Shenanigans at the SWPP

Status
Not open for further replies.
The recinding of trade qualifications is nothing unusual in my experience. I was a paid up member of the institute of engineering and technology to a level which gave me letters after my name. It isn't a qualification as I see it but a recognition of a level within that organisation. I let my subscription lapse as I had more important things to spend my money on at the time and can no longer use those letters, seems fair enough to me so I don't see why it should be any different when you leave the SWPP.

Would you be happy for a gas fitter to keep displaying thier CORGI badge (or whatever it has changed to now) long after they've stopped being registered?

FWIW this post isn't in the defence of the SWPP, I couldn't give a stuff about them, but it does seem that people treasure these "qualifications" a little more than they should do, especially when it has been pointed out that they aren't worth the paper they're printed on if you can gain the qualifications by attending meetings.
 
Kev M said:
The recinding of trade qualifications is nothing unusual in my experience. I was a paid up member of the institute of engineering and technology to a level which gave me letters after my name. It isn't a qualification as I see it but a recognition of a level within that organisation. I let my subscription lapse as I had more important things to spend my money on at the time and can no longer use those letters, seems fair enough to me so I don't see why it should be any different when you leave the SWPP.

Would you be happy for a gas fitter to keep displaying thier CORGI badge (or whatever it has changed to now) long after they've stopped being registered?

FWIW this post isn't in the defence of the SWPP, I couldn't give a stuff about them, but it does seem that people treasure these "qualifications" a little more than they should do, especially when it has been pointed out that they aren't worth the paper they're printed on if you can gain the qualifications by attending meetings.
Click to expand...

This is a totally different issue, this is a legally recognised safety qualification, and a requirment for a gas fitter (of a certain type) but it still wouldn't be illeagle to say he was Corgi registered in 2007 or whatever.
 
swanseamale47 said:
This is a totally different issue, this is a legally recognised safety qualification, and a requirment for a gas fitter (of a certain type) but it still wouldn't be illeagle to say he was Corgi registered in 2007 or whatever.
Click to expand...

as you say totally ok but probably not ok trade as I believe to trade as a plumber you need to be currently corgi registered (might be wrong). A photographer does not.

stew
 
Kev M said:
The recinding of trade qualifications is nothing unusual in my experience. I was a paid up member of the institute of engineering and technology to a level which gave me letters after my name. It isn't a qualification as I see it but a recognition of a level within that organisation. I let my subscription lapse as I had more important things to spend my money on at the time and can no longer use those letters, seems fair enough to me so I don't see why it should be any different when you leave the SWPP.

Would you be happy for a gas fitter to keep displaying thier CORGI badge (or whatever it has changed to now) long after they've stopped being registered?

FWIW this post isn't in the defence of the SWPP, I couldn't give a stuff about them, but it does seem that people treasure these "qualifications" a little more than they should do, especially when it has been pointed out that they aren't worth the paper they're printed on if you can gain the qualifications by attending meetings.
Click to expand...

The point is Kev that people are being charged to gain these qualifications and then if they disagree with any decision being chucked out or treated so rudely they want to leave. Its almost like constructive dismissal.

stew
 
Kev M said:
The recinding of trade qualifications is nothing unusual in my experience. I was a paid up member of the institute of engineering and technology to a level which gave me letters after my name. It isn't a qualification as I see it but a recognition of a level within that organisation. I let my subscription lapse as I had more important things to spend my money on at the time and can no longer use those letters, seems fair enough to me so I don't see why it should be any different when you leave the SWPP.

Would you be happy for a gas fitter to keep displaying thier CORGI badge (or whatever it has changed to now) long after they've stopped being registered?

FWIW this post isn't in the defence of the SWPP, I couldn't give a stuff about them, but it does seem that people treasure these "qualifications" a little more than they should do, especially when it has been pointed out that they aren't worth the paper they're printed on if you can gain the qualifications by attending meetings.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it is just me but I don't think it is a case of people "treasuring" the qualifications but rather, in this case, a matter of principle
 
Guys (and gals) as the OP said a few days ago - This has been done to death.

For those with the conspiracy theory, I genuinely coudn't care less wether the SWPP or any other organisation goes to the great darkroom in the sky. I've had a few of these 'qualifications' from various organisations, left and closed the door.

