[Iancrowson]

I went to my second A Advisory day/workshop today I am very grateful and thank the experts and organisers who gave their time, but please, please consider booking less people .
There were about twenty people with panels. We were told that everyone would get about 20 minutes. (20 x 20 minutes!!!!!???) We started looking at panels at 11.15. By lunch time it was obvious the day was running late. A couple of the L's in the morning each got about forty minutes, most maybe half an hour. This was great for them but when your second last on the list and in a hall booked until 4.30 some thing has to give.

I'm still confused about the RPS distinction process.
On the first A advisory day I attended I was told eleven or twelve photos were a good basis of an A visual arts panel but I should have written a statement of intent . I decided to start again with a new panel.

I presented my travel panel to the call of "oh no not Cuba again". Five minutes later I was finished and told it was marginal but given very few suggestions about how to improve it except "we see so many panels of Cuba, to pass they would have to be very exceptional". I pointed out that I had written my statement of intent before taking the photos and asked how the photos did not relate to my statement. I was told statements don't mean anything. That may well be true. Earlier in the day we heard a person being advised to" fudge one to match your pane!l". Someone else was advised to rewrite their's to suit a modified panel. This surprised me, it was not what I understood.
I am now very surprised and totally confused. I don't need any more qualifications I tackled the prep of my A panel as a project. to keep old age at bay.. I did not join a photo tour to Cuba. My wife and I (who is also a photographer) jumped on a plane, explored Havana for seven days on foot, For a further two weeks we hired a car and explored the country. Cuba was great, however it is apparently over exposed at the RPS.
Be warned that if you attend an A advisory day, L's go first and get good advice from the fresh experts., "A" panel people seemed short changed , even more so today than the "A" last I attended
I heard the experts giving good meaningful advice in the morning, I got five minute max.
Ian Crowson
iancrowsonys@googlemail.com
www.iancrowsonphotography.co.uk

[woodstock]

I am very sorry that you feel so upset by the process Ian, but if what you say is true I can sympathise entirely

There would seem little choice other than to say that unfortunately this smacks both of inappropriate management by the organisers and inappropriate behaviour by the advisors

No doubt they will have a different, and in many ways probably valid, view of how things went, and to be fair, the one L assessment (my own) and the one A advisory day that I attended were both handled very well in terms of time apportionment, and by and large fairly reasonably in terms of the standard and tone of comments

I hope that this will not start off another chorus of "volunteer self-righteousness", particularly as I would very much prefer to see systematic improvement rather than personal blame, but clearly this situation is not helpful either to intending distinction candidates nor to the RPS as a whole

Martin

[Iancrowson]

Martin
What I wrote is my experience of the day. My wife was with me and she would have a lot more to say.
I'm not having a go at the experts who gave their time (thanks again) I fully understood why some people needed a lot of time and the experts were very helpful to them. There were simply too many people there with panels.
We simply ran out of time towards the end. It was a disappointing day for me. Not because I was told my panel was marginal but because there was not the time for the experts to view my panel and to for me to be given advice.
Ian

[jimread]

Hello Ian,

I've only been to one advisory day in Newark the advisors were very good indeed the atmosphere electric and the advice superbly encouraging.

Andy Wilson FRPS who looked at the ARPS panels repeated these words, 'play to your strengths' and 'create a body of work' to which I would add 'develop your personal vision'. Sadly the mainstream photographic media and even the RPS do very little to encourage this, quite the reverse in fact. With great respect seven days in Cuba is not going to do that either, all you will get is 'cherry picking' holiday snaps.

I have done a video, my take on personal vision and how to develop it here.

