Competition Reform Proposal

3.  I don't think you will ever have all the comps agree on a standard, even with pushing them

4.  I agree with that one, there def needs to be some sort of line.  What is a pro?  Tough to decide really.  There are many serious amateurs out there who travel extensively throughout the world to some very top dive destinations and do 6, 8, 10 trips a year, taking more photos than most pros.  SHould that person be in the same category as the person who goes on one trip every year or two?  i don't think so....  Very grey area here

In terms of the RAW file only.

 

Do we not then need to take it a step further back and dictate the in-camera settings. As saturation/contrast and sharpening can be adjusted there.

I have to say that I don't think that this would be a good idea. In the days of contests before the widespread advent of digital imaging (and even now), were people limited to a certain type of slide or print film (each with different characteristics, color tones, dynamic range, etc) that they were required to use?

If not, then why would you place a similar restriction on digital imaging? The amazing aspect of digital is the ability to soft-tweak a RAW file to achieve exactly the look (of the film, or 'not-film') you desire - if you so wished, you could simulate Afga or Ektachrome, or even go straight for Velvia's vivid saturated colors. Not only that, but I, for one, have to white balance nearly every shot out of my camera (especially in the local waters, where I end up with some oddly crazy 'auto' white balances).

If you begin to start limiting work in the RAW converter, what will be the standard for the limitations? I saw mention earlier in the thread about only allowing certain sliders - it seems the individual may have assumed everyone is using Adobe Camera RAW, when, in reality, that's typically not the case.

I agree with the necessity at some times of the RAW file for verification. At other times, contests should be able to rely on honesty and integrity. But to eliminate one of the strongest advantages of digital by clamping down on RAW conversion, well, that sounds a bit out of hand.

~Matt Segal

Matt, why are you quoting my comment. I make no comment that I believe RAW should be restricted. I only pose the question to the previous poster that should their thought process need to go one step further back if they are suggesting restricting RAW conversion.

Please do not assume I want RAW restricted as I made no such comment.

About RAW etc, one thing I didnt really get about the BBC contest (i didnt enter it, but I read the rules after it came up in this thread) is the no-sharpening rule. On my D100 I would turn off in-camera sharpening and only did it in PS. On the D2x i leave it in 'normal', but I still do PS sharpening because it needs it imho.

Cor

John

Reality is such a pain.....

Am I right in thinking that Diver splits entrants into two camps - those who have never won anything and those who have won a major competition (which I think, is defined)? This seems the way to go to me.

The RPS Nature Group allow for editing 'which does not intefere with the essential truth of the photo', again sounds pretty fair to me.

While "amateur" categories and competitions are important, just because someone is out shooting more often than someone else doesn't mean that they should be excluded from a competition.  Having said that, the existing rules we've been seeing for defining amateur vs pros are not the best.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with you on that. Thats why i don't like rules in a lot of these contests.

I like 2 categories.

Novice

Open (to everyone)

But as i said before...how does one define novice....????

TIs a good thread this one....

Mike

How about:

OPEN Category - open to anyone who has not won, or been placed second or third, in a 'major competition' which could be defined as a competition open to international entries and which has attracted at least 1000 entries, and

EXPERT Category - open only to those who HAVE won or been placed second or third in a competition as deined above.

Not perfect, but it does avoid the tedious debate about 'pro' and amateur, and in reality it should mean that unless someone enters a stunningly good but flukey shot in a competition (which is up to them when all said and done) it should be a reasonably fair way of differentiating skill levels.

I like that Paul... works for me. But i would switch it to Novice and Open. I would avoid the word Expert....

Leaving it as Novice would get more people to enter i think. And that is of course the point of a contest, you want the most entries possible in order to get the most stunning results and a wide range of photos.

The word expert (even in a different category) would scare off a few people i think, its a subliminal thing

i agree with all contests being open to everyone. Certainly a "pro" designation doesnt always mean good photography.I believe it only means you do it for a living. Taking quality images is what maters

Ok, after considerable thought...

1. Lets keep in mind why these contests are put on...starts with 'M'

So, the idea is to maximize entries. By making people feel there is a chance that they will place, more will enter. I'll leave it to the contest organizers to define the specifics.

Novice- Open to non winners ever. (Ncups had a max on number of years shooting underwater. One I believe.)

Intermediate. This category will be anyone not defined as a Novice or an Advanced shooter.

Advanced: Strictly defined by number of wins, occupation, income via U/Wphotography etc. This level has the top prizes as the award for winning. As the most competitive level should. The bigger the better to attract as many entrants that qualify. The qualilfications must be such that it's not a slam dunk to get in. But not overly restrictive so that only a handful qualify. Give this category the cache it deserves. A catchy category name: ie: The Eric Cheng excellance in Underwater Photography award . Large prizes and trophies for example. Make it everyone's goal to qualify.

Most of the earlier comments seemed to be aimed at eliminating the best shooters. This will reward those, who, as Eric said, spend a ton of time trying to get better at their craft. After all is said and done, it is a competition. Not a give away.

JMHO.

Rand

Like the Novice, Intermediate and Advanced. Think you need to keep Advanced simple like the other categories. If you have won/placed in a major competition, more than once, EVER, (would include having two photos place in same comp) you are Advanced. Maybe keep the income issue out, hard to prove.

I would still like to see the beginning of a proposal for at least a partial standardization of competition rules and guidelines that would make entry an easier process.

John

I dont see the need for 3 categories. I would prefer Novice and Open. Novice being anyone that has never placed before, and Open being everyone else, including pros. Most pros wont enter anyways, for all kinds of reasons.

I doubt you're going to get any kind of standardization, and I dont think we should try and push it anyways. Competitions have different goals, and those goals often drive the entry rules. If you want to enter a competition, it's up to you, the photographer, to meet their rules. It's really not that much of a problem. Plenty of people manage to enter

Cor

This thread has produced many perspectives on the way competions are run and how they could be improved. I now have a whole different view of what they are about and how they are opperated. Look forward to a new thread with this participants opinion.

John