16, then everyone else gets 15. This way there is no poor soul getting a bunch of 8s and giving up. We do this kind of thing for the Annuals now.
More comps? I get the impression that people would not be happy with more – but we can ask!
Do remember that we have the KO where you can try out your images, though there is no comment.November 13, 2012 at 2:29 pm #2002
Personally I would rather get an 8 (I can feel it coming soon) than nothing at all to look back and build on. There are a few amongst us who due to their years of experience, knowledge and considerable talent will always be up there in the top scoring elite and deservedly so. But to me any score is part of the taking part and I would hate to lose that. I think even beginners are starting to understand that one judges meaty 20 is anothers poisonous 13 as happened recently and are learning to accept it as part of the experience.
My only frustration is that if I do not enter prints I can only enter 9 images for a whole year. No one however wants to swop quality for quantity so I suspect this issue will be difficult to resolve. If you divide the number of images by minutes per meeting / competition excluding the break, it would not give long per image if we increase numbers. Indeed it could possibly not equate at all as 120 mins – a 15 min tea break leaves 105 mins. Having thought it through on that basis after my initial reaction … I do get Johns point. 150 images (even 100 seems tight) into 105 minutes allowing for critique just does not go. However even the odd chance when entry numbers are very low to put an extra one in at the Chairs discretion would always be appreciated if the facility were written in to allow for that. I will however try my best to get into prints as my own personal solution.
Nothing is ever as simple as it first appears.
November 13, 2012 at 3:30 pm #2004
- This reply was modified 5 years, 9 months ago by D. Williams.
There lies so many complex issues and view points and what is viable.There are downsides to the league system that are never addressed.I have experienced as described by John-1st. 2nd. 3rd. and the Highly Commendeds and so on and it was what we accepted . But there was a significent difference. There would be an annual exhibition with each member permitted so many entries. The exhibits–your years best work were then judged. The imense joy was having your work exhibited and an award was a bonus. With the league system –for me -the down side is although many more entries are permitted all the work and expense you put in can only be viewed by your fellow members for a few seconds. In any village annual fruit and veg. show each others produce can and is seen on display for all to see. Also as judging is so subjective–some good work is put up for its few seconds of fame to be slagged off without proper appraisal and marked down because the judge is expected to mark from zero to twenty. Why did we buy our camera”s in the first place-A–to produce creative photo”s that we enjoy and hope others do–or B– To produce creative photo”s that others will see for just a few seconds in a rat race for points . I know the joy experienced on the international 3d forum where there is no competition but the joy of each others images and the help and support given. You pay your money and take your choice. And in words of wisdom–if things don”t change–they will stay as they are. tru in it??November 13, 2012 at 9:25 pm #2005
My theory does not carry much water. In the dark days–long ago–it mattered to have your photo”s seen . As with most changes over time that does not seem to be so now. It is noticable how few members have created a gallery. Winning awards and high points would seem to be the main priority , and nothing wrong with that if thats the in thing –so be it.November 14, 2012 at 9:22 am #2009
Thanks for all the thoughtful replies – keep ’em coming!!
I think it will take time to get things going on the Forum/Gallery. We have a good start through “importing” all you good folk from the Forum Paul started but it will take a while to get the others contributing.
On commenting time: we used to have commentaries on the L&CPU Folios and I did the one for the MONO prints a couple of times. It is easy to say all you need to in one minute pre printbut it took me several days to decide what to say in that one minute!! You couldn’t possibly achieve that one the spot.
We have until next March to get it right!November 15, 2012 at 12:38 pm #2023
Interesting comments and proposal, Wallace.
First some figures based on last year’s competition entries 2011-2012.
40 members competed in total.
17 in PDi competitions only
2 in Print only competitions
21 in both PDI and Print competitions
10 in Mono Print competitions.
So a disparity does exist (at least last season) between PDI only and Print competitors in the number of images exposed to a Judge’s comments.
As Wallace says, 9 in League but also a further 3 in Annual competition for PDI only entrants making 12 for a full entry.
For Print workers the same numbers apply but for Colour plus Mono prints. So for a full entry, league and Annual, 12 for Colour and a further 12 for Mono, making a prospective total of 24.
Then there’s the possibility of an additional 6 for a full portrait entry.
That’s a substantial quantity of comment which is not always of a substantial quality!
However, do we need to change much in our competition arrangements to fill the gap?
