Should we remove scoring in club competitions?

[toms]

An interesting post which I’m sure could run and run. Everyone’s comments highlight different strengths and weaknesses regarding competitions.

Bearing in mind CCC is a photographic club, it must follow that the end goal should be to improve members’ photography whilst attempting to provide an interesting and engaging environment on club nights.

Doing away with scoring and just picking the top images of the evening has some merit. My concern is that the non-successful images all fall into the same camp (e.g. 10 points).

Unless a member is present and can relate or remember the judge’s comments, then he/she will have no yardstick to compare their images against the rest. To destroy this observation, we all know that judging is very subjective. It is I think the latter that is the problem and we can never get over personal likes or dislikes. Working on that premise, the emphasis then falls back on subject matter, impact and presentation.

Regarding subject matter how many times have we heard judges comment on having seen similar images several times before and then mark them down accordingly? We all cannot afford to visit far away exotic places in order to generate ‘new’ examples of work.

The impact of an images is something that judges should be able to give practical advice on and is to a large extent what was covered in the feedback for the Bamber Trophy. Yes the scoring left a lot to be questioned.

Finally presentation is something that judges should not be docking marks for, but they do. As a club we need to help newer members present their work in the most flattering way, but I draw the line at judges questioning the type of paper available to be used (e.g. pearl) which average members either cannot afford or do not have any printing facilities and therefore rely on external printing services.

Were we to go down the road of abandoning competitions as they stand then we could find ourselves in a position of having no worthy exhibits for our annual exhibitions as, I suspect, the majority of ‘winners’ might come from a very small pond.

Competition by its very nature pits one member against another but it should also be viewed as a bit of ‘fun’. Yes we can cut down the number of competition rounds or even drop some altogether. What has not been discussed however but eluded to by Mike is the prospect of submitting images for ‘review’ by a judge. This is something that we tried at the beginning of last season and it seemed to go down well for beginners. It could be expanded to include all classes and form a subject for several Members’ Evenings throughout the year. That might help us all to develop our imagery.

Remember, once you drop one night/competition, you have to fill it with something else and the club programme is often set in stone at least a year in advance.

Hopefully once this post has come to a conclusion you/we might have something to put to the membership at the next AGM. Well done everyone!

[Mike Farley]

Thanks for this post, Tom. You make some good points.

David Candlish has also just posted his thoughts about judging on his blog, where he is running a series of articles about his return to UK club photography following his extended sojourn in Singapore. So far, both of those he has published have made interesting reading. Given that he did not post a link on the forum to the first article, he will probably not do so this time. He had no objections to my posting the link to the first article, although I did not end doing so, but on that basis I will direct readers to the second one:

http://davidcandlish.photography/news/2 ... mpetitions

As someone who has always found the idea of giving scores to photographs something of a strange concept, I can agree with much of what David has to say. Most people are aware of the "camera club" genre of photography, which is essentially self perpetuating. Maybe camera club members like it that way? I occasionally go to the Beetles and Huxley gallery in Swallow Street and while I have seen images I like, there have also been quite a few which I do not understand. On one occasion, I did ask the people there about the criteria they use to assess images for display, but the only answer I got was that they chose the type of picture they know collectors prefer to buy. Given that the prices are often several thousand pounds, it does emphasise that there is no work or style which has universal appeal.

Therein lies part of the issue. If I were a judge, I would find it very difficult to give a meaningful critique of some of the images I have seen, even if they have a commercial value beyond anything I could hope to achieve. Coming down to the club level, there are shots of my own which I like, but are unlikely to get a wider viewing than my monitor. There have been a few occasions when I have tried something a bit different and the judge's response has not been encouraging. On Sunday, I saw the personal work of someone who has achieved FRPS status, most of which would not pass muster in a club competition. Those who were at my "Talking Pictures" presentation during the summer will recall that I included Ansel Adam's best known shot, "Moonrise, Henandez". It was panned. It is difficult to judge an image from a low resolution JPEG, but having seen an original print there are others in Ansel Adams' impressive oeuvre which I prefer. Which is exactly why I chose the shot I did.

