RPS distinctions

[Dave Canon]

My minds gone blank (not unusual these days!), but what 'Professional Qualifications' are you referring to?

I know of such as Uni educational qualifications, and professional bodies' professional distinctions, but I can't think of any professional qualifications by which I assume you mean like having to have a pro qualification to be a plumber

I've come across quite a few with degrees who can't shoot for sh*t and certainly have no idea how to run a business, so that's defo not a pro qualification

A membership of BIPP would be the type of thing. My Club has a close association with our local University. Each year a group of the students provide short presentations on their projects. One of them returned this year as a professional having graduated with a 1st Class degree in Editorial and Advertising Photography and is now a successful professional. This allows us to see non-Club photography so we are not isolated from all other forms of photography. Most of our speakers are professional photographers. However, we prefer to pursue Landscape, sport, nature, documentary, Studio portraits, street, Macro, table top and creative subjects and why shouldn't we.

Dave

 

[Dave Goodier]

Quite probably and, equally probably, they'll perpetuate the same tired old tropes.

Then again, I've never understood how "judging art" works. To me, an individual either likes an object or does not; yet there is an entire industry based on assessing the "quality" of an object.

The idea of judging club photos is to pass on expertise hints & tips to help people improve, or at least that's my approach

That's often easy enough with many genres, but such as ICM is often more 'art' that technical photo and hence we are left with... I like/don't like it - which isn't helpful at all

 

[sirch]

I've come across quite a few with degrees who can't shoot for sh*t and certainly have no idea how to run a business, so that's defo not a pro qualification

There seems to be a fairly common misapprehension about what a degree is. A degree is not an apprenticeship, it is the academic study of a subject. It is conceivable (though unlikely in reality) that someone might graduate in a photography related degree without ever taking a photograph. People with medical degrees need years of extra study and practical experience to become Doctors, people with Engineering degrees need years of extra development and practical experience to become Chartered Engineers.

 

[Dave Canon]

I agree.i do not understand how any organization can award permanent distinctions based on single images. Any one can get the odd wonderful shot in ideal conditions, if only by chance. To judge the ability of a photographer what you are looking for is repeatability of excellent work. Especially in the case of professionals, where the expectation and. Guarantee of high quantity work must be a given.

My expectations would be that single images might be awarded a prize in a competition. Not a distinction.

An MPAGB is not awarded for a single image but 20 images. The difference with the RPS is that the images may need to be related or reflect a theme. If anyone can get a wonderful shot by chance why are we not seeing more of them. To get 20 wonderful shots is clearly a bigger challenge. I believe that there are just over 600 FRPS's worldwide whereas only 151 have achieved MPAGB. I have spoken to several photographers who have FRPS and MPAGB and they were in no doubt that the latter is harder to achieve. If you have never attended an RPS or PAGB adjudication, on what facts do you base your opinion.

Dave

 

[Dave Goodier]

There seems to be a fairly common misapprehension about what a degree is. A degree is not an apprenticeship, it is the academic study of a subject. It is conceivable (though unlikely in reality) that someone might graduate in a photography related degree without ever taking a photograph. People with medical degrees need years of extra study and practical experience to become Doctors, people with Engineering degrees need years of extra development and practical experience to become Chartered Engineers.

That was my point

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

There was a time. When both the examinations run by city and guilds and the institute of British photographers were the gold standard for a career in photography
They ran preliminary, intermediate and final exams which were universally accepted by educational bodies, the civil and government departments, the armed forces. Medical institutions and professional photographic studios.
These exams were taken at most photographic colleges, at a time when the UK had no photographic degree programs. We have no equivalent today.
They were ideal accomplishments to go along side an apprenticeship or studio assistant role. For a fully rounded photographic education and training.
Success in the finals led to an automatic AIBP or ARPS acceptance depending on the route taken.

They were also taken by full time photographic students at colleges like the Regent Street Polytechnic and the London School Of printing And Graphic Arts. Both now university colleges, though some colleges provided their own diplomas.

