P3D Re: PSA judging

[Derek Gee <73157.2172@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>One would assume that a PSA Exhibition Chairperson would be a PSA 
>member, but to clarify this - yes, I am a PSA member of about 4 years.

I did not want to assume.  While the DSS is a PSA club, we have members
that are not PSA members working on the International Salon.
 
>About as long as I have been doing stereo photography. I am also a 3 
>star stereo competitor and have judged a PSA exhibition. Who deems it 
>"inappropriate" for new judges to be on the exhibition judging panel? 
>You? The DSS? PSA? Where are these rules printed? As Exhibition 
>Chairperson, I must have set of them immediately, lest I commit another 
>"fox paw." {;>)  

After talking to Bill Turner about the hows and whys of Detroit
International Salon, he suggested that you examine the PSA rules for
international exhibitions.  It is obtainable directly from the PSA,
and you should be able to find the answers you seek there.  

>(snip)What is the magic number of club competition judgings before 
>you will allow a person to "advance" to judge your (DSS) PSA Exhibition? 
>Who has determined this number? Or if it is "qualifications" you are 
>looking for, what are the determining factors? In other words, what are 
>you looking for in a judge before they can judge your exhibition?

There is no magic number that determines qualifications for judging the
Detroit International Exhibition.  The main qualifying factors are that
the judge should be an active stereographer, should have a year or
two of active judging experience, and has been able to demonstrate to
his peers in the club (e.g. the Awards Chair and other officers) that
they can judge accurately and fairly. 

>>>>Derek Gee: What I was trying to convey by my remarks is that if you 
have "new ideas" (e.g. changes to procedures or standards/requirements), 
you should not be deciding these during a Salon judging. While judging 
is not an exact science, there are a number of reference articles from 
which you can begin to learn how to fairly judge a photo competition. 
Anyone can make judgements - we all do it everyday. It is learning how 
to fairly and consistantly apply your judgements to each entrant that 
makes an experienced judge stand out from an inexperienced one.<<<<

>What "things"? And what is to be debated? How can you discuss a "new 
>idea" ahead of time? This doesn't make sense. Are you saying that you 
>debate ahead of time what constitutes a "new idea" and decide what will 
>and will not be "acceptable." I don't understand what you are trying to 
>say here. Why is a "new idea" a "change to procedures or 
>standards/requirements." How can a fresh perspective change a procedure?

Why am I the only person trying to define the phrase "new ideas", which
you introduced to this thread?  Neither you or Boris has given your
definitions of this vague phrase.  I was trying to put something
concrete to this expression.  Let's try a real world example.  The use
of computers to create or enhance imagery is a fairly "new idea"
(especially within the last 5 or 6 years) to the general public.  The
DSS recently had to make a decision about what terms computer
manipulated or computer generated images would be allowed to compete
under.

This issue was debated quite vigorously among the club officers even
before PSA issued its guidelines.  I was aware that no matter what
recommendation the Board made, that some club members would be unhappy.
We were getting complaints from many club members that it wasn't fair
that the computer generated images were winning so often when they
(the complainers) had no computer of their own.  I also had to temper
my own feelings, because I really enjoyed seeing the computer generated
stereo imagery.  After much debate, we decided that since were are
a PSA affiliated club, that we should remain consistant with their
guidelines, and decided to prohibit computer generated/enhanced
imagery in competitions except for the Contemporary or Open categories.
So here is an example of how a "new idea" directly caused a change
to procedures.

>I would rather have judges who can think for themselves and make well 
>presented arguments (when required) for or against an image than a group 
>of people purely quoting from an instruction book. I want opinions. If I 
>had a panel that consistently judged the same, I would start to worry. I 
>can see the more outstanding images being scored fairly consistently, 
>but all of them? IMO, a stereo judge should first recognize the stereo 
>effect. Then as a photographer/artist, know the basic rules of 
>composition, lighting, etc. Last, the personal preference comes in. It 
>has to. Art is subjectional and in any competition you are hoping to not 
>only meet the technical aspects but to appeal to a judge's personal 
>interest.

A judge is not supposed to consider personal preference when judging -
period.  If I don't happen to like flower pictures or kid pictures,
then is it OK that I downgrade them just because they don't appeal
to my personal preferences?  Of course not.  It's fair to judge on
stereo effect, composition, lighting, etc.  Please leave your
personal preferences at the door when you enter the judging room.

>Boris is not a member of PSSP and has not judged for our club. As a 
>matter of fact, I don't know if he has judged at all previously. I had 
>every confidence in Boris, both as a stereographer and an artist, to be 
>a competent judge in our exhibition. As I stated in my previous posting, 
>I would encourage anyone interested in judging a PSA exhibition to help 
>with, or at least watch, a judging first. But, this would not (nor has 
>it) stopped me from inviting any individual I felt confident in to 
>judge.

