RPS distinctions - my journey - first stop - the 'LRPS' - GOT IT :)

Pookeyhead said:
Only 5 posts, and ALL of them contentious. Not even bothered to introduce yourself or anything... You do know what the word "Troll" means in the context of internet communication I take it?


He's doing it because he wants to.

In principle, I agree with you, but I'd never think to actually question Dave about it. Why would I? Does it matter to you? He clearly wants to, and if you bothered to actually read the thread, you'll understand it's the journey of development he is enjoying.

Whether you agree with the RPS mindset or not is immaterial.
Click to expand...

It has been noted ;)
 
Too self-effacing Dave ... the comment was made to me :)
 
Me again. At my panel on Sunday last week, there was only 1 male Fellow on the panel. The others had travelled from far and wide. I agree. I am not a professional [clearly!] but have really enjoyed the challenge, it has improved my photography and it gives me something else to aim for now I have crossed the first hurdle. I found the people very supportive as well during the process and the advisory days. I also watched two other assessment days before I decided to have a go, both at focus, and I did not notice any inconsistency. The panel that was failed whilst I was waiting for mine had blown highlights and a couple of composition issues including chopped off feet. So, I will be going after my 'A' once I have stopped grinning.
 
I totally understand skepticism regarding paying your yearly subs to carry letters after your name - it's basically a big camera club that has stood the test of time, gets a Royal thumbs up and is internationally recognised as a 'standard' albeit one where there is much debate as to whether it is contemporary enough to represent photography. And if you don't keep up your subs you can't maintain the letters after your name.

But so what?

I know full well what I'm getting into by joining and then trying for distinctions - I'm doing it for myself and if a few people see it as 'qualifying' the quality of my work then so be it. I know my work is good and I'm not afraid to state that. My BA Hons is a qualification that will stick with me for as long as I live but it by no means represents me as a photographer, especially as I now know a damn sight more now than I did back in 2000 when I graduated.

I find it quite ironic that many people on this forum knock something like the RPS distinction system but they're happy to post their images for critique on here and accept quite superficial responses because any response often gives enough of an ego massage. If half the people on here actually thought about their imaging, how they select their images and how they move on, then there would be a distinctly higher standard of photography shown. Surely, trying to better yourself through a distinction system that is aimed at improving all of these things can't be all that bad, even at £9 a month?
 
watlvry said:
May I ask why you value a bunch of old men's criticism of your vision so much that you pay them to do so? The RPS is an outdated elitist institution only fit for mindless conformists, and those commercial members are there only to find another outlet for their work. You like your photos, this forum likes your photos, so why try and plug into the RPS's conformist ideas of lighting, form, texture, frame, composition? So you take ten (10?) pretty pictures that they approve, and for 100 Guineas you may add LRPS to your name, thus establishing where you sit in photographic terms. That makes you better than the rest in some way, more elitist, so long as you keep paying up every year?
Click to expand...

Voicing your distaste at other people's choice makes you feel better than them, no?

I'm struggling to picture you as an active member of TP in the near future if you continue to be so blunt.

Yours sincerely

(potential) mindless conformist
 
Chipper said:
Me again. At my panel on Sunday last week, there was only 1 male Fellow on the panel. The others had travelled from far and wide. I agree. I am not a professional [clearly!] but have really enjoyed the challenge, it has improved my photography and it gives me something else to aim for now I have crossed the first hurdle. I found the people very supportive as well during the process and the advisory days. I also watched two other assessment days before I decided to have a go, both at focus, and I did not notice any inconsistency. The panel that was failed whilst I was waiting for mine had blown highlights and a couple of composition issues including chopped off feet. So, I will be going after my 'A' once I have stopped grinning.
Click to expand...


Do I detect a hint of having just passed and got your L ???

If so - :clap::clap::clap:

Care to share your panel ??? :)

Dave
 
specialman said:
I totally understand skepticism regarding paying your yearly subs to carry letters after your name - it's basically a big camera club that has stood the test of time, gets a Royal thumbs up and is internationally recognised as a 'standard' albeit one where there is much debate as to whether it is contemporary enough to represent photography. And if you don't keep up your subs you can't maintain the letters after your name.

But so what?

I know full well what I'm getting into by joining and then trying for distinctions - I'm doing it for myself and if a few people see it as 'qualifying' the quality of my work then so be it. I know my work is good and I'm not afraid to state that. My BA Hons is a qualification that will stick with me for as long as I live but it by no means represents me as a photographer, especially as I now know a damn sight more now than I did back in 2000 when I graduated.