Jim

[Iancrowson]

Jim
Thanks for taking the time to read my post and replying. I think you are missing my point. The problem on the day was time. I am in no way saying the advice given by the three experts who kindly gave their time was not good and encouraging, it was.
I was actually in Cuba at 21 days .I'm a geographer, I researched Cuba and wrote a Statement of Intent before I went, I did not go on a holiday photo tour, I went with my wife who is also a photographer, your term" holiday snaps" sounds just a wee bit too pre conceived to me.
Personal vision? Do you mean personal style? Neither were mentioned to me, or anyone else that I heard, at this Advisory Day.
Thanks for the link to the video. I had a go but could only hear a voice, the same pictures stayed in the frame. I'll try again later.
regards
Ian

[Richard Walton]

As leader of the Bournmouth Advisory Day yesterday, I've been asked to respond to Ian's post below.

Firstly, I'm very sorry that the day did not meet your expectations. The number of potential applicants we had to deal with was, as you say, about 20, which normal for such a day, and less than some. An average of 20 minutes is about right and allows for a few simple 10 minute sessions, together with those attendees that require rather more time. However, as far as yesterday was concerned, there were a less than usual number of panels that were 'ready to go', so to speak, and this meant a slight overrun of 30 minutes at the end of the day. At lunchtime we very slightly behind, but only by one panel. That was the situation throughout the afternoon until the very last panel (there were actually 2 after you - one of Canadian prints, and a set of oversized prints which we moved from earlier in the day, being aware that it would take rather longer than most. We finished pretty much on the button of 5pm. I must take issue with you over your statement that several attendees received as long as 40 minutes. I believe I'm right in saying that 30 minutes was the longest, and 10 the shortest, with an average of about 20 minutesas planned..

Moving on to your own set of images, at no time did any of the advisers say "oh no not Cuba again". As highly experienced advisers, we would not dream of making such a statement. However, you are quite right in stating that we did say words to the effect that "we see so many panels of Cuba, that to be successful to pass they need to be exceptional", which is rather different and quite accurate. This was said, if my memory serves me correctly, in relation to the panel before yours, which was also of Cuba photographs. Nick Després, who spoke about your panel, is one of the most experienced and respected members of the Travel Panel, having joined the team around 2000. Allowing for a 2 year sabbatical, he has around 14 years service. You will have noticed that I completely deferred to him, as the resident expert, until the very end. The question of whether your statement of intent was appropriate wasn't a major issue, and Nick made little of it. Rather, the issue with your set was that in Nick's opinion, many of the individual images were clearly not of the standard required for the associateship. I have to say, I agree with him, but saw no reason to get anymore involved than I did. As I was conscious of the hour, I noted that the time devoted to your set was not less than 15 minutes, maybe 20, but certainly not "5 minutes max".

Cuba is not over exposed at the RPS. Indeed, no subject is. The issue here is that with virtually any popular subject, the standard we see is continually rising as, inevitably, is the benchmark.

So, where do we go from here? I would suggest you contact the Distinctions Manager, Andy Moore LRPS at Fenton House with a view to being put in touch with a member of the Travel Panel who is in a position to offer 1-2-1 advice, as a further Advisory Day would probably achieve little, given that you have already attended two. I am aware that you have a assessment slot already booked which is far enough away for considerable progress to be made. It is possible to defer your assessment, should you not be ready by the date currently booked. Again, talk to Andy Moore, or Ben Fox to discuss.

Ian, I'm very sorry you feel short changed as far as yesterday is concerned. We try very hard to ensure that everyone is treated the same. Yes, of course we get tired by the end of the day, but work hard to not let this affect our judgement. I can only hope that with a little extra work you'll become an Associate of the Society in the very near future.

Richard Walton FRPS
Leader - Bournmouth Advisory Day


Cuba is not over exposed at the RPS. Indeed, no subject is. The issue here is that with virtually any popular subject, the standard we see is continually rising as is the benchmark.

Iancrowson, on 17 February 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

I went to my second A Advisory day/workshop today I am very grateful and thank the experts and organisers who gave their time, but please, please consider booking less people .
There were about twenty people with panels. We were told that everyone would get about 20 minutes. (20 x 20 minutes!!!!!???) We started looking at panels at 11.15. By lunch time it was obvious the day was running late. A couple of the L's in the morning each got about forty minutes, most maybe half an hour. This was great for them but when your second last on the list and in a hall booked until 4.30 some thing has to give.

