In agreement with what IanW said, I once proposed to the list a
photo competition with the prize being a LN 35-80/2.8 lens.
It seems that it created a lot of angst on the list, the whole idea of
a competition and that someone would feel the results were not
judged correctly, left out, etc.
I applaud Ken's generosity to share his OM-3t, but even that can
create angst about the whole judging thing. Ken is a generous
guy and likely one of the reasons he has an OM-3t. I think the
reward should be simply getting the chance to participate in
what we like most, and getting inspired to share that inspiration.
Offering to post the pictures is a decent prise with maybe the best photos
being more prominently displayed. Me personally, I'm interested in
the non-measurable and non-quantifiable aspects of such a proposal.
The idea is which camera really inspires your juices and which have
become ho-hum. Sometimes I think clicking away with the 5D, with
hardly any limit on shooting, the images have started to suffer on the
creative side - camera diarrhea leading to creative constipation.
Then there is the lens. I know that big Canyon 70-200/2.8 takes really
great shots. But now I'm schlepping a heavy bag around, like a boat
anchor tied to an eagle who wants to just fly, as you can't leave the
other ones behind. What happens if I only have one camera and one
lens?
Even though I love what my digital camera can do and I do get inspired.
I still remember that intangible magical feeling of having some
vulnerable film inside the camera just waiting for a moments worth
of light to define something newly created. Yeah, the digital sensor
is vulnerable, but after seeing so many images, that sensor is just
getting tired of being used over and over again, it has a sense
of immortality that leads to sameness, whereas that film only has
one chance to live a long life. And we, being the god of the film,
will determine its fate.
I do think boundaries need to be placed in order for creativity to happen
or else it leads to chaos instead, with too much possibility. Hence
minimalism is a good principle to use for the event. So some
constraints need to be placed. Minimalism is in the right direction,
and I think film only is also right.
As I have said, I am most interested in the effect the camera and the
process has on the immeasurable aspects of one's photography.
If some sort of judging is involved, it should be light hearted.
Some judging possibilities:
List Judging: Perhaps if each list participant is allowed to score each photo,
whether they participate or not, could average out the judging.
Set of Judges: A set of pre-selected judges, with not necessarily
pre-defined criteria, other than judging the photo for it's creative
inspiration.
I think the judging needs to allow for the immeasurable and ineffable aspect
of the creative process.
Self-Judging: that we each take several shots and post 3-4 images
where we judge which one we felt was most creative and inspiring to us.
And your selected minimalist camera that inspires you the most.
Judging Criteria:
Judging based on minimalism, creativity, with light-hearted hand.
Restrictions in line with minimalism - using film, fixed lens, simple,
but somewhat user defined. I think we can use our own judgement
on what minimal means for our situation.
WayneS
At 01:05 AM 12/11/2008, IanW wrote:
>I also agree, I don't need or want to compete in areas of my life I
>don't need to. so the talk of competition would probably have me running
>miles, I also think its got a bit to complicated and we should just have
>something in the style of a film only Tope full stop.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|