I find it quite ironic that many people on this forum knock something like the RPS distinction system but they're happy to post their images for critique on here and accept quite superficial responses because any response often gives enough of an ego massage. If half the people on here actually thought about their imaging, how they select their images and how they move on, then there would be a distinctly higher standard of photography shown. Surely, trying to better yourself through a distinction system that is aimed at improving all of these things can't be all that bad, even at £9 a month?
Click to expand...

But I don't need somebody with letters after their name to tell me what they think of an image. This site is free so I get the pro's and amateurs commenting for free. Are you suggesting that there is a better quality of critique,if my images were shown exclusively, in a 'society' gallery?
 
tiler65 said:
But I don't need somebody with letters after their name to tell me what they think of an image. This site is free so I get the pro's and amateurs commenting for free. Are you suggesting that there is a better quality of critique,if my images were shown exclusively, in a 'society' gallery?
Click to expand...

Not, but in terms of critique depth I expect there will consistently be greater detail from an RPS crit panel. You can never guarantee the depth of the critique on a photographic forum.

Whether you agree with the crit is a different matter.
 
Last edited:
specialman said:
Not, but in terms of critique depth I expect there will consistently be greater detail from an RPS crit panel. You can never guarantee the depth of the critique on a photographic forum.

Whether you agree with the crit is a different matter.
Click to expand...
Critique is the same if a big word is used or not. What we get on here is Yorkshireman stuff. It is all that is needed.

For your subs, I do believe you can gain enough 'goodies or discounts' to pay for itself. That would be a good reason to join.

Anyway, I feel like we are drifting from DG op and what we are discussing should be in another thread. I would rather read about his adventures!
 
tiler65 said:
Critique is the same if a big word is used or not. What we get on here is Yorkshireman stuff...
Click to expand...

No, what we often get on here is noncommittal, unspecific one-liners that are no good to man nor beast.

Agreed - back on track :)
 
Ed Sutton said:
Thanks for the clarification. It still all sounds like a con trick to me. Although I can see how the surveyor thing is designed to keep the cowboys out of the game and ensure the Chartered Surveyors can charge high prices. ;)
Click to expand...

And that is why I think getting a grade in photography was important to me (personally). You take from it what you put in actually. Ive gotten more back than what the subscriptions cost! Far more.
 
lol missed Daves last posts lol
 
watlvry said:
May I ask why you value a bunch of old men's criticism of your vision so much that you pay them to do so? The RPS is an outdated elitist institution only fit for mindless conformists, and those commercial members are there only to find another outlet for their work. You like your photos, this forum likes your photos, so why try and plug into the RPS's conformist ideas of lighting, form, texture, frame, composition? So you take ten (10?) pretty pictures that they approve, and for 100 Guineas you may add LRPS to your name, thus establishing where you sit in photographic terms. That makes you better than the rest in some way, more elitist, so long as you keep paying up every year?
Click to expand...

Irrational and rude would appear to sum up this contributor... :bang: and no real understanding of the process. Old men? Ho ho. Letters after my name are not the reason I started to do this. It was for the challenge; odd that this contributor can't seem to understand that - chip on the shoulder?
 
Last edited:
I was thinking about this and did have a sniff around the website etc heard though that landscapers don't often do well (probably the repetition thing!) seems that if your a specialist in one area then maybe it's not the route to go down.
 
Bradders09 said:
I was thinking about this and did have a sniff around the website etc heard though that landscapers don't often do well (probably the repetition thing!) seems that if your a specialist in one area then maybe it's not the route to go down.
Click to expand...

The point of the L seems primarily to be that you've proven you have a range of camera skills and so understand the technicalities perfectly, and (re avoiding blown highlights or blocking up) that you have good camera control and/or PP skills

Once proven i.e. by submitting images showing a range of appropriate DoF settings, shutter speeds and of course basic composition etc. sufficient to gain your L you are then free to do whatever you like - so for the A & F blown/blocked is fine as the L proved you knew what you were doing hence showing those 'issues' in your work now must be deliberate and hence is not considered as necessarily a fault

If you find lots of A and F panels you will indeed see lots of repetition and hence entirely suited to one form of photography, be that portraits, landscapes, macro whatever

Dave
 
Lindsay D said:
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying Tom, as well as twisting things. Innovations are welcomed by most of the institutions, particularly at F level.

To be a judge it's expected that you're well qualified and have an in depth first hand understanding of the distinction process. That is normal, in pretty much any institution.