I'm still confused about the RPS distinction process.
On the first A advisory day I attended I was told eleven or twelve photos were a good basis of an A visual arts panel but I should have written a statement of intent . I decided to start again with a new panel.

I presented my travel panel to the call of "oh no not Cuba again". Five minutes later I was finished and told it was marginal but given very few suggestions about how to improve it except "we see so many panels of Cuba, to pass they would have to be very exceptional". I pointed out that I had written my statement of intent before taking the photos and asked how the photos did not relate to my statement. I was told statements don't mean anything. That may well be true. Earlier in the day we heard a person being advised to" fudge one to match your pane!l". Someone else was advised to rewrite their's to suit a modified panel. This surprised me, it was not what I understood.
I am now very surprised and totally confused. I don't need any more qualifications I tackled the prep of my A panel as a project. to keep old age at bay.. I did not join a photo tour to Cuba. My wife and I (who is also a photographer) jumped on a plane, explored Havana for seven days on foot, For a further two weeks we hired a car and explored the country. Cuba was great, however it is apparently over exposed at the RPS.
Be warned that if you attend an A advisory day, L's go first and get good advice from the fresh experts., "A" panel people seemed short changed , even more so today than the "A" last I attended
I heard the experts giving good meaningful advice in the morning, I got five minute max.
Ian Crowson
iancrowsonys@googlemail.com
www.iancrowsonphotography.co.uk

[jimread]

Hello Ian,

My apologies I did not see that that you spent more than seven days in Cuba.

I would make a further point on personal vision, it's not something that can be demonstrated by pictorial examples, though I did try to find some as you will hear, I'm pleased now that the YouTube rules prevent this.

May I also point out your stated, I do photography to keep old age at bay, what could be better than spending many many months visiting the same local location and peeling away the layers of subjects until you arrive at something that is truly personal and because of that, unique.

In truth your post has given me the opportunity to make a statement about personal vision and to make some attempt at the magazine/media/advertiser relationship that blackmails its followers into thinking they must go to the ends of the earth to make 'stunning' images, when the truth is they are within walking dsitance of ones home.

Cheers - Jim

[Iancrowson]

Richard
Thank you for your reply.
First of all please be assured that this was in no way an attack on you or your fellow experts/advisors. I have every confidence in all your skills and ability to advise on successful RPS Distinction Panel submissions.
To labour the point, 20 people or maybe only 18 with an average of 20 mins each is not going to go into a day 1030 to 1630 with an hour for lunch and a 15 min coffee break
You gave an excellent 3/4 hour introduction and we also looked at several panels sent from RPS HQ which took more time.
Richard, you give some very good and skilled advice, your a fine fellow but you don't half talk a lot. That's not meant as an insult, I enjoyed hearing your words of wisdom.
In my view there were too many panels, not enough time. I did feel short changed.
regards
Ian

[Richard Walton]

Iancrowson, on 18 February 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

Richard
Thank you for your reply.
First of all please be assured that this was in no way an attack on you or your fellow experts/advisors. I have every confidence in all your skills and ability to advise on successful RPS Distinction Panel submissions.
To labour the point, 20 people or maybe only 18 with an average of 20 mins each is not going to go into a day 1030 to 1630 with an hour for lunch and a 15 min coffee break
You gave an excellent 3/4 hour introduction and we also looked at several panels sent from RPS HQ which took more time.
Richard, you give some very good and skilled advice, your a fine fellow but you don't half talk a lot. That's not meant as an insult, I enjoyed hearing your words of wisdom.
In my view there were too many panels, not enough time. I did feel short changed.
regards
Ian

Don't worry, Ian, I didn't take your comments personally.

