At the core of the critique process, we need to decide what methodology and goals we should pursue. There are two general philosophical avenues that we can take: Competitive or Cooperative.
Competitive
Most clubs in the area use a competitive model. On a semi-regular basis, they hold competitions and each member submits one or more pieces based upon a theme. The club asks an expert to attend and grade the pictures, picking the best of the lot.
Pros:
- This challenges the members to put forth their best work and give some real-world experience to the nature of competitions.
- Pictures and participants are put upon a level playing field and given a critical analysis of their work.
- Competitions tend to be more exciting and "fun."
Cons:
- Can be VERY intimidating for new users.
- More experienced users may consistently do well and which can dishearten beginners/intermediate artists.
Cooperative
A cooperative philosophy would look more towards the individual's improvements. Critiques would be based upon presentations by the artist and reviewed/commented by a group.
Pros:
- Critiques can be more insightful and useful to the artist. Can be most beneficial to beginner/intermediate artists.
- Encourages the individual to challenge themselves to do better.
Cons:
- More thoughtful, less exciting.
Please put in your comments on which direction we should pursue (feel free to offer alternatives).
4 comments:
I believe we should do both of these. Maybe alternate every other month.
On the competitive, I don't think we need to bring in an outside judge each time. We could instead have everyone at the meeting vote (each member getting 1, 2, or 3 votes TBD). We could make it fun by getting some ribbons and giving out a 1st, 2nd and 3rd place ribbon at each contest. Maybe charge $1 to enter which would cover the cost of the ribbons. at the end of the year we could select a photographer of the year for the club. Maybe do a simple plaque where we add a new name each year.
On the cooperative, I believe we should always start with something positive, then make 1-3 suggestions on how to improve the photograph.
I think it would be worthwhile to get a book that discusses composition (rule of thirds, diagonals, subjects entering the frame, etc) and present that as an "objective" set of criteria. We could then have members submit photos and have the group discuss them as related to the presented material.
As a take off on Heath's idea, A meet-up group I once belonged to would have a shoot on Saturday, then a show on Thursday - you could only show photos taken at the shoot. We then voted and awarded 1st 2nd and 3rd place certificates (simple desk jet printouts that cost a dime's worth of ink). Shoots could be any local place - State Capitol, Moore Square, Pullen Park, downtown Cary, etc.
Of course some people can't make Saturday, and some people claim Thursday is too soon to have a print or a jpeg, but many found this a good way to get together and interact with other members of the group.
In reference to the CON side of the discussion: I personally joined to learn more about the artistic approach to photography.. Keeping the element to critique for the purposes of improving, learning from mistakes is very helpful and it would encourage more participation. Therefore, attendees would possibly stay with the club and not quit.
The competition side of things is great and it gives us something to look forward to while growing and improving our photographic work.
In conclusion they both have their place. So, Keep them both. Since we meet twice a month there is plenty room for presentation.
Jacque J.
Post a Comment