Tom rightly says that a camera club exists to encourage its members to produce work and no one has yet found a satisfactory mechanism other than competition. David Candlish in his blog post rightly points out that the ease with which a photograph can be produced is also a factor. There is also the quanity versus quality argument which I have made. Personally, I would rather produce a few really good images each year than a series of mediocre ones to make up the numbers. Competition is also in most people's nature, which can make it harder for some to accept the "fun" element in club contests. Speaking for myself, I am unlikely to submit one of my better pictures towards the end of the season if winning the overall competition is out of my reach. Yet I do not consider myself to be especially competitive.

At this point, it is worthwhile mentioning Dorchester Camera Club, the organisation I was referring to in an earlier post which holds one-off competition evenings and has no trophies. Has this policy affected them? Maybe it has. They recently had to change venues because their former premises was no longer appropriate for the numbers attending. They needed somewhere bigger to accommodate the 100 or so who turn up each week.

My final point relates to judges. Making a critique will always be subjective and we can only work with the pool of local people who have volunteered for the role. Possibly there is a case to be made that we should introduce a standard set of criteria by which we would like to see images assessed which could be sent out beforehand. That is one way of getting around such problems of images being downgraded for a technical fault, although I accept it would have its limitations. We would also need to be careful not to offend those who consider themselves too experienced to be told how to evaluate a shot. There are certainly a few of those around. It's a fine balance.

[davidc]

Just to be clear on my stance, I'm in favour of competitions where they achieve two goals - let those who want to "compete" have a platform to do so, and secondly provide a means for those who value feedback over points a chance to get their images critiqued. There are other benefits too, such as providing a steady stream of images for the club to consider for inclusion in outside competitions. But as everyone has agreed - I think - "putting images in front of a judge" is something we want to maintain.

I'm not advocating getting rid of them at all - only what we prioritise getting back from the judge.

The reason for the original post is that all too often it's the marking that overwhelms the commentary and is what people wait to hear, yet a random score from one random judge is the least effective way of improving your images

Flat or removed marking puts the emphasis squarely back on the judge to provide feedback. Deciding what wins will then be a combination of image quality & judge preference (which is what we have today) but for every image that doesn't win an award, it doesn't matter which is "best". All that matters is the feedback. Council are in attendance at every event and are perfectly able to override a judge's opinion and choose images they want to represent the club.

As for the number of competitions/volume of images, it will be hard to find something that ticks everyone's boxes. Take this as an example - Mike (a master) would rather produce a small number of good images, whereas David (a beginner) might prefer to produce a larger number of images for consideration because he doesn't yet know "what is good" from his work. They are basically opposed (and Mike & David being opposed has never happened before )

I think the number of competitions and number of images we have now are actually a pretty good balance but maybe there are other ways to satisfy both types of photographer.

In Singapore, I got together with some other photographers and together we held a few sessions. The idea was that people would bring a small portfolio - anything from 3 to 10 images - and each photographer would spend some one on one time with myself or one of the other judges before moving around to the next. The photographers received feedback on the same images from anywhere between 3 to 6 judges in one evening and it was received very well indeed. The beauty is you do not need the "judge" to be any kind of expert, just someone who is willing & able to give more detailed critique than "it's nice" or "I like it"

I remember feedback from one person, I liked his monochrome with very contrasty b&w whereas another of the judges said he needed a wider range of tones. What he learned from that was not that one way is "right" but what he wanted his style to be. Which in my opinion is a great thing to take away!

What about this as a proposal - we start holding "round robin" judging/feedback sessions where the focus is on letting members get feedback from many judges on as many images as they can. More images = less detailed feedback, but a broader appraisal - fewer images = more detailed feedback for "refining" an image. We can do these "round robin" sessions in two ways, by either inviting half a dozen or so judges across for the evening OR by asking our more experienced members to judge for the evening.... or maybe a better balance is a combination of the two? It means photographers can take on board a range of feedback.

We can hold several of these sessions early in the season to give members the time to review, refine and prepare entries then later on we hold competitions...

The focus of competitions becomes showcasing our best work. Everything that has been reviewed & tweaked has a chance to be shown off here. It's also another round of feedback. Perhaps fewer images because this is our best stuff.

I think I've now come up with two suggestions for the AGM now, a change to scoring and a suggestion for activities/competitions

[Mike Farley]

...... Mike (a master) .......

