Rob Studdert wrote: > I have two main concerns/observations WRT to this type of competition > photography, first I believe it tends to artificially unify photographers > perspectives of what makes a good image.
That's an interesting idea and I think there would be some truth in it if the same people always judged the competitions. The judging panel is never the same in the competitions I've seen or entered. Different judges have different opinions. There are certainly trends in photography as in all of art. I think the leaders in the field are driving those trends not the judges in competitions. John Shaw and Galen Rowell have been enormous influences in nature photography. > And secondly I have never found those > in competition to be willing at all to share techniques/locations etc, it's > all > a big secret with the potential to loose competition points if too much > information is given up to the enemy. I think that's really bizarre. There just aren't that many secrets to be kept in photography. I've never met any photographer who wouldn't happily discuss technique and location. That's part of the fun IMO. I can see the need to keep a location secret when it comes to protecting a rare species. > I don't participate in club competitions > though I do still visit occasionally, there are some excellent photographers > there but few of the really good ones compete regularly. Some people like to compete and some don't. <shrug> Tom Reese > > http://groups.msn.com/stgeorgephotographicsociety > > > Nature photography does indeed make you aware of how intrusive man has > > become > in > > the natural world. > > Yes, I have a photographer friend who is very aware of the local botany and > he > often blows away my notions of untouched wilderness by identifying weeds and > plants not endemic to the locale. > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 >