Where on earth did I say that 'anyone who is not a fellow is not intelligent enough to judge'. Please don't twist my words, or invent them.

Distinctions get a bad press from those who know they would not make the grade if it were a requirement, or else from those who have little understanding of what they involve, or mean. I full respect anyone who chooses a totally different path, but a modicum of respect in return would help the conversation to remain balanced. I've done my best to politely answer your questions but I feel you've got an axe to grind.
Click to expand...

No axe from me apart from that there is no distinction between the 100 or so bodies that do this type of 'licence'. I could fail a panel in one group but pass in another - sometimes with some of the same judging panel - so where does that leave a submitter?

Re the bad press - just go do a search on this very forum for bad press - it is not all from 'below grade photographers'.

Any way I have to stop posting in the thread.
 
Bradders09 said:
I was thinking about this and did have a sniff around the website etc heard though that landscapers don't often do well (probably the repetition thing!) seems that if your a specialist in one area then maybe it's not the route to go down.
Click to expand...

This is possibly where the professional bodies have the advantage over the RPS, as they assume people will already be specialising to some extent or another and 'repetition' in it's loosest sense is not an issue at L level. Have a look at Jamie Stones [jamesoliverstone user name] posts here, for his A panel at BIPP which were landscapes for an example of this, though they were submitted as an L and upgraded. Not much use for those that aren't full/part time pro's though of course and just want the journey to distinctions - which is why I made the comment earlier that it is probably quite hard for an experienced photographer to go back and take an L as chances are you will have gone past understanding and following all the basic rules and started breaking them to further your own style and niche and at an L with the RPS, that just isn't always accepted from what I have seen. :shrug:

So, if anyone here has their successful LRPS panel they are happy to share, it would be interesting to see (y)
 
DG Phototraining said:
Which is one of the things I'd hoped for in this thread (y)

Dave
Click to expand...

Same here, in fact L's and A's so we get a comparison too, because as I understand it and what you were saying earlier Dave, at A & F there is a lot more leeway for artistic input that is not acceptable at the basic L standard.
 
Yv said:
Same here, in fact L's and A's so we get a comparison too, because as I understand it and what you were saying earlier Dave, at A & F there is a lot more leeway for artistic input that is not acceptable at the basic L standard.
Click to expand...

Absolutely there is - a couple of the Fs I've seen have also been so highly PP'd they didn't even look like photos any more !!!

One was an entire set of similar looking mountains, and another a dancer in flowing dress all shot in a studio (could have been in one session too) where the images were then combined as multiple exposures would have been

Both very arty, and neither did anything for me :D

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
Absolutely there is - a couple of the Fs I've seen have also been so highly PP'd they didn't even look like photos any more !!!

One was an entire set of similar looking mountains, and another a dancer in flowing dress all shot in a studio (could have been in one session too) where the images were then combined as multiple exposures would have been

Both very arty, and neither did anything for me :D

Dave
Click to expand...



hmmm....go to flickr and put in LRPS as a search term, some very interesting results returned ;)
 
QUOTE=viewfromthenorth;5427172]No not really. Doesn't make the entire process or institution pointless does it?(y)[/QUOTE]

My original reply was aimed at the OP, of which he answered...
Never said the process or institution was pointless. Just thought it was pointless for Dave.

Read my posts properly please. :)
 
DG Phototraining said:
Absolutely there is - a couple of the Fs I've seen have also been so highly PP'd they didn't even look like photos any more !!!

One was an entire set of similar looking mountains, and another a dancer in flowing dress all shot in a studio (could have been in one session too) where the images were then combined as multiple exposures would have been

Both very arty, and neither did anything for me :D

Dave
Click to expand...

Dave, there are a number of different categories under which a panel can be submitted, such as Visual Art, Digital Art, Contemporary Portraiture etc. These would differ greatly from more purist categories such as, say, Documentary Wedding or Documentary Nature and so on.

As far as the dancer is concerned (I suspect you're referring to Roman Melnyk's panel) if you tried to recreate the images you would see just how much skill is involved in executing them so cleanly. There are only a very small number of Fellows worldwide for a reason - and there is a very high failure rate. Some of them are undeniably 'arty' and I see many panels which don't do anything for me either, but that doesn't come into the judging process. :)
 
Lindsay D said:
Dave, there are a number of different categories under which a panel can be submitted, such as Visual Art, Digital Art, Contemporary Portraiture etc. These would differ greatly from more purist categories such as, say, Documentary Wedding or Documentary Nature and so on.