Get over it guys and enjoy your photography and let those who wish to participate in any benefits they see in their chosen 'club', enjoy them too. :)
I'm sure that any organisation with as many suggested bad practises as the SWPP can't survive for long anyway, but the vindictiveness shown by ex members isn't a good sign of temprament either.
 
I actually don't have any problem with not being able to use letters once you have left and I believe it is relatively common practice in many industries and having left I really don't want any association with the company.

I don't think there would be a problem with saying in a biography on your website that in xxx month of xxx year you were awarded whatever by whoever just so long as you are not claiming to have a current qualification level. If you then go on to state that you left and joined somewhere else where you currently hold qualification X then I think that's acceptable. :)

And for Dave:- I for one do appreciate the positive input you have given on this thread, I have frequently stated that there ARE perfectly valid reasons to join and also to continue membership as many of my friends do. :) I have benefited hugely from my membership but I also have significant concerns about the current structure and processes no matter the personailities involved.

The fact that the positives and the negatives can be discussed in public, on a forum while the very issues being raised are censored by the company it affects just goes to demonstrate how little they appear willing to listen to it's own members.

I also fully understand that it is a commercial venture and not a social club and as such the owners are free to do as they please within the law.
 
The problem is that as a member you are not allowed to discuss matters on their own forum and therefore it will get talked about elsewhere. As has been said unless you pay your £99 you do not get the opportunity to see it for what it is and then it is too late. Better to be informed and make a reasoned decision than go into anythinh blind.

Mike
 
mercedes said:
Guys (and gals) as the OP said a few days ago - This has been done to death.

For those with the conspiracy theory, I genuinely coudn't care less wether the SWPP or any other organisation goes to the great darkroom in the sky. I've had a few of these 'qualifications' from various organisations, left and closed the door.

Get over it guys and enjoy your photography and let those who wish to participate in any benefits they see in their chosen 'club', enjoy them too. :)
I'm sure that any organisation with as many suggested bad practises as the SWPP can't survive for long anyway, but the vindictiveness shown by ex members isn't a good sign of temprament either.
Click to expand...

And let those that want to discuss it do so. No-one is making you read this thread, so stop trying to suppress it.
 
Really Dave?? You obviously don't care about your Reputation.

i've been asked to join many times and have refused when talking to the Kenny Rogers lookalike bloke that runs it.

Why? because I know of at least 13 naff under hand use photographers that give poor service and produce under par work to clients. and I will not be assoiciated with such sub standard standards!!!!

when I told who, why and where.... will you remove them ? no,no,no, they said.

They only want your money. I for one hope this is the beginning of their downfall.

R.I.P.
 
Dave Routledge said:
To accuse that judge of cheating is not only inaccurate it is potentially libelous, and another example of misleading comments that are being made here.

Accusing someone of cheating is a serious charge.
Click to expand...

Ok, tell me the difference between these two images:

http://swppusa.com/competition/displayimage.php?pos=-44206

and

http://swppusa.com/competition/displayimage.php?pos=-55376

I have read the 'explanation' on the forum and personally, I think it is weak. The competitions are supposed to be judged in such a way that the pictures are anonymous when put in front of the judge. When there is so little difference between the two images, there is a strong possibility that the judge will know whose work it is on the second viewing.

So, perhaps it isn't cheating by the word of the rules but, to my mind at least, it is not within the spirit of the rules.

Simon
 
Wildsnaps said:
Ok, tell me the difference between these two images:

http://swppusa.com/competition/displayimage.php?pos=-44206

and

http://swppusa.com/competition/displayimage.php?pos=-55376

I have read the 'explanation' on the forum and personally, I think it is weak. The competitions are supposed to be judged in such a way that the pictures are anonymous when put in front of a the judge. When there is so little difference between the two, there is a strong possibility that the judge will know whose work it is.

Simon
Click to expand...

I thought the same image couldn't be submitted twice?

I don't have access to the SWPP Forum so don't know what "explanation" has been given.
 
MarkyP said:
I thought the same image couldn't be submitted twice?

I don't have access to the SWPP Forum so don't know what "explanation" has been given.
Click to expand...

Apparently, the knees were 'defocussed' in photoshop in the successful image, but it is only visible in the full-res image.:shrug: I copied both of the gallery images into a single PS document and could see no differences at all. I guess I should go to SpecSaver:suspect:

Simon
 
I would love to see images submitted anonymously, for one I don't believe some of the images awarded certain standards to be fairly judges at all.