Sadly those days are long past. And the current degree system is Fine Art based rather than aimed at professional photographers.,
As a result neither photographic education nor the profession is provided for nor regulated in any way. and has Lost both recognition and status as a profession.
This situation is unlikely to change any time soon in the UK.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

An MPAGB is not awarded for a single image but 20 images. The difference with the RPS is that the images may need to be related or reflect a theme. If anyone can get a wonderful shot by chance why are we not seeing more of them. To get 20 wonderful shots is clearly a bigger challenge. I believe that there are just over 600 FRPS's worldwide whereas only 151 have achieved MPAGB. I have spoken to several photographers who have FRPS and MPAGB and they were in no doubt that the latter is harder to achieve. If you have never attended an RPS or PAGB adjudication, on what facts do you base your opinion.

Dave

I do not know if it still stands, but things must have moved on by now, but when I joined the MPA in the very early 60's I had to submit 10 images for each field I wanted to be professionally recognised in, in my case 30. and submit professional references. It also required that you were a proprietor or working at management level. And that was just to be a member. AMPA and FMPA were not awarded by print submission but by your recognition as a photographer and in society.
As you can see it was not open to amateurs or part timers.

To day there are literally dozens of photographic bodies of varying degrees of usefulness, most run as businesses for the benefit of an owner, and at least a couple with charitable status. the PAGB seems to be rather better han most. But just about all of them except perhaps the RPS are virtually invisible to the general public and business world.

 

[Phil V]

Quite probably and, equally probably, they'll perpetuate the same tired old tropes.

Then again, I've never understood how "judging art" works. To me, an individual either likes an object or does not; yet there is an entire industry based on assessing the "quality" of an object.

Sorry Andrew, but no matter how many times you’re confronted with the phrase “art is not measured by what someone ‘likes’”, you still trot out the same error.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Perhaps we are moving towards a time when there will be a general category of DIGITAL Media Providers. Who fulfil what is needed for digital image platforms of all kinds.
With an amalgam of AI, photography, vide, drone and graphics and sound engineering, into a single profession.
Were I starting again I would welcome such a development
To some extent this. Is covered by Media studies at university but perhaps at not high enough technical or integrated a level.

 

[realspeed]

removed

 

[sirch]

Then again, I've never understood how "judging art" works.

If I don't understand something, I either go away and learn about it or I add it to the vast pile of things I don't understand and label it "live and let live". The thing I try to avoid is repeatedly showing my ignorance in public.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Sorry Andrew, but no matter how many times you’re confronted with the phrase “art is not measured by what someone ‘likes’”, you still trot out the same error.

Firstly, it's an opinion and not an error, no matter how often you claim otherwise. Secondly, you are providing a rather good imitation of a stalker, as it appears that the only time you ever respond to my posts is to attack them.

Perhaps it's time for you to just accept that we hold different views and ignore me.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

The thing I try to avoid is repeatedly showing my ignorance in public.

As I wrote above, it isn't "ignorance" in the sense you have used it but an opinion.

In your position, you are of course free to ban such opinions.

 

[Ed Sutton]

Opinions can be wrong.

 

[benc98]

Opinions can be wrong.

Not all opinions are equal, some opinions are more informed than others (in my opinion)

 

[TimHughes]

@AndrewFlannigan My perspective on this has shifted over time. Art, and how we evaluate it, is such a subjective topic, so it’s natural for people to have different views. I can see where you’re coming from—opinions about art often come down to personal taste, which is deeply individual. That said, I think there’s value in considering how others approach "judging" art—it might open up new perspectives or even make you think about things in a different way. That said, the phrase “I've never understood how "judging art" works.” could come across as dismissive to some—not sure if that’s what you intended?

 

[Pound Coin]

Opinions can be wrong.

A wrong opinion repeated lots of times is still wrong.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

That said, the phrase “I've never understood how "judging art" works.” could come across as dismissive to some—not sure if that’s what you intended?

It wasn't intended that way at all.

Rather it's a fact that I cannot understand how a judgement can be made beyond "this many people like the item, this many dislike it, this many have viewed it and have expressed no opinion".

A wrong opinion repeated lots of times is still wrong.

Yet, if it's someone's opinion that it's wrong, then it's equally possible that the opinion that it's wrong is wrong.