A considerable measure of advice and help can be obtained by assessing a Judge’s evaluation of images other than your own. I know it’s not the same as having your image dissected before everyone but it can help.
Anyway, as Ken says, it’s the fun and pleasure of presenting images for others to look at not the points chasing or what the Judges think!
The notable feature of last year’s figures above is the abysmal number of members who entered Monochrome images. This is the area we should be concentrating on.
We, CPS, have a reputation for producing fine Monochrome images but they seem to be produced by fewer and fewer members.
I would be more inclined to support an idea which would encourage more members to take up Mono and I’m afraid that PDIs probably aren’t the best medium for quality Monochrome. But then I’m biased to prints!
Tom.November 15, 2012 at 1:19 pm #2025
DO YOU KNOW TOM I HAVE WITH MY DISABILITY WORK SO HARD –FOR THE MERE JOY –OF USING FILM WITH A SUPERB WERRAMATIC CAMERA. HOPING TO SUBMIT SOME MONO -THE REAL THING.. NOT WANTING TO PROCESS THE NEGS MYSELF NOW–I WENT TO TOP CLASS FIRMS–ILFORDS FOR ONE–AND THE PROCESS IS UTTER RUBBISH—-GRAIN –VERY BAD. SEE IF I CAN FIND ONEDecember 1, 2012 at 8:08 am #2231
Some interesting statistics there in Tom’s reply, but the number of PDIs you can submit is a maximum of 9, not 12. The images entered into the Annual can only be images already submitted to the League Competitions. You can modify them (within sensible limits) but they have to be the same images.
As someone keen to find new images, or rather a wider choice of images, for external competitions I would be supportive of any practical idea which increased the number of images we see from you all. The Forum is one place where new work can be shown and there are already one or two on here that have potential.
Returning to our competitions though it is possible to go up to 4 images per competition at least, without affecting the judging too much. ESPECIALLY IF WE HAVE A NEW ADDITIONAL SECTION. This section could be MONO on two occasions and a SPECIAL TOPIC on another. Including MONO makes a lot of sense since there is such a section in the L&CPU competitions and we have some members who are very keen on mono.
What about allowing PDIs in the Maurice Ashwin?
What about allowing SOME new images in the ANNUAL? (Say 1 new in an entry of 4)
Lastly, don’t forget the PDI KNOCK-OUT is another way of “testing” your images. Even though the method of marking is flawed (two good images come up and one has to go, two poor and one stays) it is a good test of audience reaction.
If we make changes we will needs to think again about how we score the League totals.
And/Or can we stand another PDI League Comp? 4 rather than 3?
BTW, notice how many times Margaret said “They said it would be better in mono”. Tom is right that a print is best but a mono PDI can be a better rendition of a subject, even if the tonal range (not to mention the vagaries of projection) is not as good in a print.December 1, 2012 at 12:11 pm #2232
I’d be very interested in Mono PDI.
(Unless I’m making my own – mono – prints from negs in a darkroom, I’m not convinced of the superiority of prints. In my experience, having digital colour files printed by a lab is a very hit-and-miss process compared with mono darkroom work, because you simply don’t have as much control over the outcome. Doing your own digital colour printing is only marginally better – but even to do that is, for many, prohibitively expensive.)
Anyway, that’s all a side issue – let’s have Mono PDIs!December 1, 2012 at 9:33 pm #2235
I know I am not heard in the same way as others by what I say and how I put it, but I am not keen on having to put in nature because unless you meet the very high quality you have NO chance. As for everyone getting the say 15 score under 17 what is the point. I have scored very very low this year so far but at least I know my place and position I would rather know my placing..December 1, 2012 at 10:18 pm #2237
Personally, as a relatively new member I have a struggle to find images which are not in Mono. I mostly shoot in colour and convert because it gives more options. Sometimes if I feel the setting / subject just demands it I will shoot in mono straight from the camera.
Regarding Ians comments about printing Mono images, I recently had my first ever prints done for next weeks comp and had to discount my two favourite images as they came out nowhere near as punchy as hoped for. One I was not happy with when I sent it and was proved right but the other just came out quite a bit darker than on screen. As others were perfect it is hard to say where the blame lies. I have learnt from the experience and will be much more careful myself next time.
Easily all three of my submitted prints could have been Mono and I know that Meg also is a fan …… so worry not Tom … there must be more of us out there!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.