True, my sentiments are very much in the minority if you take photographers as a whole, however until other professionals bite the bullet and start saying what they believe in public then the standards will continue to drop and more con artists will gain creedence.Originally posted by Kit
Ok point well taken. However Ian, you only represent a group of photographers(most probably, not even the majority) who would like to be more involved and further pursue their hobby or profession to a higher level.
Indeed it is not aimed at those people who are happy and content to take snapshots, or just shooting around, it's aimed squarely at the amateurs and professional 'artists' who pass off second rate reject bin level work that is flawed by any standard as 'art'.Originally posted by Kit
Let's not forget there are those who are just happy and contented with just shooting around. I firmly believe that everybody has the equal rights to access to photography just like you and me. They do not deserve criticism for what they're interested in doing irregardless of results. I hope your comment does not include them.
Also I should point out that experimentation is something most of the pro's and keen amateurs I know indulge in when time and inspiration permit. I still often go out for a fun shoot and wreak havoc upon a subject trying out new ideas. For me this is part of my professional development as a new technique in the arsenal can make a client a happy client.
I feel it's probably fair to say that many architectural and 'arts' based competitions whether newspaper or institutionally sponsored often pick contravesial winners to generate contraversy in the press and thus gain coverage for their particular subject and raise public awareness.Originally posted by Kit
As for high level competitions and method of judging, I still have my reserves on whether a competition or a particular panel of judges would hold a judgement that's absolutely foolproof. It shouldn't be, cos it subjective. I study architecture and we all agree, in a competition, the winning scheme is not necessary the best.
This is particularly the case with portraiture competitions on canvas using paint as the medium, the 'critic's choice and the peoples choice are often poles apart which again raises the spectre of a con job by artists and their ilk.
A well known Australian architect whom I won't name won the Australian design award a couple of times for buildings that were demonstrably hideous.
Awards like the Nikon Award work at a different level, as the entrant has to submit multiple works in most categories, so the photographer is being judged on a body of work, this helps to eliminate inconsistency in the judging, or so the theory goes.
Sadly I've seen too much third rate mateiral in the press in recent years. I won't go in to this area here as it's sensitive stuff, and might be deemed highly offensive to some, however if you'd like a frank appraisal I'm more than happy to email you my views on the current state of play in the PJ world.Originally posted by Kit
I've seen the photojournal works on the Straits Times website and frankly and personally, I don't think its anything to be proud of at all. However, I also believe that there are better and more positive ways to raise the level of "competence" in photography.