 

[TimHughes]

Rather it's a fact that I cannot understand how a judgement can be made beyond "this many people like the item, this many dislike it, this many have viewed it and have expressed no opinion".

Surely judgment can go beyond "this many people like the item, this many dislike it, this many have viewed it and expressed no opinion." These reactions reflect how the general public feels, often based on instinct or personal taste.

A judge’s critique, however, would consider additional elements—such as innovation, influences, context, or technique. While there’s probably some overlap between the two perspectives, a judge may recognize qualities that the public doesn’t immediately connect with.

In my opinion, the difference matters. Public opinion shows how art resonates with the average person, often on a gut level. Expert critique, on the other hand, digs deeper—uncovering layers of meaning, craft, and cultural significance that aren’t always immediately obvious. Both perspectives have value, but critique helps frame a piece of art in its broader historical and technical context.

 

[Rodinal]

Not worth the paper they're printed on. IMO

I'll rephrase that. Not worth the membership fee you have to keep paying to be allowed to keep using the letters after your name.

Having read what you have written that I do not recall anyone who has left the Society ever been challenged if they continue using the letters after their name. It is a bit like being told a personal detail about someone which you should not have been privy to, there is no way you cannot 'unhear it' whatever they say.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The Truism that "Art is in the eye of the beholder" is impossible to deny.

However that statement does not deny the existence of Art nor does it try to define it.
I suggest that the more one studies art and the more we see , the more we come to appreciate it in all its various forms.

From a personal point of view, of all the forms known, the present promotion of conceptual Art is the closest we have come to "The Kings New Clothes" Syndrome.
At the same time it is generally the least attractive, however intellectually stimulating it might be to some academic minds
Again from a purely personal point of view, the form that appeals to me most is that of the impressionists, and that which followed from it. Especially pieces that combine it with the graphics design elements and experiments of the 30s which lead indirectly to modernism and Pop Art

It is strange how major trends in Art, architecture, and fashion have always followed each other. That is to say, up to the appearance of conceptual Art, which has no equivalence In other fields. It is perhaps for this reason that this period in the history of art will go down as a period of lost opportunity, and mediocrity.

All of which might just show what a poor judge of art I am.?

Time will tell.

 

[Ed Sutton]

It is strange how major trends in Art, architecture, and fashion have always followed each other. That is to say, up to the appearance of conceptual Art, which has no equivalence In other fields. It is perhaps for this reason that this period in the history of art will go down as a period of lost opportunity, and mediocrity.

I'd dispute this. There is conceptual music. I'm not well up on it but serial music (e.g. Schoenberg) is conceptual in structure. Other musicians have made music that is far from unusual sounding by setting out a series of rules for its production. Again the concept is integral.

I'd also suggest that the contemporary art that hits the headlines doesn't represent contemporary art as a whole. What stands the test of time is always a small fraction of that produced. At all periods the majority has been mediocre. Figurative art never died, photography didn't kill it off. I'd also say that conceptual art doesn't have to be visually dull. What will survive as 'great art' from now we'll not know for at least 50 years - by which time most of us here will be long gone!

Dont forget that 'Impressionism' was originally a term of derision.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I'd dispute this. There is conceptual music. I'm not well up on it but serial music (e.g. Schoenberg) is conceptual in structure. Other musicians have made music that is far from unusual sounding by setting out a series of rules for its production. Again the concept is integral.

I'd also suggest that the contemporary art that hits the headlines doesn't represent contemporary art as a whole. What stands the test of time is always a small fraction of that produced. At all periods the majority has been mediocre. Figurative art never died, photography didn't kill it off. I'd also say that conceptual art doesn't have to be visually dull. What will survive as 'great art' from now we'll not know for at least 50 years - by which time most of us here will be long gone!

Dont forget that 'Impressionism' was originally a term of derision.

Absolutely but only derided for about five years, before it took over almost completely. Previous styles became almost unsalable. Impressionism was derided because it lacked detail not because it was not beautiful. The man in the street never had a problem with it. It was largely adsorbed by others like the Scottish colourists.
The art world has been pushing conceptualism for more than thirty years years. And no one is buying it for their homes... If anything it has stopped people buying new original art. Modern classical music is also having a hard time. who listens to Schoenberg for pleasure ? Even Benjamin Britton is an acquired taste.. and although there were many popular modern classical composers like Erich Korngold's who's music is easily recognised, very few will identify the composer.. The fact that he scored 16 Hollywood movies stopped many classical scholars taking his music seriously.

