Shenanigans at the SWPP

Status
Not open for further replies.
BarryDawsib said:
They wont reply, you have asked a relevant question :bang:
Click to expand...

Oh ye of little faith!

Terrie didn't reply, so I sent a message to Phil instead. My original message was:

Simon Coates said:
Hi Terrie,

I would have posted this question on the forum, but my posting rights were revoked a while ago.

I read with interest your posting on the "Science and Nature Competition" thread in which you said "Nature shots include plants, flowers, seeds, fungi, botany, farming, and agriculture", which seems fair enough to me. What I cannot understand, however, is how it is that photographs of domesticated cattle are repeatedly accepted (and awarded golds) within the Wildlife category.

http://www.swpp.co.uk/image_competition_oct_09/winnerspg08.htm
http://www.swpp.co.uk/image_competition_sept_09/winnerspg02.htm

These are clearly domesticated animals and are equally as captive as any animal shot in a Zoo or safari park, so surely they should not have been admissible?
Click to expand...


Phil Jones replied with:

Phil Jones said:
Hi Simon

Thank you for your interest

Would have to ascertain who judged that category in those months and what was on their minds when they awarded Golds

Kind regards

Phil Jones
Click to expand...

I have now replied to him as follows:

Simon Coates said:
Hi Phil,

Thanks for the reply.

It must have been Damien McGillicuddy who awarded the Gold to the cows in October, since he had double submissions in November's competition. Why is it not possible to have the competition judged by someone with relevant experience in the speciality? I can just imagine the uproar if you were to have a wildlife specialist judge the wedding categories! Any competent wildlife judge would have realised that domesticated animals are ineligible in a wildlife competition. The fact that these two images received awards would indicate that the judges in these instance were far from competent in this area.

When you ask a someone to judge a category that is clearly outside their normal area of experience, surely you brief them of the rules for the competition? Otherwise you are doing both them, and the specialist photographers, a grave disservice.

It is also clear that a vast number of members think that the wildlife competition is open to any picture that contains an animal. Take this month's submission for instance. Despite the fact that the rules clearly state no zoos or safari parks, this months submissions include:

Farmed sheep by ************
More sheep by ************
A tiger in a zoo by ************
Even more sheep by ************
A meerkat that appears to have a building behind it by ************
A caged gorilla by ************
Twycross Owl by ************

So a little over 13% of this month's wildlife entries are ineligible for the category into which they've been submitted.

As a professional wildlife photographer I can assure you that there is no way in which your 'partner society' will ever be taken seriously by truly professional wildlife photographers whilst the profession is treated with such disdain by the SWPP.

Kind regards


Simon Coates
Click to expand...

I also noticed that they ran a Nature competition on Friday night on their forum. Which nature specialist did they use to judge this one? To quote from the forum:

SWPP forum said:
This week's Judges

Trevor and Faye Yerbury
Trevor & Faye are 2 of the UK's top Fine Art photographers and, uniquely, Trevor is the 4th generation of his family to run the business. Trevor has been Kodak UK Portrait Photographer of the Year for which he was awarded a gold plated Hasselblad camera. He has also twice been Kodak UK Wedding Photographer of the Year and the Master Photographers Association Photographer of the Year. In 2005, Trevor was runner up UK Photographer of the Year with the SWPP. Faye has on three occasions been Kodak UK Child Photographer of the Year.

In 2008 Faye was Awarded the SWPP Bridal Portrait Awards, Glamour Award and the 2009 Open Category Award.
You can visit their web site at www.yerburyweddings.com

Their Blog at http://yerburyconfidential.squarespace.com/
And the Journal at http://yerbury.squarespace.com/
Click to expand...
:bang::bang::bang::bang:


Simon
 
BarryDawsib said:
Or am I a realist? ;)
Click to expand...

Ahh, but you said they wouldn't reply and they did! I nearly fell off my chair:eek:

It is clear to me that they don't have any relevant experience outside of the wedding/portrait market and assume that someone who is good in these areas is capable of judging any area of photography.

