Monday night was competition night at my camera club. The
there was no mandate; it was "Open" night.

One person (not me) submitted a black and white photo of a
man sprawled on a park bench. The subject was interesting,
the composition very good, and the processing strong blacks
and whites.

The score was 64 (out of 100) and the lowest of the b&w
submissions. The judge that critiqued the photo said "It's
just a man sitting on a bench".

The judge is a locally renowned nature photographer whose
photos - mostly birds - have appeared in magazines and
on magazine covers.

"Street" gets no respect at my camera club.

Why do you suppose street doesn't get any respect at your camera club ?

Judging from Tony's post about the judge being a bird man, they care a lot about the quality of the photo & they are color folks, so all other things being equal b&w would come in second.

The surprising comment to me was, "just a man doing nothing"; when birdsters take scads of shots of birds, just doing nothing....

Go figure

Originally Posted by lensmole Why do you suppose street doesn't get any respect at your camera club ?

There are over 500 members of the club but only a couple of hundred
are active. Competition night brings in about 100 images.

There are three judges each month; two members that are pros or
very proficient amateurs and an outsider that is employed in the
field or a photography teacher from one of the local colleges.

Many of the member judges have written books, teach courses, make
a supplemental living from stock photography (two full-time at this),
are professional wedding and portrait photographers, or are
dedicated wildlife or landscape photographers. Some specialize in travel
photography and run teaching tours for groups for a fee.

Judges tend to rate what they know better than a genre they
are not familiar with. I understand that, and I'm not unhappy
with the judging. I've won best-in-show twice, but not for
images I'd put up in this forum.

Most of the winners are superb photographs, but not of subjects
that interest me. I do like the competitions because the critiques
help me understand what other people see in a photograph.

Let's see the photo Tony!

Originally Posted by TonyCooper There are over 500 members of the club but only a couple of hundred are active. Competition night brings in about 100 images. There are three judges each month; two members that are pros or very proficient amateurs and an outsider that is employed in the field or a photography teacher from one of the local colleges. Many of the member judges have written books, teach courses, make a supplemental living from stock photography (two full-time at this), are professional wedding and portrait photographers, or are dedicated wildlife or landscape photographers. Some specialize in travel photography and run teaching tours for groups for a fee. Judges tend to rate what they know better than a genre they are not familiar with. I understand that, and I'm not unhappy with the judging. I've won best-in-show twice, but not for images I'd put up in this forum. Most of the winners are superb photographs, but not of subjects that interest me. I do like the competitions because the critiques help me understand what other people see in a photograph.

Healthy attitude...

Originally Posted by torags Healthy attitude...

Indeed.

I think "street/PJ" is an odd little group. I don't think many people get us.
If you can continue to learn from going to the camera club, then by all means, but I would continue to expect this kind of attitude towards street.

I kind of take a little pride in it :)

Originally Posted by TonyCooper Monday night was competition night at my camera club. The there was no mandate; it was "Open" night. One person (not me) submitted a black and white photo of a man sprawled on a park bench. The subject was interesting, the composition very good, and the processing strong blacks and whites. The score was 64 (out of 100) and the lowest of the b&w submissions. The judge that critiqued the photo said "It's just a man sitting on a bench". The judge is a locally renowned nature photographer whose photos - mostly birds - have appeared in magazines and on magazine covers. "Street" gets no respect at my camera club.

"Camera Clubs" get no respect at my camera club. Seriously, points? Nature photographer judging urban street photography? I think the problem you're describing is typical of almost all camera clubs, Tony.

Originally Posted by bdcolen "Camera Clubs" get no respect at my camera club. Seriously, points? Nature photographer judging urban street photography? I think the problem you're describing is typical of almost all camera clubs, Tony.

To be fair, I provided an anecdote about one entry in one
month's judging. It's rare for anyone to submit this type of
image.

I submit images each month, but I photograph many subjects
that are not "street" or close to it. While I like "street",
Orlando is not a fertile ground for this genre and I don't want
to be restricted to any single type of subject.

I have learned a great deal from the competition night critiques.
I see elements in photographs that I would not notice if not for
the comments in these critiques.

There are comments in this group about composition, contrast,
focal points in an image, and rendering in post that apply equally
to a photograph of a snow owl or a hibiscus blossom.

You and a couple of other people frequently comment on the
advantage of reading books about and by street photographers.
That's just learning from outside sources about how to improve.
A verbal critique at a camera club is learning from an outside
source based on how that source sees your image.

Only the subject matter changes. The judges may not respect
the subject matter that is the focus of this group, but they do
respect and inform about the basic elements of a good photo.

