Latest PAGB News

[Paul Heester]

The latest PAGB newsletter covers the recent inter-club DPI competition. What is interesting is how many portraits & bird images there are, probably around 90% between them. Seems like other subjects presumably score lower

http://www.pagbnews.co.uk/newsletter/issue-143-extra

[Mike Farley]

I agree that there does seem to be a preponderance of essentially similar images spread across a few genres, with evidence of a high degree of manipulation. Even some of those which appear to be "straight" at first glance have probably been composited.

[Paul Heester]

I hope this doesnt mean that we need to submit images that are in vogue for the CPAGB award, the judges should cover all genres & styles.

[davidc]

Interesting timing that you bring this up. I was discussing the "state" of the international exhibition scene with some friends over here (from a range of countries) and it came up that the UK exhibitions (national & international) are widely viewed as a joke by many international photographers and they have stopped entering. They were quite comprehensive in terms of examples given and anecdotes shared, so much so I thought I'd ask what the UK exhibition scene thought of it and do some research of my own.

I asked some questions in a post on the UK Club Photography Facebook page, such as

-why people abroad have been very critical of the current vogue in UK photography - namely as you say quite generic portraits, often with some unmistakeable compositing/processing, to the point where most look like CGI instead of photos
-whether or not this was true, and whether it's bad for UK photography. As Paul asks, if this is what the small group of PAGB & UK judges like & want, is that pushing UK photographers down that same avenue whether that is intended or not. That you have basically asked if this is what is required proves I'm not alone in thinking it!
-I also mentioned the comment made by one of the photographers out here, specifically that you can take any average portrait, photoshop a background in and overlay a "cracked paint" texture to hide the joins; voila, exhibition gold.

Well... The response on the post I made was pretty harsh! I was personally insulted and the question was dodged while a couple of people assumed I was "stirring trouble in the age-old creative vs non-creative debate" before someone dismissed all my questions in a very rude, gruff manner. At the point of thinking I'd just leave the group and not engage the internet trolls further someone who I recognised (and who I think is very good at the composite type image) came into the discussion, we chatted offline and they explained the background. I then had a few other people message me privately, saying not to worry about the people posting harsh comments, they are "known" for being overly aggressive and that there is a kind of super-clique among UK exhibitioners/judges across various organisations who stamp out any kind of discussion or criticism of the creative style/exhibtions. I did question the super-clique claim as being a bit far fetched but they were quite adamant; I've only been in that group for a short time so not had time to get much of a personal opinion. Trouble is that kind of accusation is as hard to prove as it is to deny. Just as I was going to delete my post on the advisement of the people I was talking to, I found it had been deleted already

So - based on the discussion/explanation, it seems like the whole creative/non-creative topic is an extremely sore point. Based on the evidence I've seen there definitely IS a preference among UK judges for creative & heavily processed images that does not seem anywhere near as evident internationally. Normally I never bother checking my exhibition catalogues but after being shouted at I made a point of looking back; there are a huge number of UK photographers doing these types of images, noticeably more than other countries and the few UK exhibitions I've entered all have a huge number of photoshopped entries like this as award winners. The defence I heard from the UK guys were that "the UK has, and continues, to lead the world in the field of the creative arts". Maybe a little of their personal opinion creeping in there... not sure I agree with that myself.

Most of these images tend to fall in the "obvious CGI-looking composite", "HDR portrait" or "portrait composite of someone dressed in steampunk clothing" tropes It's not that I have some particular dislike of photoshop or compositing (on the contrary I'd love to do it much better), it's just that so many are so similar in such a cliched way or badly/obviously composited I don't understand why the receive the awards or appreciation they do, especially when the field is filled with such similar examples.

It was astonishing to see the level of anger & annoyance on display, very off putting for someone new to their group, and while I definitely think "to each their own" applies, advocates of this style of photography don't do themselves favours when reacting the way some people did when questions are asked. I was told that so many people have criticised the "composite clique" in the past that "whenever someone even raises their hand to beat them, the guard dogs attack hard and fast". That's probably what I experienced, though it seems like the dogs attack even if you raise your hand to ask a question. Very unpleasant atmosphere.

This has turned into a longer post than I expected... The official response to Paul's question seems to a vehement (and overly aggressive in my experience) "NO it is not an issue how dare you ask " whereas the reality seems to be, to my eye at least, that while you can succeed with any images, submitting stuff you know that the judges like means you are much more likely to succeed. I was sorely tempted to photoshop any old crappy portraits, send them in and see how they got on. But life is too short for that and I don't personally value much in the way of photography distinctions

[Mike Farley]

A fascinating post. Do you have a link to the Facebook group you mentioned? One thing which I was wondering is whether the "attack dogs" are actually doing the style of work they are defending so vigorously and being successful with it, or is it just noise? The images should speak for themselves and I always become suspicious of anything, not just photography, where people believe that it needs to be so aggressively protected from criticism beyond what might be considered normal debate.

One of the things I have never really understood is the disconnect between club photography and what is expected at higher levels. An image which does well in one will almost inevitably fail in the other, although there is the occasional exception. Over the weekend I was discussing RPS distinctions with a friend who is a good street photographer. He had recently taken a selection of his images to a workshop to see if they would make the grade for an ARPS. He was complimented on his vision, but in almost every instance the assessors wanted to crop the shot down to its core elements. He felt that the context was important to him and removing it destroyed the point of the picture. Possibly he could still go for an A, but he would do so with a set of images which are not representative of his output. I suspect that could be true of a lot of people, producing work which conforms to what is expected which in turn becomes self fulfilling. It is not a bandwagon my friend will be joining.

