The problems of competition.

  The thread below reminded me of how competitions can bring out the best and worst in people.

 http://www.myfinepix.com.hk/forum/8/416538?page=1#new

 It is not new and photography produces its own characters.

 The above thread referrers to an ‘on line’ competition, a fairly recent development with its own rules, selection method and standards. It also involves a new influence, that of social media.

 Let me start by saying that there is nothing wrong with competition. Without it things would stagnate, and life might be very dull.

 What I might try to do is to compare the board mounted print to the digital image on a screen to see if things have changed.

 In print competitions there was often a stipulation of minimum size of the print. This lead to comparisons of prints from different camera formats with those using 35mm complaining of being disadvantaged against the 120 or 620 film which was much larger.

This sounds similar to the discussions on the merits of a compact or a simple bridge digital camera as against a DSLR.

As is often pointed out it is the photographer that takes the picture but the flexibility of the camera will play its part in a more complex situation.

 In earlier times apart from a working professional, a dedicated photographer wanting to make prints for exhibition or competition might take relatively few compared to now. Where there were once hundreds there are now tens of thousands. From those precious negatives the photographer might produce ten or twelve finished prints a year. Of these only two or three would be used for competition and success may only come from one. There would be more successful placements in open exhibitions where prizes were not the object and being selected for the display was sufficient and all acceptances were considered equal.

 This would often mean that the same prints would be entered into numerous exhibitions. This did not cause any problems as the viewing population was localised except in the case of International Salons which would show at several venues. I used to do this and have the print labels to prove it.

The total number of people viewing these exhibitions would depend on the accessibility of the venue and the density of the surrounding population. If the gallery was some distance from your location, it would be doubtful if friends or family members saw the display.

 It is so different now with images sent directly to anyone you wish by email, Facebook or Twitter and not forgetting the on line galleries where the audience can run into millions.

 Another product of this system was the ‘Pot hunter’. A photographer who would enter the same print, knowing its merit, in several prize competitions in an attempt to win multiple times, a practice while not ill eagle was frowned upon. As this began to happen more frequently, rules had to be updated to prevent abuse.

 How does that compare to the current situation. Tens of thousands of pictures taken which have to be sorted evaluated and decisions made of which one to use for a competition. Out of all those images I wonder how many are suitable, maybe no more than the fewer of former times. If this is the case, how far have we come?

 Apart from local camera clubs I would think that general public exhibitions have all but disappeared. Now we have ‘on line’ images. Galleries of any subject matter you want, the quality may vary but the Quantity grows Dailey.

 This number game continues into on line competitions. Anyone can enter any camera, any format and any subject perhaps within a loose theme which can cover almost anything.

 How and who decides?

 In many cases it is the same people who enter so who sets the standard?

 I would speculate that a new language is being written for the many new photographers who know little of what went before. That ‘I like’ becomes more important than I know why. That ‘I‘ve never seen that before so it is new’ instead of this have been done so many times. A favourite must be I like the colours, in which case the subject and composition does not seem to matter.

Another growing influence is the social network. It is all to easy to ask those many friends on Facebook or followers on twitter to go and vote for your image. They will do so willinging because you aare a friend. Perhaps one they have never met, but still a friend. The followers who can not wait for your next word of wisdom will react like Pavlov’s dogs. They do not need to know anything about photography but like many political voters the less they know the better as long as they vote for your cause.

 N.B. Other social networks are available with similar facilities.

 Will this create a new complaint? It might go like this. How can my image taken with a top of the range DSLR compete with another persons photograph taken on a mobile phone with a Twitter account? This inferior image had more on line votes than I got in total before I got mine downloaded to the computer. It’s about time we had a level playing field.

 I wonder what the response would be, oohs it has probably already happened on a blog somewhere. Most things have.

 The stolen image.

 This is something new to photographic competition. Stolen ideas and techniques have always happened. It has been said that imitation is the greatest form of flattery and building a photograph based on another is like standing on the shoulders of giants.

But taking a print from a gallery wall and passing it off as your own was unheard of until now. Because that is what is happening and in many competitions there appears to be no checks by the organisers. There may be rules about images being your own but perpetrators know that little checking is done so guidelines can be flouted with impunity.

 On member site such as Fuji the membership are vigilant and suspicious images are soon reported and removed, however this may not be the case on more open competition sites.

 Rule breaking can happen at the highest level as individuals strive for success. At least two international wildlife competitions have been affected; one after the award was made. These were not about stolen images but about falsifying the ‘wildness’ which was the point of the competition.

 At a professional level fame can mean elevated status and money, a potent combination for some. I have come across dubious practices in the attempt to win a commercial competition in the days of prints, so I wonder what is happening now.

Perhaps that is why that anyone who values their images may try to protect them from misuse, difficult though that is.

 The above ramble is just that. A trawl through the memory no doubt coloured by my own experience and with which others may not agree.

 So where do you want to go in this new photographic world?

 It is over to you.