It's Photography, Jim, ......

[Mike Farley]

http://davidcandlish.photography/news/2015/10/8/opinion-has-the-rps-lost-its-relevance

Had a think about it. While I still don't personally like a significant majority of the shots, maybe "Garbage IMO" was a bit strong. Even though I don't personally like the majority of images, it's not the images themselves I have the problem with, it's the potential message the RPS has given with this selection.

That was kind of the approach I took with Lesley Goode. She initiated the conversation by asking if I was a member and I responded in rather combative style* in the affirmative, although seeing the exhibition made me wonder if I should renew. She fell back on the usual RPS defence** that the selection is down to the judges and they are all experts in their field. That ignores the fact it is the RPS which chooses the selection panel so even if there is no briefing about what is being looked for, it is possible to influence the outcome. As an example one of this year's selectors was the picture editor from The Guardian; would their opposite number at The Times have preferred similar images, I wonder?

The second line of defence is that the selectors can only choose from what is submitted. True, but anyone who wants to achieve success will look at what has gone before and will either not waste time an money in entering or tailor their submission accordingly. It was not always that way and one of the club's older members made it into the exhibition on a number of occasions during the 80s, but not since the RPS changed what they were looking for.

A case can be made for all the images featured in this thread. Certainly not all would achieve much more than 7 or 8 in a camera club competition, even with Croydon's generous marks out of 12 system, since they are not typical of what usually does well. Inclusion in an exhibition of this nature can be justified on the basis that it is evidently what some people like, but it is depressing that the same types of boring images feature amongst the winners so frequently. Where is the interest, variety of genres and styles to represent all aspects of photography, which is what the RPS should want to achieve?

During my conversation with Lesley, I rather got the impression that she was in agreement with much of what I was saying but as an employee of the RPS had to put their viewpoint. Which goes back to my earlier point in this thread about how representative the RPS should be of all its members.

* Subtlety never being a strong point ......

** Yes, I have had this conversation with them before.

[davidc]

I've posted this on the uk club photography facebook discussion page now, potentially against my better judgement. Though I'm interested in hearing what others think & have to say based on previous experiences I wonder how long it will be until the attack dogs are released. Phrasing it as a question and tacking on my own thoughts at the end should hopefully mean it is less confrontational and more discussion-worthy. At least that's the plan.

[Mike Farley]

I have seen what you have written on your blog and agree with most of it. There are good images in the exhibition and you have highlighted some of them, but they are overwhelmed by the mediocrity of the others. All the successful images are technically well executed, but too many are aesthetically sterile. Where I would differ is your assertion that the RPS is stuck in a time warp. It has a mission to push the boundaries of photography, but this ambition pushes it towards the contemporary which is where the exhibition suffers. The contemporary is always with us, of course, and artists have long wanted to be different from what has gone before. The downside is "emporor's new clothes" syndrome where experimentation is falsely hailed as innovation. Some of today's contemporary art will undoubtedly be long remembered, including perhaps some work which currently attracts derision, but I suspect much will be forgotten. Too much of what the RPS has chosen in both this and earlier years falls into the latter category.

I would also note that the RPS is not alone in this. Last Friday I saw three exhibitions, one being of work from AOP members and it demonstrated much the same traits as I saw with the RPS. I would provide a link if I could find one, but the AOP appears to be too embarassed to publish any of the winners.

http://davidcandlish.photography/news/2 ... -relevance

[Mike Farley]

You seem to be geting a fair hearing on the UK Club Photography Facebook page and some of those opposed to your view are open to your responses. IAs a former insider, I would be very interested to know what Rod Wheelan's objections to the RPS are. Although he pins his hopes on the new council and advisory boards, I would not be confident that much is going to change. The RPS has never struck me as an organisation which pays much heed to constructive criticism and is very inflexible in its approach.

I suspect that a good proportion of its membership live in the south of England, quite posibly 20% or more, yet only the London region is active which is mainly due to the efforts of one individual* from what I have seen. The Southern and South Eastern regions do little by comparison. The same is true of the Digital Imaging Group sub section to which I belong. The nearest active centre is the Thames Valley group, which holds eight meetings a year and is a 50 mile drive via the M25 car park. There is nothing happening in Surrey, Kent or Sussex. Yet when I enquired about helping, I could not get past the fixed way the RPS does things. I wonder if it has been the case for others?

* Not the regional co-ordinator, ironically.

[davidc]

I was going to be posting back pretty much the same assessment here, I wasn't aware you were on Facebook It was nice to not get my head bitten off for asking a question and that makes me much more inclined to participate more! I thought Rod's reasons would no doubt be interesting too but it's not something I'd feel comfortable asking publically and I don't know him well enough - at all, really - to ask privately.

I've been thinking more about this more too. I'm wondering if the main two reasons people are joining & also staying as members is because of their distinctions. They remember the effort it took to get them and the sense of achievement and don't want to give up the letters (even though doing so wouldn't invalidate that achievement in any way!). Assuming this is true, it's not necessarily good for the RPS because it's inherently backward looking. People aren't staying in to achieve new things, it's to preserve old things.

The second factor I think is based around a need for a sense of community. It probably starts from their clubs and the RPS has always been a logical extension of that because the other bodies (SPA, PAGB) are far less about the members and more about club-management. This is also being eroded because nowadays you can join any number and any type of community you want online and often with the relevance that the RPS can't maintain because it feels the need to cater to all.

Might add that as an addendum to the blog post

[Mike Farley]

....... I wasn't aware you were on Facebook

Well, I am just about, but only because there are certain groups I very occasionally look at and I remain friendless*. Apart from this forum where I know the participants personally, I am not really into any form of social media.

I thought Rod's reasons would no doubt be interesting too but it's not something I'd feel comfortable asking publically and I don't know him well enough - at all, really - to ask privately.

I've been thinking more about this more too. I'm wondering if the main two reasons people are joining & also staying as members is because of their distinctions. They remember the effort it took to get them and the sense of achievement and don't want to give up the letters (even though doing so wouldn't invalidate that achievement in any way!). Assuming this is true, it's not necessarily good for the RPS because it's inherently backward looking. People aren't staying in to achieve new things, it's to preserve old things.

The second factor I think is based around a need for a sense of community. It probably starts from their clubs and the RPS has always been a logical extension of that because the other bodies (SPA, PAGB) are far less about the members and more about club-management. This is also being eroded because nowadays you can join any number and any type of community you want online and often with the relevance that the RPS can't maintain because it feels the need to cater to all.

I have long been convinced that the only reason the RPS has survived as long as it has is due to offering distinctions. Apart from the monthly magazine, which is average at best and I have not read it for months, it does not offer much else; there is little of the community spirit you write about. Whenever I have approached them for advice, they have never been of any real assistance. It all leaves me wondering what its purpose is. Our judge last night, who inadvertently supplied me with material for a future talk, is a lapsed ARPS, for example.

A few years ago, the South East region had a very active organiser and for three or four years it was great with lots of events to attend. When she stepped down, I thought it was a shame to let all that go and I enquired about taking over. I ended up talking to the then current president and vice-president, but all they were really interested in was holding distinction workshops and assessment days. In other words, activities which are designed to encourage participation in the distinctions process and drive up membership. From what I have seen of assessment days, I believe they do as much to discourage people from continuing with photography as promote the hobby and there were changes I wanted to make. Oh no, the RPS has a standard way of doing things which are forever carved into granite, or some even more durable material. Unsurprisingly, I did not take my investigation any further.

There is more about the set ways of the RPS in my fuel on the fire thread - viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1838.

* Just like real life, then.