 

[Ed Sutton]

Absolutely but only derided for about five years, before it took over almost completely. Previous styles became almost unsalable. Impressionism was derided because it lacked detail not because it was not beautiful. The man in the street never had a problem with it. It was largely adsorbed by others like the Scottish colourists.
The art world has been pushing conceptualism for more than thirty years years. And no one is buying it for their homes... If anything it has stopped people buying new original art. Modern classical music is also having a hard time. who listens to Schoenberg for pleasure ? Even Benjamin Britton is an acquired taste.. and although there were many popular modern classical composers like Erich Korngold's who's music is easily recognised, very few will identify the composer.. The fact that he scored 16 Hollywood movies stopped many classical scholars taking his music seriously.

Impressionism was conceptual. Cubism was conceptual. And so it goes.

Keith Arnatt was a conceptual artist who used photography to document his performances/ideas. After meeting David Hurn it could be said he became a conceptual photographer. There are traditionally formal qualities to some of his pictures, but they are based on concepts. I'd hang his photos on my walls. I'd argue that Martin Parr and Jem Southam are conceptual artist/photographers. I've made photographs that have a conceptual element to them. You can't really generalize about what conceptual art is. It's not all sharks in formaldehyde.

I've some sheep farming to watch on Youtube so I'm outta here.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

These reactions reflect how the general public feels, often based on instinct or personal taste.

I'm very partial to Waldemar Januszczak's programmes on art, because he tries to explain why he likes a particular piece and how he sees it fitting into a group of of other work.

As I see it, he doesn't tell you that something is good, just that it gives him pleasure. That's my sort of critique, not a million miles from the "likes" on this site.

In my opinion, the difference matters.

I agree with you but our reasons are, I suspect, the exact opposite. To me, the apreciation of an object is highly personal and cannot be quantified.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Impressionism was conceptual. Cubism was conceptual. And so it goes.

Keith Arnatt was a conceptual artist who used photography to document his performances/ideas. After meeting David Hurn it could be said he became a conceptual photographer. There are traditionally formal qualities to some of his pictures, but they are based on concepts. I'd hang his photos on my walls. I'd argue that Martin Parr and Jem Southam are conceptual artist/photographers. I've made photographs that have a conceptual element to them. You can't really generalize about what conceptual art is. It's not all sharks in formaldehyde.

I've some sheep farming to watch on Youtube so I'm outta here.

Those artist never considered their work to be conceptual. However you can read concepts into anything. That is why I consider it kings new clothes.
It has replaced vision and skill with word play, a poor substitute.

All the great art movements of the past were led by finding new ways and techniques to express the same subjects that Artists have always been interested in.
The empathises on conceptualism has destroyed the acquisition of skills needed to communicate the artists vision.
All art is about communication, this is always on the artists terms.

 

[Ed Sutton]

Those artist never considered their work to be conceptual.

Not in the terms we understand it now, but they were working to a method. Particularly the cubists, following on from Cezanne, were trying to develop a new way of presenting three dimensions on a flat surface. That's a conceptual approach. Some of the impressionists were seeking new ways to represent light and shade.

It has replaced vision and skill with word play, a poor substitute.

No it hasn't. It's added something new to what art can be. It doesn't have to be about skill and craft. Contemporary conceptual art is more akin to philosophy. There's a place for both.

I don't know what you make of the work of Frank Auerbach who died last week. I can see skill in the way he uses paint and charcoal., but it probably looks like a mess to a lot of people. I think it is wonderful.

I'm not out to convince anyone. I think a lot of art is crap (contemporary and from the distant past), but I also think a lot of what others consider rubbish to be good, interesting and stimulating. As I said earlier, you can't generalize.

I think the emphasis on skills holds people back, and is a damper on the creative process.