Given that I've had my wildlife work critiqued by the likes of Andy Rouse and Mark Carwardine, I am fairly confident that what I am doing is OK - (after all, it does sell which is all that matters.) I'd much rather have my work critiqued by those that understand the subject instead of by someone who simply doesn't have a clue about the genre, other than what looks like a nice picture.

Simon
 
Beats me how the likes of Trevor Yerbury continues to be associated with them
 
haggis said:
Beats me how the likes of Trevor Yerbury continues to be associated with them
Click to expand...

Because they make a lot of money out of the contacts they make from the SWPP - or is that me being a cynic?

Terrier Jones posted in the last couple of days that they dont pay speakers at the SWPP show - but they charge those attending, I believe that they also charge the sponsors of any talkers. The money only flows in the direction of the Taffia - shame they dont invest it in improving the standards of photography or getting judges experienced in the subjects they are judging.

Mike
 
Wildsnaps said:
Ahh, but you said they wouldn't reply and they did! I nearly fell off my chair:eek:

It is clear to me that they don't have any relevant experience outside of the wedding/portrait market and assume that someone who is good in these areas is capable of judging any area of photography.

Given that I've had my wildlife work critiqued by the likes of Andy Rouse and Mark Carwardine, I am fairly confident that what I am doing is OK - (after all, it does sell which is all that matters.) I'd much rather have my work critiqued by those that understand the subject instead of by someone who simply doesn't have a clue about the genre, other than what looks like a nice picture.

Simon
Click to expand...

:D I wonder if you will get a reply to your last correspondence?
 
Simon,

what you are really saying is that wildlife competition has as much to do with wildlife photographers as their event competion has to do with event photographers.
Think of this, if they had awarded an event winner at the show it would either have been to photo of the Red Arrows that would have made them look stupid or to Paul Rogers who as a member of EPS has less chance than a snowball in hell.

Mike
 
BouncyMelons said:
Isn't it great that they start to make changes when threads like this in a public domain (where they are allowed to remain) point out the deficincies that have been pointed out for as long as I can remember by members.

It just appears that the impression that I always had that they didn't listen to their own membership is validated again and again. It's only when members and ex members take it outside of the strictly controlled environment that is SWPP and it starts to negatively impact on them that they pay any attention to it.
Click to expand...

What are they changing Ali?

stew
 
Wildsnaps said:
Interestingly enough, I've just had an email from them saying that "As requested by many members", they've finally got around to adding new boards to the forum for each of the "partner societies." It has taken them over 18 months to get around to this. I've seen continents move quicker!

It is a sign of poor planning that they had to wait for members to request this feature. Personally, I'd have thought it was a no-brainer and would have introduced these extra boards at the time the partner societies were launched...:bang:

Simon
Click to expand...

Referring to this bit Stew.
 
Just to go back to a point discussed earlier, that at long last the SWPP had finally opened up a forum section on Event work, unfortunately having made a twinned sub society ( Event & Schools Photography), that I can foresee problems with who is talking about what.

Schools work is very much a different area of work to Events, or least that is what I believe.

Half cocked solution.
 
mike weeks said:
what you are really saying is that wildlife competition has as much to do with wildlife photographers as their event competion has to do with event photographers.
Click to expand...

I think that there's a subtle difference here Mike. With the Events competition, as far as I understand it, your problem is that they are not defining what constitutes an "event." With the wildlife competition, they've clearly defined what is acceptable and what isn't, but they are not adhering to their own rules. Today I have emailed Phil Jones and asked him to clarify which rules are mandatory and which ones are optional.

For instance the following image was disqualified from the competition and the entrant was invited to read the rules: http://swppusa.com/competition/displayimage.php?pos=-63930

whereas this image, which to my eye looks like it was taken in a zoo, and therefore contravenes the rules, was awarded a silver
http://swppusa.com/competition/displayimage.php?pos=-64421.

Likewise, the photo of a great grey owl entitled "Twycross owl", was accepted into the competition, despite the name giving it away as a captive bird.

The problem here is that when they use a studio-based portrait photographer, albeit of an acceptable standard, to judge a specialist competition, then the judge simply does not have the knowledge required to know if an animal is captive or not.