Originally Posted by TonyCooper To be fair, I provided an anecdote about one entry in one month's judging. It's rare for anyone to submit this type of image. I submit images each month, but I photograph many subjects that are not "street" or close to it. While I like "street", Orlando is not a fertile ground for this genre and I don't want to be restricted to any single type of subject. I have learned a great deal from the competition night critiques. I see elements in photographs that I would not notice if not for the comments in these critiques. There are comments in this group about composition, contrast, focal points in an image, and rendering in post that apply equally to a photograph of a snow owl or a hibiscus blossom. You and a couple of other people frequently comment on the advantage of reading books about and by street photographers. That's just learning from outside sources about how to improve. A verbal critique at a camera club is learning from an outside source based on how that source sees your image. Only the subject matter changes. The judges may not respect the subject matter that is the focus of this group, but they do respect and inform about the basic elements of a good photo.

Makes sense.

Originally Posted by torags ...when birdsters take scads of shots of birds, just doing nothing.... Go figure

They're probably waiting for something exciting / dramatic / different etc to happen and checking that the gear's working ok :)

pp

Tony, was it actually, as the judge said, "just a man sitting on a bench?" You said " The subject was interesting, the composition very good, and the processing strong blacks and whites." But you didn't tell us what there was about the picture that made it good. Why was the subject interesting? I think we've all seen hundreds of pictures of a guy sitting, sprawled, or lying on a bench; usually a hobo. But from what you said, I'd assume there was some particular thing about this picture that made it stand out. What was it?

Originally Posted by RSL Tony, was it actually, as the judge said, "just a man sitting on a bench?" You said " The subject was interesting, the composition very good, and the processing strong blacks and whites." But you didn't tell us what there was about the picture that made it good. Why was the subject interesting? I think we've all seen hundreds of pictures of a guy sitting, sprawled, or lying on a bench; usually a hobo. But from what you said, I'd assume there was some particular thing about this picture that made it stand out. What was it?

Keeping in mind that about a 100 images were shown that night, and
I saw each image for only a very brief amount of time, I have to say
that I really can't give you a good reason for liking this particular
image.

The images are projected on a large screen, one judge comments on
each image, and the next image pops up for the next judge to comment
on. The judges have seen the images on their own computers prior to
the meeting. They each assign a numerical grade, and the total grade is the
sum of the three judges. Sometimes the judges refer to notes they've
taken earlier. Sometimes a judge comments that the image looks
different on the big screen than they saw at home.

In this case, it was a man (not a hobo) sitting on a park bench
backed up to a curved brick wall. It just struck me as good.
I didn't have a chance to analyze why it was good. Gut said
good.

It might not have earned raves in this group, but this group has
biases and expectations. This group has time to take in more
than a few second's view of an image.

Sounds like it was a contextual image: urban landscape - structurally the same as a mountain landscape.

Sounds like a fair group, you happen to be a minority..

You're not going to start demonstrating are you????

Originally Posted by bdcolen I think the problem you're describing is typical of almost all camera clubs, Tony.

In one camera club I belong to - that has outside judges for our competions - I was talking with the president once, and he said "Unless it's buds, bugs, or beasts, most judges don't care for it". The few times I entered with some of my aviation photography, I found this to be true.

That sounds like Florida. While I was living in NYC I did street photography mainly. NYC was great for that because NYers don't expect to have any privacy. NYers try very hard not to make eye contact with strangers. Its great working conditions for a street shooter.

In Florida they do expect not to have their privacy invaded and they are not comfortable with a stranger taking their picture. Plus many are carrying guns. Not an ideal situation for a street shooter. This carries over to their viewing of images. They like landscapes. sunrises and sunsets, and nature images.

Very true, Harry, but there are exceptions. St. Augustine is a street-shooter's paradise. Everybody there is carrying a camera, so nobody pays any attention when you raise your own and click.

Originally Posted by Harryb That sounds like Florida. While I was living in NYC I did street photography mainly. NYC was great for that because NYers don't expect to have any privacy. NYers try very hard not to make eye contact with strangers. Its great working conditions for a street shooter. In Florida they do expect not to have their privacy invaded and they are not comfortable with a stranger taking their picture. Plus many are carrying guns. Not an ideal situation for a street shooter. This carries over to their viewing of images. They like landscapes. sunrises and sunsets, and nature images.

Many of the Orlando Camera Club members are to be found over in your
area on weekends. Subjects shot in the Viera Wetlands are often
submissions in the competitions.

Originally Posted by RSL Very true, Harry, but there are exceptions. St. Augustine is a street-shooter's paradise. Everybody there is carrying a camera, so nobody pays any attention when you raise your own and click.

There are always exceptions and yes St Augustine is a paradise. I'll be spending 3 days there next week.

pics or it didn't happen