 

[PHOTONA]

My minds gone blank (not unusual these days!), but what 'Professional Qualifications' are you referring to?

I know of such as Uni educational qualifications, and professional bodies' professional distinctions, but I can't think of any professional qualifications by which I assume you mean like having to have a pro qualification to be a plumber

I've come across quite a few with degrees who can't shoot for sh*t and certainly have no idea how to run a business, so that's defo not a pro qualification

I assumed he meant relevant professional qualifications. Do not expect te ones with degrees to shoot technically good pictures or run a business, this is not what a degree is about, technical abilities, it is about understanding.If you want to get technically good pictures' hire an amateur who had some practical /'plumber'-alike training

 

[PHOTONA]

Just something on this original question, most judges I’d say learn from other judges and through judging seminars. So, no, I don’t think they have an appreciation for art/photographic history or have a refined visual vocabulary. They’re basically learning to judge photos and that’s it, but through received wisdom. Camera club judges could be replaced with AI soon..
I think critique on the camera club circuit is very detrimental to the photographer. I think camera club photos are in their own hemogonised genre.

Depends, if you wish to start paying attention to technical aspects of photography to combine both it is ok. They could be soon as some judges do not really use their critical thinking skills or just simply do not have enough knowledge , eye, and experience.

when I see someone with lots of letters after the name, I just wow, you paid to enter a lot of competitions


I’m not sure on the credentials of the RPS assessors in general. For the L they are applying a specific ish assessment criteria. The A and the F is more open and requires a statement of intent. I did my A in the photobook genre and the accessors were a mixture of academics and professional photobook makers.

thinking about photobook as well, a mixture of both (academics and professional photobook makers sounds good. Ive watched couple of photos and accessed their assessments sessions, about L, it seemed to make sense, L is a nonsense to me as like single pieces distinction, so for complete amateurs

 

[PHOTONA]

Did that not teach you how to evaluate and develop your own work?

I'm not dismissing the need for continuing to hear the opinions of others, but that has to be from a support network of like minded people.

Doing some course may or may not do that IMO.

network of like-minded people means nothing. Any feedback from the person who knows what he/she is doing is valuable. Not talking about Licentiate (without a statement of intent), because it is a nonsense

 

[PHOTONA]

A membership of BIPP would be the type of thing. My Club has a close association with our local University. Each year a group of the students provide short presentations on their projects. One of them returned this year as a professional having graduated with a 1st Class degree in Editorial and Advertising Photography and is now a successful professional. This allows us to see non-Club photography so we are not isolated from all other forms of photography. Most of our speakers are professional photographers. However, we prefer to pursue Landscape, sport, nature, documentary, Studio portraits, street, Macro, table top and creative subjects and why shouldn't we.

Dave

Professional Photography Bodies – Are They Worth Joining?

Which Professional Photographic Body Should I Join? As you progress in your photography, you may consider joining a professional group for your particular genre, or a more general national/international photographic society. These groups don't tend to come cheap, however, so here we look at what...

www.learningwithexperts.com

BIPP £195 a year , I am not that crazy and have very specified interest in photography, wouldnt necessary be bombarded by Landscape, sport, nature etc.

 

[PHOTONA]

An MPAGB is not awarded for a single image but 20 images. The difference with the RPS is that the images may need to be related or reflect a theme. If anyone can get a wonderful shot by chance why are we not seeing more of them. To get 20 wonderful shots is clearly a bigger challenge. I believe that there are just over 600 FRPS's worldwide whereas only 151 have achieved MPAGB. I have spoken to several photographers who have FRPS and MPAGB and they were in no doubt that the latter is harder to achieve. If you have never attended an RPS or PAGB adjudication, on what facts do you base your opinion.

Dave

That's the thing, 20 images but S I N G L E images, it doesn't change anything, it is still not a body of work. It doesn't show you can present an elaborate thought, idea, story. A complete waste of time, it shows your technical ability ONLY as like Licentiate (the lowest RPS distinction). Remark good artists are usually bad 'editors' , that's where difficulty appears

 

[PHOTONA]

There was a time. When both the examinations run by city and guilds and the institute of British photographers were the gold standard for a career in photography
They ran preliminary, intermediate and final exams which were universally accepted by educational bodies, the civil and government departments, the armed forces. Medical institutions and professional photographic studios.
These exams were taken at most photographic colleges, at a time when the UK had no photographic degree programs. We have no equivalent today.
They were ideal accomplishments to go along side an apprenticeship or studio assistant role. For a fully rounded photographic education and training.
Success in the finals led to an automatic AIBP or ARPS acceptance depending on the route taken.

