___________________________________
Purpose: To provide a regular and non-competitive venue for members to have their work reviewed by their peers. This is an opportunity for members to submit works to help improve pieces or it can also be an opportunity to simply show a piece (without critique).
Format: Digital projection only. (the club can decide to do prints as well, but that should be only after we have acquired the appropriate display easel)
Length of event: 15 to 30 minutes maximum.
Reviewers: Meeting attendees with moderation by a single volunteer.
Protocols:
- All work to be submitted by email to a designated recipient by determined date. One person should be the volunteer to have pieces sent to them and then be responsible for displaying them on the projector.
- Media should be in either .jpg or .tiff format and size formatted for best resolution of the projection device.
- No restrictions on the number of pieces submitted per person but suggest no more than 3.
- The projectionist should sequence the photos so that everyone has at least one of their submissions reviewed. We should allocate enough time that everyone will have at least one photo displayed. 2nd and 3rd pieces will be displayed as long as the time allows. If a piece is not reviewed during the meeting, then the owner will need to resubmit for the next meeting’s critique; pieces will not carry over.
- Each event, a moderator should be chosen. The moderator will be responsible for ensuring that time limits and critique standards are observed by the participants.
- When an artist’s piece is first displayed, they should have the option to briefly explain the photo or give pertinent details. After that point, the moderator will open the floor to the audience for comments. Once the comments are done or the maximum allotted time has been reached, the moderator will call for the next photo to be displayed.
- It is not required, but critiques can be associated with previous meeting’s lecture. All pieces related to a lecture should be reviewed first. If someone has submitted works not associated with the lecture, time permitting, they should be reviewed as well.
1 comment:
COMMENT FROM GENE CRUMPLER:
A year ago I volunteered to set up the competitions at CPA, but got no response. I have the Rolodex of many people who are qualified to judge camera club competitions.
Any way,I'd like to put in my two cents worth based on past experience.
As far as the monthly digital critiques are concerned I only have one comment. 20 minutes is too little time. At the various clubs I have been part of, the Critiques are the total content of one of two monthly meetings.
Print competition;
Assigned subject competitions in my experience do not work well, i.e. not many members participate. I would suggest that only one in three print competitions be assigned subjects and the other two be open.
there should not be any distinction between digital inkjet prints and other media (silver Gelatin, etc.). The Chapel Hill club nearly split up on this issue in 1999 (silver Vs digital)
This issue may not be a major consideration, except for the few of us who still do darkroom B&W work.
The standard scoring system used by PSA (Photographic Society of America- for those who do not know if it) is considered the universal standard for clubs, at lest in the pre-digital age. I can explain this system in more detail, if interested-really very simple. Although I personally prefer a First, Second , Third, Honorable mention system, the PSA system seems to be less intimating to many beginning photographers, who are reluctant to go up against the highly experienced members.
As to the display of prints, The PSA specifies a standard design for showing prints. The Chapel Hill Club built a PSA standard box in 1993, when I agreed to start competitions there at that time. The club had not had competitions before, but I had a lot experience from Two Clubs in the Northern Virginia area.
Competitions are my primary interest, since I have studied and practiced photography for over 50 years. most of the technical discussions at camera clubs I can give my self and I have some specialized photo espertise, like the body of work on lens testing and the effect of diffraction on photographic sharpness.
The PSA box produces an EVA value of 13 on the print surface. John Sexton recommends that an EVA of 9 be used for viewing. The problem with the EV-13 lighting is that people tent to print a bit too dark for best showing at EV-13 Prints. EV-9 (more normal viewing conditions) makes the prints to be a bit dark! Teh parctical consequence of this difference is that I use to have to reprint lighter prints for exhibition use.
Post a Comment