Award Standards...

[P3D Allan Woods <allanwx@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>>...Another picture of a
>>flower (yes, trying to get those awards have lowered my standards!!! ;))...
>>...-- George

The connection between "Standards" and "Awards" is a fuzzy one, at best.

Emmy Awards, Oscars...  Awards for 3-D pictures I have seen have
been awarded to images which were 3-D pictures when judged against
images where the photographer missed (or didn't get) what 3-D
photography is all about (i.e. limitations, strnghts, etc.)

Those awards weren't issued on a level playing field.

There also seems to be a "50s" mind set among many judges.

I remember in Atlanta seeing a striking and extrememly interesting,
well done, imaginative series of stereo pictures of an urban
environment.  Creative photography and composition.

Unfortunately, the "buzz" from the audience indicated sneering and
giggling - I assume because the slides were not of the American
SouthWest.

I agree we need a tad more imagination in subject selection and
treatment - and we also need more acceptance of different approaches.

Perhaps a category for "assignment" might be to EXCLUDE photographs
of the SouthWest, Flowers, etc.

If you've ever looked at any of Kodak's demonstration pictures (their
web site is full of them) you'll see beautifully composed, accurately
exposed photographs of beautiful places - but they are all DULL as
DISHWATER.  No Pop! No Zazz!

(oh, oh!  I think I missed my medication...)

allanwx@xxxxxxxxxx



------------------------------