I assume that this is an apocryphal Mike.

I have previously outlined my issues with marking, so will not repeat them, other than to reiterate that it forces the judge to give a true indication of their opinion of an image's worth, whatever they might have said in the comments.

There is no right or wrong answer here, but it is worthwhile to review whether competitions are giving the majority of members what they want and explore other options. Round robin critiques are one way, but not everyone is comfortable expressing their views. There is the option for image critique on this forum, but it is little used and only the usual suspects give feedback when something is posted. Just as this thread is a biased discussion in that so few are making comments. What would the silent majority like to see, or are they content with the status quo?

[toms]

Both David and Mike have raised some valid arguments in relation to images submitted for camera club competitions. Without expanding on any issues already raised, the concept of club competitions as a vehicle to gauge competence remains a popular vehicle. That carries on to inter-club competition.

For me what has come out of this post is the need to acknowledge the need to foster all member's aspirations in photography, regardless of skill level, without demoralising them through low scoring in competition and/or negative feedback from poor judging. Yes I know this is somewhat of a contradiction to the above paragraph but perhaps we need to find a way of achieving both goals.

As earlier stated I think one of the ways that we can achieve this is to incorporate more critique sessions in our Members' Evenings, even if that means that an image that has been reviewed is later submitted in a competition.

Thank you all for your comments.

Tom

[Iggy]

I will keep my response short!
I do enjoy the competitions and pay attention to the critique for every single image, not just my own, as this helps me to progress my photography, hopefully.

Its wrong to have an Open Competition in the first month where standard, intermediate and advanced members' works are judged together to the same standard.
We should start with normal club competitions where judging for classes is segregated; Standard Class should be judged sympathetically, while Advanced Class might get more criticism! Hence newbies have a chance to get a feel for the ropes without being lambasted.

We could have all the Open Competitions in June & July and use the selected high scoring images in SLF competitions in the next season.

Iggy

[Rose]

Interestingly, at my new club, the season always starts with an open comp !

[Mike Farley]

Just to be clear, I'm not blaming the judges per se, nor debating the pros & cons of "winning images". I'm only wanting to discuss alternate ways of running competitions that makes it less about producing images that tick all the boxes in the judges handbook and more about getting valuable critique & positive feedback.

Looking back on David's initial post, this seems to be the crux of his argument for the removal of scoring in competitions. It also mirrors Iggy's comments about learning from feedback. The problem as I see it, and it is one on which David has commented on elsewhere, is that a certain style of image tends to do well in camera club competitions. Anything which does not conform or where the judge has failed to grasp the concept of an image, tends not to do well. As the possessor of a number of low marks, usually (but not always) when I have gone "off piste" and tried something different, that can be frustrating.

There is no doubt that the quality of the judges we see varies and there are a few whom I would never wish to see at the club again. Judging is subjective and no image is likely to be universally acclaimed, which everyone accepts. A judge is entitled to award a low mark to an image which they consider is substandard. The caveat is that they must be able to justify the reason and provided it is done in the right way, constructively and with sensitivity, there is nothing wrong with that. It's a fine balance, but it is not uncommon for an image which has seemingly received a positive critique is marked down, which can often be confusing. The real problem, though, arises when the basis for rejection is perverse or even absurd, which does not help anyone involved. I have my own horror stories and I am sure others do as well.

[Iggy]

Rose

Interestingly, at my new club, the season always starts with an open comp !

We have quite a large number of new members this year, many of whom submitted entries for the Open Bamber Competition.
Some of them did not fare well and obviously it was disheartening for them to have a lot of negative comments and could easily have put them off for good.
So starting with an Open Competition is not great.
Rose, there were 51 print entries in this competition, which will surprise you. Are you doing print competitions this year?
Iggy

[Iggy]

The re-entry of half a dozen images from the Bamber Competition in the 1st Print Competition yesterday, as is permitted, does offer an opportunity to consider the view from two different judges. Both judges offered more or less the same comments on the resubmitted images, which is encouraging. While the first judge was deemed too lenient in marking, the other was more considered when giving marks.
With another entry of 50 last night, the judge just had about 1.5 mins or less per image in the 1.5 hr that was actually available for the judging. Most entries came from the Advanced Class.
Iggy