As for awarding gongs to photos of cows, I can only assume that the numpty judge has a bovine phobia and believes that they are wild, slavering animals that are the stuff of nightmares and that anyone brave enough to photograph them deserves a medal. As for those terrifyingly fluffy sheep, well don't get me started!

Simon
 
Wildsnaps said:
whereas this image, which to my eye looks like it was taken in a zoo, and therefore contravenes the rules, was awarded a silver
http://swppusa.com/competition/displayimage.php?pos=-64421.
Click to expand...

I am sure that background is from one of the Theme parks in Florida, the one where it is set out like ruins in India. Can't for the life of me remember which one. I got a few belting shots of the tigers from there the other year.
 
It is a great shame, it is not as though people have tried to increase the understanding of the job. There has been enough chat about it on various forums, yet the problem still persists.

I had commented on their new Schools and Event forum section that it would be a good idea to differentiate between what are two disciplines of work, and was waived off.

What a shame, there are people out there who want to see them improve waht is being offered, and yet nothing happens , and if it ever does, it takes place at a snail's pace.

The concept of Event Photography is fairly clear to understand , it has been covered several times by notable magazines ( BJP and Photo Pro). It is not just images of something happening at an 'event'. I will leave it to someone like Mike to define it.
 
An event in Event Photography terms is reasonably easy to define.

It is an event were the subject of the image is also the target client for the sale of the image and is a participant in the event. This covers participative sports, presentations, black tie dinner and dance etc.

The key is that the subject and target client are one and the same.

Using this definition means images of the Red Arrows are definitely not Event photography.

Sorry Mike - thought I would throw my definition in and you can add, take away or completely ignore as you wish :)

John
 
Well, here's a good one- usually you think, " I know , lets google the word and get a definition!" .

Umm, try it . I did , I put in 'event photography definition'

Nothing, well nothing that looked official.

There is a start point. Get that sorted and we are on our way. Whilst no relevant and searchable defination is there, it means you can get crazy interpretations.:thinking:
 
Eh Now!!:)

Yours is spot on John.
 
jpwone said:
An event in Event Photography terms is reasonably easy to define.

It is an event were the subject of the image is also the target client for the sale of the image and is a participant in the event. This covers participative sports, presentations, black tie dinner and dance etc.

The key is that the subject and target client are one and the same.

John
Click to expand...

Hi guys.

Please note this a genuine question and not maent to be provocative, but doesn't the above definition apply to commercial wedding and portrait photography?

I have never really understood how the judging criteria for event photography is different to other social photography, and would love to know your thoughts.

Please also note that event photography is part of my business

God bless
Dave
 
Hi Dave

I think (and I did consider this when I was posting) that the client element separates weddings from this definition as the client for a wedding is usually the bride and groom and the other participants will usually have little interest in purchasing images. You could of course shoot a wedding as an event and treat all participants as equal and print and sell on the day. The image of a bride queuing with the guests to try and select 40 images to put in an album does not gel well with this though :)

The event side separates portrait photography from event photography. In portrait photography the primary reason for the client being there is to get their photograph taken. At an event the primary reason for being there is the event and the photography is secondary. The photography can be a very key element (school prom for example) but is not the primary reason for being there.

Hope this clarifies the definition as I see it.

I do agree that they could all be put under the broader banner of social photography.

Regards

John
 
There is also another element that separates Event Photography from weddings and portraits. Generally for events what you take is what you print, the work flow and time scales do not allow any significant post processing. Events require that you largely get it right in camera first time every time. There is very much a time critical element to event photography.

Both weddings and portraits have more latitude in that there is usually a period of selection and post processing. The post processing can be very extensive and time consuming. There is usually not the expectation of instant delivery.

John
 
Dave Routledge said:
I have never really understood how the judging criteria for event photography is different to other social photography, and would love to know your thoughts.
Click to expand...

To my way of thinking, the answer can be simplified to two words: post production. Most wedding and portrait photographers have the luxury of being able to spend time manipulating the image post-shot. Event photographers generally do not have this luxury.