While Boris is a fine stereographer and artist, that doesn't tell me
much about his judging experience.  If I was the exhibition chair-
person, I would feel more comfortable if I knew he'd had lots of
2-D judging experience rather than none at all.  I do agree with your
comments about visiting a PSA Exhibition judging wholeheartedly.

>I would like to point out that Boris was not always the "odd man out" in 
>the judging. He was often scoring the same as one of our other very 
>experienced judges, while the third judge was way off. That means that 
>most of the time one judge was voting inconsistently with the other two. 
>Since the other two were veteran PSA exhibition judges, I would be 
>interested to hear your opinion on this, Derek. Should we send our 
>veteran judges back to PSA judging school since they disagreed?

Actually yes, I would have your judges review either articles, or the
PSA slide program on judging prior to your Exhibition judging.  If
your judges are disagreeing by four and five points, there is a problem.
I usually schedule that PSA program about every other year to refresh
our current members and teach our new ones about the art of judging.
 
>Fortunately, we do not see a lot of mismounted slides or other errors, 
>but it is educational to watch an entire exhibition and see these types 
>of errors. There was a decrease in mounting errors this year and we hope 
>this continues to decline. Unfortunately, since there are no comments in 
>exhibitions, the guilty parties may never realize they are rejected for 
>these reasons. Some people do not have a projector to test their slides 
>and others do not have a club they can go to for critique and help. And 
>still others do not subscribe to P3D. {8>O  

Good points.  I wish everyone were subscribed to P3D!

>More information on the 
>Internet will help. I hope to include some mounting tips and resources 
>in the next exhibition catalog. That way the information is getting to 
>the ones who need it.

That is an excellent idea!  By having the info right with the entry
forms, it makes it more likely that the info would be noticed.  I'll
see if I can get something like that added to the Detroit International
Salon entry forms.

>Personally, I just enjoy spending a whole day looking at stereo images. 
>I can see what my fellow stereographers and friends from around the 
>world are doing and get ideas for my own projects. This year the Potomac 
>had 70 entrants - 280 slides. What a great day! Then we looked at cards 
>all afternoon (Chesapeake International).

Me too!  That's one of the best benefits of attending the Salon.  You
get to travel all over the world in just a few hours.
 
>>Mark Dottle: Until the traditional school accepts the enthusiastic, 
innovative and fresh ideas that new stereo photographers can offer...the 
newcomer will just continue to do what they do best with regard to 
stereo photography, and others will adopt their ideas and read their 
books someday. :-) Let others judge...please!<<

>And unless we keep insisting on the acceptance of the new, the creative, 
>the different, we won't stand a chance at changing "the old school." 
>When we have the opportunity to make a difference (such as PSA 
>exhibition judging), we need to take it. Otherwise, we'll be stuck in 
>the same old rut, complaining about the same old stuff, over and over. 
>This is our chance to help PSA grow.

Could anyone elaborate on just what "enthusiastic, innovative and
fresh ideas" were talking about here?  I see a need for improving
the clubs we associate in by constantly evaluating new proposals,
but if an idea is rejected on sound grounds - I see no need to
label it as the "same old rut".

>Overview:
>Derek's comments are far from original, i.e., I have heard them in 
>various forms from other followers of the "old school."

While I'm certain that I'm not the only voice in the choir here, I
resent being dubbed with the "old school" label because some of
my views happen to coincide with current PSA views.  As President
of the DSS, I always try to be receptive to suggestions from the
members.  I have been partially responsible for diverisfying our
club's exclusive focus on Realist (w/some European) format slides
to expose the membership to the world of View-Masters, 3-D movies,
3-D television, and stereo prints.  The last couple of years we
have sponsored a stereo print competition to satisfy a small number
of members desire to show off and compete with their stereo prints.
Our club officers often go out of our way to make things that
members have suggested happen, so please don't stereotype us just
because our opinion is different from yours.

>It was briefly 
>discussed earlier this year in P3D about dragging PSA into the present. 
>The responses were unfortunately, but not surprisingly, negative. It 
>seems that a lot of people feel that PSA is not open to new ideas, 
>change, or anything else that challenges what appears to be set in stone 
>somewhere. How sad that the newcomers to this organization must continue 
>to fight to have any amount of change incorporated. I joined PSA to 
>participate in the excellent activities and services provided. I hold an 
>office, run an activity, and started a local chapter to make a 
>difference.

Big organizations like PSA are always somewhat slow to change.  Andrea,
you are obviously frustrated with the pace of change.  I'm glad to see
you are particpating in PSA.  Just remember that if enough people feel
as you do, things will change.  Also keep in mind though that people
will not always follow where you lead.  If members are dissatisfied,
they will either vote you out of office, or leave the club themselves.
That's why moderation usually rules in these type of organizations.

                              Derek Gee
                              President
                              Detroit Stereographic Society




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