Yes, I do talk a lot. That comes from critcism that we don't give out enough information! You can please all of the people some of the time, etc etc

18-20 panels is not unusual. In fact with the very best organisation 20-24 is possible. The difference at Bournmouth was too fold. Firstly, as I previously mentioned, was that there were few 'L' panel ready to go than I would usually expect. Secondly, the ratio of ARPS to LRPS sets that we had to look at was higher than expected. If my memory serves me correctly, Bournmouth is the first Advisory Day that I've done that went over time. I guess there's a first for everything! Lessons will be learnt.

As to Woodstock's comment re. "volunteer self-righteousness". I have never, in 12 years involvement with the distinctions process, found this to be an issue. However, I can cite a recent experience with a person I had offered 1-2-1 help to. He emailed me a list of dates and times to me that were convenient to him. I responded with a similar list that suited me. He took the point - some don't! BTW - he was successful.

[Iancrowson]

Richard,
People need to constantly remember that you and others are giving your time very generously for free. If your were being paid £50 k things might be different.
Thank you for your time and advice.
Ian Crowson

[woodstock]

I now find myself in a very difficult position, because having taken Ian’s initial comments at face value, there is clearly a considerable disparity between the scenario then painted by him and that now put forward by Richard.

If Ian’s description had been entirely accurate (and of course all our views must, by virtue of human nature, include a measure of subjectivity) then I would see no reason to withdraw my original remarks, even bearing in mind the very significant caveating with which I surrounded them (“...if what you say is true..., ...valid view..., ...advisory day that I attended...”). However, given Richard’s response and the tenor of Ian’s subsequent postings which do, to me, suggest that on reflection the situation may not have been quite as problematic as first described, I am happy to do so, and I certainly regret any ill feeling which may have been caused by what would now appear to be their inaccuracy.

Might I suggest one potential learning point from all this? I have no idea whether this occurred or not at this particular session, but it might well mitigate against the type of disappointment experienced by Ian if the organiser/advisor who introduces the day makes clear how the day will be run, including the need for some modest flexibility in timings, whilst maintaining the need to cut short discussion on any individual panel so that all feel that they have been given appropriate attention. This was not done at the A advisory day I attended, and whilst I personally did not find the flexibility a problem, I did hear some mutterings to the contrary.

Richard, the “volunteer self-righteousness” issue reflects a thread some considerable time ago where in response to someone’s posting, there were responses from some RPS members which, to paraphrase, suggested that as volunteers they had a right to run things as they saw fit, and certainly not to have their behaviour scrutinised in any way by the RPS. I genuinely hoped that we should not revisit that as part of this thread, perhaps it would have been wiser not to mention it at all!

Apologies again to any who were offended by my remarks which pertained to the content of the original posting

Martin

[levidog]

Paul H, on 18 February 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

I think the thread has served its purpose and responses made from both sides of the discussion, If you are happy I shall lock it.


Paulh

I would like to add three questions to the subject, given that I too have attended two advice days with the subject matter being reptiles and mammals (captive). Firstly I struggle to find a place in which to enter them.

I was also told "we see so many panels of ....., that to be successful to pass they need to be exceptional", and "The issue here is that with virtually any popular subject, the standard we see is continually rising as, inevitably, is the benchmark"

My question is why? Should I choose a subject that is virtually unknown so the standard is lower? Why does it matter what the subject is, surely it's the photographic quality that is important.

Sean

[Paul H]

I shall leave this open as there seem to be members that have questions to ask.

Paulh

[Richard Walton]

levidog, on 18 February 2013 - 03:03 PM, said:

I would like to add three questions to the subject, given that I too have attended two advice days with the subject matter being reptiles and mammals (captive). Firstly I struggle to find a place in which to enter them.

I was also told "we see so many panels of ....., that to be successful to pass they need to be exceptional", and "The issue here is that with virtually any popular subject, the standard we see is continually rising as, inevitably, is the benchmark"

My question is why? Should I choose a subject that is virtually unknown so the standard is lower? Why does it matter what the subject is, surely it's the photographic quality that is important.

