Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
I meant it WRT to judges, not the forum posters.
I have sat through a session where what I thought were thoughtful sensitively taken images were brushed over (not mine in the case in mind so it was not the personal touch though I have felt that :-0 ) by someone who could not see what the photographer was doing/striving for. There are images I look at that pass me by but I can appreciate where thought and care is taken.
The most recent case I can think of started off with a list of things he does not like before he had even seen any images. That to me shoes a closed mind. Not everyone will like a particular image, but you could at least look. Its like me saying I hate portraits so all portraits will be dismissed. The truth is even if you are not into a particular subject area every now and then you will stop on an image and admire it. Well I will.
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
...or it could be likened to saying; "I hate birds on a stick." and having the award galleries peppered with them. Are they just a number in a quota system?
Imo, there is no such thing as an impartial, or objective judge. For a judge to say something like; I don't like this method, or that method, means to me they have disqualified themselves from judging. For example, many entrants will lose out because of the judges personal agenda. How can a judge be a critic, and use their prejudices as points of critisism? If the truth were known, strong dislikes in a judge might indicate weaknesses in their own photography skills, or understanding. What would a judge like the one mentioned by the OP do if the competition were based on silky smooth water? He/she would be out of luck, or would they judge the competition anyway?
Quote: Imo, there is no such thing as an impartial, or objective judge. For a judge to say something like; I don't like this method, or that method, means to me they have disqualified themselves from judging. For example, many entrants will lose out because of the judges personal agenda.
I think a lot of camera club members would agree with that, StrayCat.
The problem, of course, is that there is no alternative (other than a panel of judges chosen for having complementary personal preferences). Because photography, at competition level, is an art rather than a science, there can be no such thing as objectivity. Even the more "scientific" factors, such as camera or processing technique, are hugely subjective then, when you come to more esoteric matters, such as composition, there is really no possibility of consensus.
One thing that every camera club member does is look up, in advance, the personal website of the judge to see what style of photography they do. But even that leads to a dilemma - do you enter prints or digital images of the judges chosen style in the hope she will like them or do you avoid that style or genre in the fear that she will be super-critical of them?
But this is becoming a whole new discussion. The point of the original post was merely to pass on a suggestion for getting rid of milky water, if you are so inclined.
.....and just to proceed with the sideline discussion, my own "pet hates" about judges are:
1. With prints, their insistence upon examining them more closely than the "natural viewing distance" of 4 or 5 times the diagonal.
2. With digital images, their insistence upon examining them at 100% pixel level rather than at a normal size on a monitor or projector (with the same criterion of viewing distance as above)
Quote: One thing that every camera club member does is look up, in advance, the personal website of the judge to see what style of photography they do.
Think you might be pushing it with the "every member" bit. It's not something I have done or would ever bother doing.
I really can't take competitions that seriously, It's interesting to get feedback but if it's not the judges cup of tea then I ain't bothered - I accept people are fallible and make mistakes
Quote: 1. With prints, their insistence upon examining them more closely than the "natural viewing distance" of 4 or 5 times the diagonal.
When looking at prints we are voting for in competitions that the members judge, I like to view very closely to see what the printing is like, as some can be diabolical & you can also see dodgy photoshop work. It led to one instance of my going home after, a particular shot had won to do some research on the internet, only to find it had been printed directly from a stock site. Needless to say it was then disqualified.
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
1st March 2014 - 31st March 2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View March's Photo Month Calendar