On 3/23/2012 5:18 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012-03-23 14:55 , Robert Coe wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 17:52:28 -0400, Alan Browne
>> <> wrote:
>> : On 2012-03-21 17:40 , tony cooper wrote:
>> :> On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 16:55:23 -0400, Alan Browne
>> :> <> wrote:
>> :>
>> :>> On 2012-03-20 23:17 , tony cooper wrote:
>> :>>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:02:56 -0400, Alan Browne
>> :>>> <> wrote:
>> :>>>
>> :>>>>
>> :>>>> ideas? Please post here for the committee to consider.
>> :>>>
>> :>>> Don't forget the old stand-by: Open
>> :>>
>> :>> Then I'd suggest to the committee that it nominate a letter based
>> open.
>> :>
>> :> Whatever the mandate, "fresh" should requested (but not required).
>> :
>> : I'm not happy with the high number of archive shots in the recent SI.
>>
>> What's wrong with archive shots if they fit the mandate? If you have a
>> good
>> picture you'd like to share, wouldn't you be pleased if a mandate came
>> along
>> that covered it?
>
> The original intent of the SI was to get people out and shooting to
> mandate. Archive shots were "let in" to increase participation - but it
> always had a negative perception. Archive shots had to be so marked.
>
> Given the smaller (and diminishing) number of usenet users,
> participation in the SI has dwindled (early SI's had 25 or more
> different photographers per mandate).
>
> These NG's hardly have that many active posters now.
>
> One rul I changed when I was the admin a few years ago was to allow each
> shooter to put up 3 instead of a single photo. This helped "plump" up
> the number of shots. I can't say it's helped quality much.
>
>> It's not that we're too lazy to take pictures. But those of us that
>> get to
>> take pictures on company time have to take the pictures our employers
>> want or
>> need, or they'll stop letting us do it.
>
> Most in the SI work and find time to do it. You have the advantage of
> having your camera at hand more often.
>
> The SI was _originally_ every _week_ not every 4 - 5 weeks as it is now.
>
Alan, we appreciate your taking over a thankless job.
As feedback I am comfortable in saying that many of s look for some sort
of constructive critique. If any images are not as good as other images,
we ought to understand why.
I think Bob Coe's comment on taxis is as valuable as a positive comment.
It should give the committee some sense of what is not wanted.
I, for one definitely do not want the constant carping. Let's get on
with photography and reserve the negative comments for my images.
--
Peter
|
Similar Threads