Sean

Sean

You don't state whether you are seeking the LRPS or the ARPS. With the 'L', provided you can show variety of approach as per the criteria given in the appropriate distinctions handbook, there should be no problem with captive animals provided they show now signs of stress and their environment is appropriate. As far as the 'A' is concerned, you would have to look to a Visual Art, or possibly an Applied application. However, you would need to seek advice from Bath. I'm fairly certain the Nature Panel would not accept captive creatures.

As far as photographic quality is concerned, no subject is easier than another. However, with 'A' and 'F', conspicuous personal input needs to be evident and that becomes harder the more popular the subject matter becomes as standards inevitably get higher as more people take an interest in the subject.

Richard

[Iancrowson]

Sean
Thank you for your post, I'm pleased someone has expressed the same thoughts I have had.
In my view my panel was pre judged due to the nature of it's content and not examined in any detail due to lack of time.
I'm on my way to crawl around a derelict milk processing plant for three months.
Ian

[markbs]

May I comment as one who has responsibility for organising advisory days. Obviously I wasn't at the event being discussed, so this is more abstracted.

The organisation of advisory days is set out in a document issued by the Society, and is quite detailed in its requirements. There is some flexibility in the number of panels to be brought. I used to work to a maximum of 24, but experience (and the official recommendation) is for fewer, and I now work to a target of 21. That doesn't mean I get that many. Based on experience of demand, I also work to a ratio of 2 x LRPS to 1 x ARPS, and the panels are then mixed up during the day so that the advisors get to work in some sort of rotation. Again, the balance doesn't always work exactly, and I also have to manage where the minority group of projected panels fits within all the print panels. The point I am making is that this is quite a deliberate process of trying to schedule a varied and interesting day for everyone, despite the vagaries of demand and cancellations.

The official requirement is that all advice is given in front of the audience. To fit everything into the day, the 'public' advice has to be limited to maybe 10 minutes, and we get the author up front for a personal discussion with the advisor. Until a couple of years ago the 'public' advice could be followed by another 10 minutes of private 1:1 discussion, but that is not done now. The chairman of any meeting has a responsibility to all the participants to keep to reasonable time, and it can be necessary to stop a discussion given some judgement on how things are going.

I am not qualified as an advisor. All I will say is that, having watched a lot of advice, it is easy to get too complicated. LRPS is about basic competence. Anyone who has brought an L panel needs to know how their work fits or does not fit with the criteria on the L assessment score sheet. There is often too much emphasis on mere layout of the work. ARPS is about being very good at something of your choice. The statement of intent should clearly say what you choose to be good at. The pictures should be obvious proof that your statement is true.

As with all examinations, proper preparation is about getting to the stage where the examiners dare not fail you. The advisory days are there to help you along that path of preparation. The organisation of advisory days is constantly evolving, and part of the driver is user feedback. Everyone attending should be filling in a feedback form for the Distinctions department so that problems can be identified and improvements made.

[Richard Walton]

Iancrowson, on 18 February 2013 - 03:34 PM, said:

Sean
Thank you for your post, I'm pleased someone has expressed the same thoughts I have had.
In my view my panel was pre judged due to the nature of it's content and not examined in any detail due to lack of time.
I'm on my way to crawl around a derelict milk processing plant for three months.
Ian

Ian

That simply is NOT correct. All panels get exactly the same treatment and most certainly are NOT pre-judged because of their subject matter. If that were the case, hardly anyone would ever rise beyond LRPS unless they had a completely original idea, and that accounts for very few. You saw for yourself panels yesterday at Bournmouth panels that were not unique but were assessed to display a personal input that made them stand out within their genre.

I reiterate what I said yesterday, the historical success rate for ARPS is in the order of 40-50%.

I hope that goes someway to clarify your concerns.

