P3D Competitions suppressing creativity?

["Dr. George A. Themelis" <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (John W Roberts) writes:

>Much has been said about the benefits of stereo competitions, and I agree
>that they appear to have some benefits - I may even enter some photos someday.
>But the above quote illustrates what I consider to be one of the harmful 
>effects of stereo competitions - a push toward a uniform judgment on what's
>worth photographing.  Right now, when I take a stereo photograph, it's almost
>always something that *I* wanted to photograph, for any of a number of
>reasons. It's not always something that I would consider "a good, artistic
>stereo photograph", or something that I would expect others to consider that
>way. To pressure people to take "good" stereo photographs, and to define "good"
>as "likely to win a stereo photo competition", inhibits creativity and runs
>the risk of discouraging innovation. 

This popular point of view is certainly worthy of consideration and 
has its own merits...

(so far so good...)

HOWEVER,  (hmmm... another DrT absolute reference?)

I ABSOLUTELY and POSITIVELY DISAGREE! (there we go... :-))

IMO, there a slight problem with this line of reasoning.
The problem is that you see yourself as a photographer and not as a 
judge. You also do not see the judges as practicing photographers. 

Is there a such thing as a "a good stereo photograph likely to win a 
stereo photo competition"?  Are there any absolute standards that 
encourage people to submit uninspired work in order to win awards, 
instead of following their own creative juices?  I don't  know... 
If there are any recipes around, someone please send them to me!

For the past fe years I have been sitting from both sides of the fence 
and have been faced with the amazing variation in judgment among 
photographers who are serving as judges.  I have seen some of my own 
pictures win awards in one PSA competition and get rejected in another 
(exactly same picture).  As a judge, I have looked at the scoring 
sheets and have seen one judge score a particular image as high as 
possible and another as low as possible.

Judges are practicing photographers and they are humans, subjected to 
all the individual variations that most humans do.  Usually (but not 
always) these judges have average common sense and tastes, and their 
votes go in favor of what most people would say are the best or better 
pictures.  This is a fine democratic process.  Anyone who thinks that 
their creative work is marked down because it is out of the ordinary, 
is invited to join the system and influence the common thinking by 
casting his or her vote as a judge.

In taking my own personal pictures, I have followed only one guideline:  
Submit what I consider to be my best work.  I have only been in the 
system for 2-3 years now, but I have noticed that some pictures do 
better than others, sometimes running against my own predictions.  
The problem is that I cannot judge my work objectionably, being the 
creator of these pictures.  But, I have not been able to find a
recipe for awards other than my own judgement of what is good and
what is not.  And my participation as a judge has assured me that
the system works fine.  

It might as well say that I am an average person so my own personal 
opinion is geared towards "average good work" and not particularly 
creative work.  The system works for those average people who think
like me.  Those who are in the extremes of the normal distribution
might find themselves isolated.... But, that's life in general.

-- George Themelis


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