Re: Award Standards...

[P3D Allan Woods <allanwx@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>Allan, I was there and I have a problem with your comments... Like most
>of the audience, I felt that we saw all too many pictures of lampposts
>street signs, buildings, monochromatic images, etc...

I was probably too vague about my reference to the set of slides.
We are no doubt talking about different photographs.  The set I
was referring to was not "lamp posts, street signs... too many..."
I thought it was a welcome change from the other slides which,
in many cases WERE "...too long and kinda boring."

>Unlike most of the audience, you Allan enjoyed this "creative" show.
>So what is the problem here?

The problem here is that there are very few gatherings for sharing
3-D photography - especially gatherings on the size and scope of
National Conventions.  We are told NSA cannot entertain notions
of holding its convention in a city without a 3-D organization -
and the effect of that seems to be an extrememly limited set of
possible sites.

Now, if the overriding sense and message at these gatherings is that
if your photographs are of a rock, a tree, a cliff, a sandstone
formation - then you get the "Oohs and ahhs" but if they happen to
be of something else, they are greeted with a dearth of encouragement
and enthusiasm.

Where will tomorrow's 3-D photographers (and NSA/PSA members) come
from when all the current members have parked their motor homes above
the clouds?


>Are we, the majority of stereo viewers, left with a 50s mindset,
>craving for pictures of the American SouthWest, or is it you Allan
>attracted to a boring and fake-creative form of 3d?

Is the above my point?

...or is this?

>...  I only know that you are one and we are many... 


>... in Detroit anyone who walks off the street and pays $10 to join,
>can be a judge for the night!

Wow!  ANYone?

What I was referring to was not the subject or treatment, but rather
the "reception" given to another approach.

>Every PSA stereo competition today has a "contemporary" special award.
>Don't you think that this encourages imagination and "alternative"
>approaches?

Actually, I think this separate category is used by some as an
exclusion rather than a viable category.  It says: "Here are some
pictures we don't understand, so lets stick them in this category
and move on to the real pictures."

While PSA struggles to find another word for their "contemporary"
classification, it seems to me they are struggling to label
something for which there is a lack of feeling and understanding
with a new word that has no meaning.

Is a photograph of Bryce Canyon taken TODAY not a contemporary
photograph?  Ever see a stereo slide of Bryce with an RV in the
foreground?  Why not?

I encourage you to take stereo pictures of anything you want.  I
also take pictures of eroded sandstone.  It is a GREAT subject.

I do NOT want to give people the not-so-subtle, implied, inferred
message that unless their slides are of subjects like the ones taken
by "...we are many," they will be greeted with silence, coughing, snide
inflection and inclusion in some weird and meaningless category.

I would like to see more interest shown in imaginative, creative
and experimental 3-D photographs - and have those photographs
evaluated with open, accepting minds.

There should be room for all of it.


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