Richard

This post has been edited by Richard Walton: 18 February 2013 - 04:08 PM

[levidog]

Richard Walton, on 18 February 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

Sean

You don't state whether you are seeking the LRPS or the ARPS. With the 'L', provided you can show variety of approach as per the criteria given in the appropriate distinctions handbook, there should be no problem with captive animals provided they show now signs of stress and their environment is appropriate. As far as the 'A' is concerned, you would have to look to a Visual Art, or possibly an Applied application. However, you would need to seek advice from Bath. I'm fairly certain the Nature Panel would not accept captive creatures.

As far as photographic quality is concerned, no subject is easier than another. However, with 'A' and 'F', conspicuous personal input needs to be evident and that becomes harder the more popular the subject matter becomes as standards inevitably get higher as more people take an interest in the subject.

Richard

My apologies Richard, I mean't to say that I was seeking the ARPS and attended both Visual Art and Applied sessions and have pretty much given up on the idea such was my confusion.

I have also largely moved away from captive to wild animals so never say never, but I doubt it.

Sean

[RichE]

I am writing as someone who has attended an 'A' assessment day as a viewer and am hoping one day to enter an 'A' panel. I am confused Richard by some of your comments. Mostly the one about 'popular' panels. I think Levidog asked

"I was also told "we see so many panels of ....., that to be successful to pass they need to be exceptional", and "The issue here is that with virtually any popular subject, the standard we see is continually rising as, inevitably, is the benchmark"

why? Should I choose a subject that is virtually unknown so the standard is lower? Why does it matter what the subject is, surely it's the photographic quality that is important."

I too am a little confused by your reply. Why does the standard have to keep on rising? If it was good enough 5 years ago, why does it have to be better today? Either it passes the requirements or it doesn't. I would probably enter a 'Portrait' panel, an area I would think was extremely popular. Why would this need to be better than the last panel that passed? You state that "conspicuous personal input" needs to be present, what does that mean exactly? I am sure that very few of us haven't been influenced by somebody somewhere or somehow but it may not always be conscious. If I enter a panel 6 months after someone else did and the panel is 'similar' in style, you seem to be implying/stating that my standard would have to be higher? Or my take on portraits different, but why?

As someone stated above, either the panel is good enough or it isn't, the fact that you may have seen 200 of similar panels recently shouldn't make a difference should it? Or should it? The benchmark surely can't keep shifting just because you have seen similar images in the past. If I have a style that seems to be coming through, wouldn't that be good enough? Why is my panel judged against other panels? It should be taken in isolation I would have thought otherwise it will always be entirely subjective rather than as I thought it was which is slightly subjective.

I too am now totally confused.

Re the OP's comments about the day I haven't attended one yet but if 20 panels are up for discussion and you think 20mins each then 20 panels X 20 minutes = 6 hours and 40 minutes. The timings of the day allow for only 5 hours less the 45 minute introduction, viewing of successful panels and coffee breaks. Surely there are bound to be problems as the numbers just don't stack up. I accept that some panels may be perfect and simply may get a nod but even they will take time to assess from a quality viewpoint. The numbers say that only 15 panels can get through in the time allotted without any intro/outro or coffee breaks. Seems it may be a one off but that maybe a re-assessment of the numbers may be in order. Assuming an hour is taken up by breaks and intro's etc then only 12 needy panels could get a 20min airing each.

Hoping I have the 'A' assessment all confuzzled now but any clearing up of these points would be useful.

Cheers

Rich

[Iancrowson]

Ian - original poster.
Over 270 have read this thread. A few people have added their views, one or two have implied I've not told the truth but that does not worry me. I certainly have not been fully frank and said all I might.. To do that would risk hurting people's feelings and egos.
For me photography is a fun enjoyable activity. Getting an L was easy as I can take decent photos but the mysteries of gaining an A are beyond me . I have no personal or professional need to prove myself photographically so why bother, it's hardly fun.
Good luck to those who value the challenge, I have enough letters to put after my name, I don't need any more,
iancrowsonys@gmail.com