Photography club

Dael_Pix said:
I was thinking about joining my local club. I looked at their website and their photos what members had taken. I wasn't impressed, so I didn't bother joining.
Click to expand...

I can't comment on specific cases, but possibly there is a case for the defense (and note I am NOT a club member!). I went to an exhibition by a reasonably local photographic society and felt the same, but I was able to have a chat with one of the members, possibly a committee member. He explained that the exhibition wasn't of the club's best work; rather it was an opportunity for all the members, regardless of ability, to display their work.

So, on that basis, and if that was also the intent of the web site, is it reasonable to expect that everyone who is a member is skilled? Perhaps they joined to learn; and that implies members (or speakers, in which case it's the organising members who are ultimately responsible for that) who are willing and able to teach and/or encourage.

When I look at photographs, and work out why I think an image fails, I generally learn more than I would have done by looking at one that succeeds. It's usually easier to see why something works than why it doesn't (and if you doubt that, try looking at a piece of computer software code!). So, dare I say that joining a club of poor photographers might be a better learning experience?
 
StephenM said:
(and if you doubt that, try looking at a piece of computer software code!).
Click to expand...
Thank you but no thanks. After 35 years of fixing other peoples' code I'd rather have my eyes scooped out with a table spoon!

Back on topic, however: the problem that I found with clubs (and I've visited quite a few around the country) is just how stifling they seem. There's always a coterie who dictate what's good or bad and what's in or out. This group always seem to be made up of minor characters from Midsomer Murders and they always seem to have an obsession with "quality", which they equate entirely with what they like.

That I kept searching out these groups indicates just how boring four nights a week in a British hotel actually is. :tumbleweed:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Sky
Spurgeon (19th century preacher) tells the story of an old lady he visited, whose only available place of worship had as the minister a rather dry (and rather theologically unsound) person. Spurgeon asked the lady how she could derive any benefit from the sermons she heard there. "Ah", she said, "I just add a few "nots" here and there and then I find the sermons helpful".

Everything depends on your attitude and approach I suppose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
Most but not all Camera Clubs are affiliated to the Photographic Alliance of Great Britain which has 1000 clubs with and average of just over 30 members per club. This suggest that most clubs are very small and everybody will know everyone so inevitably they will tend to converge on their likes. I used to be in such a club just over 20 years ago but then moved on to my current club which is one of the largest 130+ members. The Committee thus has to work hard to provide for a wide range of interest (not just their own). It is in such a club that almost anyone can find an interest and almost certainly another member with similar interests. The standard is inevitable higher. If you want to win lots of club competitions join a small club but you might make little progress. With a large club, it will be very difficult to win but the challenge should improve your photography.

Dave
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
In all seriousness: how will it improve your photography?
Click to expand...
I’ll bite.

My photography improved as it exposed me to the work of better, more experienced photographers, both in terms of other members and from the speakers we had come to the club. It gave me a benchmark to aim for, and exposed me to new ideas and techniques. As a direct consequence of this I was encouraged to do an ARPS distinction which helped me up the standard again in terms of printing, image selection, etc. Without these experiences, I’d never have had the confidence or quality of work to have exhibitions, print sales, or the other stuff like being featured in magazines, commissioned by O2, etc. That’s not to say that this is the only to improve as a photographer - I know some people who were no better when I left the club as when I joined - but it’s a good a way as any if you approach it with the right attitude and find the right club.

I’m no longer in a traditional club as my photography went in a different direction, and I got fed up of the constant stream of what I regarded as mediocre speakers and little variation in the program. However I am in a local monochrome group, and do occasionally visit another local camera club who are great, as well as regularly giving talks to clubs so I’ve still got a lot of respect for what they do.

Your experience may vary of course.
 
viewfromthenorth said:
I was encouraged to do an ARPS distinction which helped me up the standard again in terms of printing, image selection, etc.
Click to expand...
So, it made your photography fit with a particular "market"?