As far as the dancer is concerned (I suspect you're referring to Roman Melnyk's panel) if you tried to recreate the images you would see just how much skill is involved in executing them so cleanly. There are only a very small number of Fellows worldwide for a reason - and there is a very high failure rate. Some of them are undeniably 'arty' and I see many panels which don't do anything for me either, but that doesn't come into the judging process. :)
Click to expand...


Yes I had forgotten about the 'Not really photos anymore' categories :D

And no idea of the dancer shots, I've actually seen 2 very similar ones both got Fs with some society or other. I didn't mean they were easy to create, but it did seem relatively simple... i.e. all shot in a studio under perfectly controlled lighting... as opposed to those that take years of finding the right light & planning, even danger, outside of a studio

Dave
 
Lindsay D said:
A perfectly controlled studio image is no less valid than one taken elsewhere - it just means the intent of the panel is different.
Click to expand...

You're missing my point Lindsay - if its awarded an F then yes of course it is - but effort-wise, its nothing like as hard as those committed souls who've traveled thousands of miles & probably over several years to capture their F outside of a studio

Dave
 
I do see what you're saying Dave, I just don't completely agree with it. You feel there is far less commitment to creating a successful panel which is based in the studio, to one which involves travel and time elsewhere. I think, on balance, the time involved in gaining the skills and formulating the concept, and executing it, is likely to be very similar, but may be apportioned differently. There may be a different level of comfort, but the effort may not be as far apart as you think. I know some photographers who have spent decades in the studio practising, mastering, and finessing their lighting techniques. It's then taken more years to come up with their mental picture of the panel they want to produce - then there is the process of physically carrying out the work. It is this latter phase which you may be referring to, but overall the work involved is considerable whichever way you choose to look at it - it's very common for F panels to be reshot several times over, only to be discarded and shot again adding more years to the equation. It can go on and on. Knocking up the air miles, putting up with a different environment, is simply another side to the process.
 
Lindsay D said:
I do see what you're saying Dave, I just don't completely agree with it. You feel there is far less commitment to creating a successful panel which is based in the studio, to one which involves travel and time elsewhere. I think, on balance, the time involved in gaining the skills and formulating the concept, and executing it, is likely to be very similar, but may be apportioned differently. There may be a different level of comfort, but the effort may not be as far apart as you think. I know some photographers who have spent decades in the studio practising, mastering, and finessing their lighting techniques. It's then taken more years to come up with their mental picture of the panel they want to produce - then there is the process of physically carrying out the work. It is this latter phase which you may be referring to, but overall the work involved is considerable whichever way you choose to look at it - it's very common for F panels to be reshot several times over, only to be discarded and shot again adding more years to the equation. It can go on and on. Knocking up the air miles, putting up with a different environment, is simply another side to the process.
Click to expand...


Yep - I get all that, but here's my 'but'

Doing 50 reshoots in your studio MUST be easier than driving to Scotland 50x hoping for the right weather, or flying to Kenya looking for a Lion

In all other respects I agree with you :)

Dave
 
Last edited:
You'd fly to Kenya, at the right time of year, with all the planning done, a very experienced guide who would find the animals for you in a known location ... and there's every chance within a reasonable time frame you'd have all the shots you needed. I know quite a few wildlife photographers and that's pretty much how it usually is. At worst, you'd have to go back the following year for another go (and these trips are largely for pleasure and personal interest as well). Kind of similar with Scotland, you'd do the planning, choose the season, and spend however many days were needed for the weather to be decent. And squeeze in a bit of sightseeing while you're there :thinking:

Meanwhile back in the studio the dancer you've had booked for 6 months falls over and breaks her leg on the way to the shoot, you have to spend several more months finding a replacement, or several dancers if you want to vary the theme. Then the lighting you've been working on for months actually looks all wrong with the clothing the dancers are wearing ... you need to go back to the drawing board, or get the clothing re-designed. The dancers (who are professionals) turn into divas and hate the new outfits .... and so on. ;)
 
DG Phototraining said:
You're missing my point Lindsay - if its awarded an F then yes of course it is - but effort-wise, its nothing like as hard as those committed souls who've travelled thousands of miles & probably over several years to capture their F outside of a studio

Dave
Click to expand...

But what are they rewarding?.. the photography, or having the time, and financial ability to travel to exotic locations regularly.

Good studio work requires as much skill as location work.. often more so, as you have to create everything, including the lighting, yourself, and you often have to do it on demand.

Travel enough and you can easily just get lucky and happen across the right shot at the right time, with the right light. Which makes a better photographer? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top