Edited to remove crit of an image not posted to TP :)
 
Wildsnaps said:
Here's another example by the same upstanding gentleman:

From last January and awarded a silver: http://swppusa.com/competition/displayimage.php?pos=-39472

and from June, this gold winning shot: http://swppusa.com/competition/displayimage.php?pos=-50709

Apparently, the sharpening was applied at a different stage in the second attempt.:thinking:

Simon
Click to expand...

Ok they look the same to me???????

Now if we assume that these were submitted as per the Comp Guidelines and are 2000 pixels along the longest edge ........ how the chuff can a Judge say there is a substantial difference between the images?

I'm lost, well and truly lost.

Talk about lack of transparancy.
 
MarkyP said:
Ok they look the same to me???????
Click to expand...

Exactly - whilst it may be that it is all above-board and honest, but it doesn't feel like it.

In the second image pair, the photographer claims to have applied a pastel noise filter and sharpening in the wrong order originally, and corrected it in the second.

The photographer admits that it is difficult to tell the difference between the images in anything other than at high-res, which does beg the question of what the judges were looking at?

Of course, we probably shouldn't be discussing this on account of it upsetting Dangerous Dave Routledge, who's probably praying for us to drop the thread. If were not careful, we'll have to pay for a replacement set of worry-beads for him:bat:

Simon
 
Wildsnaps said:
Exactly - whilst it may be that it is all above-board and honest, but it doesn't feel like it.

In the second image pair, the photographer claims to have applied a pastel noise filter and sharpening in the wrong order originally, and corrected it in the second.

The photographer admits that it is difficult to tell the difference between the images in anything other than at high-res, which does beg the question of what the judges were looking at?

Of course, we probably shouldn't be discussing this on account of it upsetting Dangerous Dave Routledge, who's probably praying for us to drop the thread. If were not careful, we'll have to pay for a replacement set of worry-beads for him:bat:

Simon
Click to expand...

Rule 8 of the SWPP Monthly comp clearly states:

# No entries of the same subject shall be entered twice.

'Nuff said!

And I don't think Dave's Religious beliefs should be brought into this, even if he does like to Bless us all :o)
 
Funnily enough, there is a slight problem with this months judging.

Someone has managed to win 12 gold awards despite not having entered a single image by the comp deadline or by the "usual" method of entering.

Not saying the images are not of superb quality but surely they do actually have to be entered and errrm judged?

confused of Manchester.
 
AliB said:
Funnily enough, there is a slight problem with this months judging.

Someone has managed to win 12 gold awards despite not having entered a single image by the comp deadline or by the "usual" method of entering.

Not saying the images are not of superb quality but surely they do actually have to be entered and errrm judged?

confused of Manchester.
Click to expand...

The were sent telepathically to ensure they arrived in time :lol:

Just out of interest, and I don't know the answer so am hoping that someone can help me out.

Do all the Gold winning images go through to the Judging at Convention, and if so, what are the prizes?
 
I know they go forward to the annual comp but I'm not familiar with the mechanism, if there is one? :)
 
Radiohead said:
They're the same image. Entering them twice is a joke. Using that as a reason is equally a joke.
Click to expand...

So one can only assume that the person submitting them has the worlds slowest or longest workflow:

Look at the dates they were submitted!

Took him ages after the first one was submitted to go.......... "Ooooops I made a bit of a mistake when I edited that months and months ago, oh silly me, I'll correct it and resubmit it".

And what planet does the person think we all live on?

Just one more question for the Members of the SWPP to ask the Management me thinks! :)
 
AliB said:
Funnily enough, there is a slight problem with this months judging.

Someone has managed to win 12 gold awards despite not having entered a single image by the comp deadline or by the "usual" method of entering.

Not saying the images are not of superb quality but surely they do actually have to be entered and errrm judged?

confused of Manchester.
Click to expand...
Hi Ali
I know I may be a bit dense;) but not heard of this before, can you give more details please. I'm even more confused!
 
NigelPaul said:
Hi Ali
I know I may be a bit dense;) but not heard of this before, can you give more details please. I'm even more confused!
Click to expand...

I believe it is the current topic of "discussion and debate" on the SWPP Forum Nigel :)

Pity I no longer have access, this is gonna be one interesting discussion thats for sure lol
 
When I asked why pictures taken at a public airshow of the Red Arrows classed as Event Photography (which also won gold) I was told that this was the industry experts view of what event photography was - funny how all the event photography experts that I know cant understand the SWPPs definition of events.