Unfortunately, there does seem to be a trend in the PAGB for certain styles at the expense of others. I know of a club which went to the PAGB finals a while back with a good set of images, but lost out in the first round simply because the judges preferred the more manipulated variety. I do not see this changing, simply because PAGB judges are promoted by their peers who seem to have a limited view of what makes a good shot. At least the RPS has recognised this as an issue and divided the former Visual Art category into classes for straight and manipulated photography.

[Paul Heester]

Thanks for the comprehensive reply.

Im shocked you were attacked for posting thought-provoking questions. I like a good debate and Im know your questions were asked with no intention of trolling.

Your mention of steampunk clothing gives me a wry smile as Ive seen exactly that kind of shot posted on the unoffical PAGB assessment Facebook page asking for advice on whether it meets the standard!

As a counterweight to this discussion myself and a few other members went to the PAGB assessment workshop in Crawley back in May. From memory there was a good selection of subject matter in mostly "non-creative" style so maybe its an inter-club level this situation arises?

[Mike Farley]

As a counterweight to this discussion myself and a few other members went to the PAGB assessment workshop in Crawley back in May. From memory there was a good selection of subject matter in mostly "non-creative" style so maybe its an inter-club level this situation arises?

Were these images getting the nod at the workshop? From what I hear, there were some good shots being turned down. Unfortunately I could not attend, so maybe I have gained a misleading impression from the feedback of what occurred.

[Rose]

I thought the assessors were were honest and helpful for the most part. To be fair they weren't there to assess, but provide guidance and feedback on whether our images were in the right ballpark for a distinction. Most of the issues they had seemed to be with prints - often the image itself was potentially good, but they didn't think it was coming over well enough on the medium chosen.

[davidc]

I can't access facebook at work so will need to dig out the link to the group at home. It's called UK Club Photography though, so easy enough to find. There are quite a number of groups all seemingly run by the same people who are all seemingly quite high up in the PAGB world. For example, there is one group for "unofficial distinction critique", and another for distinction success reporting, another for club photography... when I noticed that a public message was made telling people off for reporting a distinction success in the distinction critique group I asked why there isn't just one unified UK Photography group where members can exercise their own discretion as to what they choose to read and what they don't, that resulted in another telling off, asking why I was stirring trouble and we have plenty of groups for every purpose thank you very much. At that stage I had no clue there were more groups with very specific purposes! Seems silly to have such a disjointed facebook presence for what is ostensibly the PAGB plus friends, especially when newbies are routinely criticised for trying to understand what's going on.

Honestly, not a hugely pleasant community but the fact I get private messages from some saying stick with it, and "ignore these specific people" does help. It's a shame the level of discussion seems to be very stifled and driven mostly by the people who are vocal in telling others off. Maybe further observation would dispel that idea but it's hard to be interested enough to do it after the first experience.

I did check the specific person who was rude when you asked and yes they do replicate the style of photography in question. In fact their style is exactly the "portrait, composite background, texture overlay" which I repeated parrot fashion in my questioning of the style so maybe that does explain part of the vehemence of their rage!

What I'm now wondering about is looking at the types of images that do well in the PAGB national inter-club events. I don't mean exhibitions, as I've now checked every single catalogue I own and with the exception of Southampton all of the salons I've entered have a huge over-representation of these types of image. Mostly from the same core group of UK photographers but there are some noteable foreign guys doing the same type of image. I wonder if the PAGB club events are dominated by clubs & photographers doing these images?

Argh... what really annoys me is not this type of picture, the good ones show real flair & imagination. So many are so obviously a BAD composite or over-processed/HDR/hyper-contrasty it's more computer graphics than photo and there are millions of them all looking the same! How is everyone doing the same kind of image possibly proof UK leads the field in creative arts?

All a storm in a teacup I guess, though it does still make me think it's a bad example to set to new/inexperienced photographers who view these images as the standard to attain.

Instead of bleating about rough treatment online maybe I SHOULD actually attempt to do another one myself

[Mike Farley]

Now I am confused. I initially tried to find the group using Google, but that returned a lot of irrelevant links to photography clubs' Facebook pages. I found it easily enough once I logged into Facebook* and saw a number of your posts there. Perhaps I did not scroll far enough back to see the comments to which you refer (or have they been deleted?), but you seem to be getting a friendly reception. Your article about distinctions was well received, for example.

What I will say is that on my travels I meet a lot of friendly people at camera clubs and the occasional pillock who thinks they know it all. The latter ruin it for the others as I make it a rule not to return to a club where someone has given me a hostile reception. I am giving my time freely, charging only travel expenses, and that is not something I need. Reasoned debate is one thing, rudeness is something else entirely. So far, out of all those I have visited, only three clubs have managed to make it onto the blacklist. A fourth has also managed it, but for a completely different reason, although that came down to another individual who had a narrow view.

I see that Wigan 10 won the recent PAGB DPI championship and that club is well known for its composited shots. For me, photography is as much about capturing the moment as anything else, so while I enjoy many of the images created on a computer, that's not what it should all be about.

* Yes, I am on Facebook and am the guy without any friends. FB has pulled a number of dubious stunts in the past and I am not sure that I trust it. I joined because that is the only way to access some content, but have no intention of posting there and have kept my profile to the bare minimum.