If that's what you were aiming for and you succeeded as a result of joining the club, then your membership was of benefit to you.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
So, it made your photography fit with a particular "market"?

If that's what you were aiming for and you succeeded as a result of joining the club, then your membership was of benefit to you.
Click to expand...
No, my photography is nothing like the majority of camera club photography. The point I was trying to make was that I took what I learned from my experience in the club and applied it in a different direction.

I had no aims when I joined the club, a friend from a nightschool photography course suggests we go along after the course finished. I didn’t even know camera clubs existed before that point, so didn’t know what to expect.

Would I join another? Not at this point. I’ve no interest in competitions, and my photographic interests are mainly documentary rather than the composites / studio / landscape / wildlife that dominate the club scene. It is nice to be in the company of like minded people though.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
So, it made your photography fit with a particular "market"?

If that's what you were aiming for and you succeeded as a result of joining the club, then your membership was of benefit to you.
Click to expand...
How would you describe 'improving one's photography'?
 
Tried a couple of clubs in the past and found both to be very similar in how they were run and promoted the art of Photography. They didn't float my boat so left never to return and they left me with no interest of joining any other local photography clubs. Each to thier own though.
 
Ed Sutton said:
How would you describe 'improving one's photography'?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't. To my way of thinking, different people wish to derive very different outcomes from their photography and the only real definition of success is made by the photographer. Just a few possible definitions are...

winning a competition
selling a picture for a high price
using a photo to influence the opinions of others
documenting an experiment or an archeological find
providing evidence for one side to win a trial in court
recording a process to train others
​
There are, I'm sure, many others that I haven't thought of and indeed of which I never would think.
 
You've now shifted the goalposts from "improving" to "succeeding", and ducked the actual question thereby.

I understand you don't like clubs; let's leave it at that.

I was very forcibly struck by the "definition" you left out though. I wonder how many others will spot it, and whether others will note the subconscious (I assume) bias revealed thereby. That's my last on this as I leave it as an exercise to the reader to spot the omission :)
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I wouldn't. To my way of thinking, different people wish to derive very different outcomes from their photography and the only real definition of success is made by the photographer.
Click to expand...
Okay. So how would you define improvement in your photography?
 
StephenM said:
I was very forcibly struck by the "definition" you left out though. I wonder how many others will spot it, and whether others will note the subconscious (I assume) bias revealed thereby. That's my last on this as I leave it as an exercise to the reader to spot the omission :)
Click to expand...
I did not spot producing images to meet one own satisfaction. This might thus be a combination of various criteria such as technical or artistic.

Sometimes, I plan a photograph and go out to capture it which would certainly fit with landscapes. On the other hand I might attend a sports event and be unsure what opportunities might occur. For me, I do not have fixed criteria but if the captured image is technically correct and esthetically pleasing, it is fine for me but, if entering in a competition and it is successful, that is just a bonus.

Dave
 
Dave Canon said:
if the captured image is technically correct and esthetically pleasing, it is fine
Click to expand...
This could be revealing. Those two criteria seem to apply to a photograph as an item of decor, whereas to me the essence of a photograph is its meaning.
 
droj said:
This could be revealing. Those two criteria seem to apply to a photograph as an item of decor, whereas to me the essence of a photograph is its meaning.
Click to expand...
Not sure I understand meaning, but many of my shots may carry a message if that is what you mean. It is not necessary for some photography such as documentary where capturing the moment may be important.

Dave
 
Meaning is often composite, and there may be a thousand varities of it. But to me it's what makes a picture worthwhile. Documentary? Then what's documented is a good part of the meaning. Another image may concentrate on some kind of communicable emotional verity.

Perhaps meaning isn't discussed as often as it might be. But it's more vital & interesting than an invocation of the 'rule of thirds', for instance. It might be a harder thing to discuss, though, since it can transcend various convenient boxes.

Photography is about communication. I think that it's profitable to discuss in each case what's being communicated. Technique may be the scaffolding for this, but not the essence.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top