Simon
 
benl said:
Yep, I would say the differences are:

Wedding: [+] Get to post-process / [-] Have little or no control over environment
Event: [-] No chance to post-process / [+] Create your own environment (backdrop & studio lighting)
Click to expand...

Ok,, weddings you (at many points) have to direct the subject(s) and do have some control.

Event: would this include e.g. a martial arts tournament? where all you have is the light your given and to get the shot you have to anticipate?
 
benl said:
I wouldn't classify a martial arts tournament as event photography (that would be sports photography to me).
Click to expand...

it may involve sport BUT, it has the same theory and is aiming for the same outcome of selling to the people attending / participating on the spot,

so can it really be excluded?
 
I think I'll leave the definitions argument to others :-)

I'm sure we're all more sensible here, but I have seen such threads elsewhere degenerate into some kind of 'My type of photography is harder than your type of photography' silliness. I think the truth is that there are different challenges in different spheres of photography.
 
benl said:
I think I'll leave the definitions argument to others :-)

I'm sure we're all more sensible here, but I have seen such threads elsewhere degenerate into some kind of 'My type of photography is harder than your type of photography' silliness. I think the truth is that there are different challenges in different spheres of photography.
Click to expand...

LOL,, yeah me too, but its nice to be able to express an opinion without being told off :)

As for "my photography is harder then yours", again true, different people fit different styles easier then others, I cant do motor sport worth a damn but get me shooting a couple and I know what ime aiming for :cool:
 
When I registered EPS I had to generate a definition of event photography for the aims of the PLC which are as follows;

"Event Photography" is an all-encompassing term that is generally used to refer to situations where the photographer takes photographs at an event (including, but not limited to sports, activities or social gatherings) from which they will derive financial reward typically through either a commission or through on-site printing.

There was not a definition so we came up with one, so definitely not images of the red arrows or some snap you took at a gig or a heavily edited biblical or sealed knot scene. In essence the major difference is the workflow - just because it is quick does not mean that it is hotdogs because there are many of us producing steak. Just look at wedding photography, there are far more prodicing corned beef hash as their are beef stroganoff to use somebody elses analgy.

Mike
 
Sports tournaments are popular events and well attended by Event Photographers. I shoot a lot of sports (mainly football) as a sports photographer. As a sports photographer my clients are the clubs, the the FA's and editorial usage. It is a different target market and the client and the image requirement is different. There is some overlap with the type of image shot but what is good editorially is not generally a good seller to the participants. I do sell to the participants as well so I try to get shots that will sell to both markets but they are different

John
 
mike weeks said:
When I registered EPS I had to generate a definition of event photography for the aims of the PLC which are as follows;

"Event Photography" is an all-encompassing term that is generally used to refer to situations where the photographer takes photographs at an event (including, but not limited to sports, activities or social gatherings) from which they will derive financial reward typically through either a commission or through on-site printing.

There was not a definition so we came up with one, so definitely not images of the red arrows or some snap you took at a gig or a heavily edited biblical or sealed knot scene. In essence the major difference is the workflow - just because it is quick does not mean that it is hotdogs because there are many of us producing steak. Just look at wedding photography, there are far more prodicing corned beef hash as their are beef stroganoff to use somebody elses analgy.

Mike
Click to expand...

Thanks Mike

If you are given a commission to attend an airshow event at which the Red Arrows are performing and you photograph the fly past and are then paid for that image, would that qualify it as event photography?

God bless
Dave
 
Dave,

the Red Arrows have their own in-house photographer so this is a rhetorical question. SWPP camera club type photographers buying a ticket and turning up and taking snaphots certainly do not qualify. There are very few photographers professionally taking i.e. being commisioned to take such photographs and to the best of my knowledge none of them are in the SWPP.

If you want to know what event photographers do go along to one of their seminars at places like Focus or the prom day at Photomart and then you will understand why the SWPP has set up an organisation without the most basic understanding of the people they are targetting at.

But one big favour please dont come up and mention one word about religion to me at any of these, photography yes, religion no.

Sales Bless
Mike
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top