These 12 golds are just another demonstartion of how the management of the SWPP feel that they can treat their members like idiots but there again it is their business and they can do whatever they want, and they do.

Mike
 
Nuff said really...how people can defend those actions is beyond me!

Also, this really does give a amateur gimp such as me, hope that one day I will too succeed.

But seriously I need to get signed up, I might actually win some ****!
 
I haven't managed to read through the whole thread yet, but I tend to find the interesting threads get closed before I can reply if I do read the whole way through!

Wildsnaps said:
Of course, now that I've told them that I will not be renewing my membership, they've asked me to return my certificate of qualification. This strikes me as very strange indeed -

I could understand it if the qualification was subject to regular review, but it isn't: as long as you pay your fee, you remain 'qualified'.
I was also told that I could no longer use the letters after my name either.


Simon
X-LSINWP
Click to expand...

There are quite a few professional qualifications which work this way. Although they should not need the certificate back, as it is evidence that you had the skills on the date that it is awarded on, you are no longer allowed to use any professional symbols or awards after your name. However, is the SWPP a recognised body for granting the use of letters after your name anyway? (BTW. if they are, you can claim the yearly fees back via your tax claim forms)



mike weeks said:
There have been a number of court cases where people have been granted the right to have details removed from similar. Nothing in the T&Cs that I can see (http://www.swpp.co.uk/terms.htm) that would allow this. As I said they threw me out but want to retain my details - why? to me this is close to passing off.
Click to expand...


matty said:
i dont see the logic of keeping names on file, especially if they are no longer happy members.. a potential minefield...
Click to expand...

The data protection act is quite clear on the matter (well as clear as these things ever get). Data should only be kept in a format and to a detail level which is applicable for the use to which it is being put. Once data is no longer required for a particular task, it should be removed as soon as is practically possible.
For each use of the data, there should be explicit permission given for that use.
i.e., if you have not given them explicit permission to use your name on that page, then it should be removed from the database at their next maintenance cycle.
 
Yv said:
.That is fair enough, but that does not mean others cannot discuss and express an opinion or state their experience of the organisation.


As you were chaps. ;)
Click to expand...

Hear Hear.
I do not think it could be considered bullying or harassment in any form of the definitions.
Both of those words suggest that there is no way of getting away from the cause of the pain, and as such, I don't think those in question have commented here yet. So possibly have not even read it (although they may be aware of it)
 
AliB said:
You are only permitted to enter one image per category in the monthly comp (I do believe those are the rules and stand to be corrected) Yet here we have someone winning 2 golds in one category and three in another.

More questions being asked I do believe.

http://www.swpp.co.uk/image_competition_Nov-09/winnerspg14.htm
Click to expand...

The exception to that rule is that the a judge is allowed to enter two images a month per class if they judged the previous month's competition. Still, it doesn't explain how the photographer managed to enter three shots. Perhaps he was judging the next months comp. too?

Simon
 
AliB said:
Edited to remove crit of image not posted on TP
Click to expand...

Whatever you think of the SWPP or the person who submitted those images, is it really fair to crit their photography on this forum when they havn't asked for it, or even posted the shot themselves?

Based on you not wanting this thread to be linked to the SWPP forum I'm also pretty sure you wouldn't like it if one of your photo's from here was lifted and posted on another forum for the members to criticise in the way that you have.
 
Daysleeper40 said:
Whatever you think of the SWPP or the person who submitted those images, is it really fair to crit their photography on this forum when they havn't asked for it, or even posted the shot themselves?
Click to expand...

Those photographs are being displayed in an online gallery that is available for the public to see: it is not within a private, restricted website. What is wrong with critiquing such images? Are you saying that unless an image is posted directly to this site, then members of this forum have no right to pass comment?

Simon
 
AliB - thank you! I so very nearly joined. I'm very glad I stumbled across this thread first!!
 
Daysleeper40 said:
Whatever you think of the SWPP or the person who submitted those images, is it really fair to crit their photography on this forum when they havn't asked for it, or even posted the shot themselves?

Based on you not wanting this thread to be linked to the SWPP forum I'm also pretty sure you wouldn't like it if one of your photo's from here was lifted and posted on another forum for the members to criticise in the way that you have.
Click to expand...

The photos haven't been posted here, like anything else on the internet they are fair game for comment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top