Re: [SI] New mandate needed

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by tony cooper, Mar 21, 2012.

  1. tony cooper

    tony cooper Guest

    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

    I like the challenge of shooting-to-mandate, but Open, or no mandate,
    might suit some.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Mar 21, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. tony cooper

    tony cooper Guest

    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).
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Mar 21, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. tony cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    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?

    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.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Mar 23, 2012
    #3
  4. tony cooper

    tony cooper Guest

    On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 14:55:59 -0400, 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?


    Wrong? Nothing. That's why I said "requested" but not "required".
    The idea should be to get participants out looking for
    mandate-appropriate shots, but not to discourage those that have other
    obligations.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Mar 23, 2012
    #4
  5. tony cooper

    PeterN Guest

    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
     
    PeterN, Mar 24, 2012
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Robert Spanjaard

    Re: [SI] Mandate reminder/update & new mandate!

    Robert Spanjaard, Apr 16, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    335
    tony cooper
    Apr 26, 2010
  2. Robert Coe

    Re: [SI] Mandate reminder/update & new mandate!

    Robert Coe, Apr 17, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    518
    Paul Furman
    Apr 24, 2010
  3. Annika1980

    Re: Mandate reminder/update & new mandate!

    Annika1980, Apr 17, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    348
    Eric Stevens
    Apr 17, 2010
  4. PeterN

    Re: [SI] New mandate needed

    PeterN, Mar 20, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    249
    RichA
    Mar 20, 2012
  5. tony cooper

    Re: [SI] New mandate needed

    tony cooper, Mar 20, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    279
    Pete A
    Mar 21, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page