They were also taken by full time photographic students at colleges like the Regent Street Polytechnic and the London School Of printing And Graphic Arts. Both now university colleges, though some colleges provided their own diplomas.

Sadly those days are long past. And the current degree system is Fine Art based rather than aimed at professional photographers.,
As a result neither photographic education nor the profession is provided for nor regulated in any way. and has Lost both recognition and status as a profession.
This situation is unlikely to change any time soon in the UK.

exactly, this is for both Fine Art and Photography. Whereas you have RIBA for architecture you have nothing for Fine art and photography. This is why makers or artisans at best can self label themselves as artists and usually are doing well if they have big enough network (totally in opposition of what true researcher of art would have)

 

[PHOTONA]

The Truism that "Art is in the eye of the beholder" is impossible to deny.

However that statement does not deny the existence of Art nor does it try to define it.
I suggest that the more one studies art and the more we see , the more we come to appreciate it in all its various forms.

From a personal point of view, of all the forms known, the present promotion of conceptual Art is the closest we have come to "The Kings New Clothes" Syndrome.
At the same time it is generally the least attractive, however intellectually stimulating it might be to some academic minds
Again from a purely personal point of view, the form that appeals to me most is that of the impressionists, and that which followed from it. Especially pieces that combine it with the graphics design elements and experiments of the 30s which lead indirectly to modernism and Pop Art

It is strange how major trends in Art, architecture, and fashion have always followed each other. That is to say, up to the appearance of conceptual Art, which has no equivalence In other fields. It is perhaps for this reason that this period in the history of art will go down as a period of lost opportunity, and mediocrity.

All of which might just show what a poor judge of art I am.?

Time will tell.

People are taking pictures for different reasons, for me at the moment it is ONLY a tool (I can change any time) to explore ideas so yes this could be 'labeled' as conceptual art/photography. For some, who are strongly attracted to only visual aspect of art/photography/form etc. (I was exploring 20 years ago) it will be mediocre or lost opportunity. Exploring ideas is higher understanding and I call it a search for excellence. But generally it is a state of mind, a personality, a sum of all experiences and knowledge that draw you more to one or the other pole

 

[PHOTONA]

Not in the terms we understand it now, but they were working to a method. Particularly the cubists, following on from Cezanne, were trying to develop a new way of presenting three dimensions on a flat surface. That's a conceptual approach. Some of the impressionists were seeking new ways to represent light and shade.



No it hasn't. It's added something new to what art can be. It doesn't have to be about skill and craft. Contemporary conceptual art is more akin to philosophy. There's a place for both.

I don't know what you make of the work of Frank Auerbach who died last week. I can see skill in the way he uses paint and charcoal., but it probably looks like a mess to a lot of people. I think it is wonderful.

I'm not out to convince anyone. I think a lot of art is crap (contemporary and from the distant past), but I also think a lot of what others consider rubbish to be good, interesting and stimulating. As I said earlier, you can't generalize.

I think the emphasis on skills holds people back, and is a damper on the creative process.

Whereas I agree with most on what you say about conceptual art I must disagree with Frank Auerbach hysteria since I couldn't stand him.Once you can draw yourself this guy is a a representation of arrogance mainly. If he could draw himself and build philosophy on top of it he would be a credible and authentic artist for me. Unfortunately his philosophy is only to cover his lack of skills. I can only place him on the same shelf as Damien Hirst who is an arrogant i*diot.

 

[PHOTONA]

Those artist never considered their work to be conceptual. However you can read concepts into anything. That is why I consider it kings new clothes.
It has replaced vision and skill with word play, a poor substitute.

All the great art movements of the past were led by finding new ways and techniques to express the same subjects that Artists have always been interested in.
The empathises on conceptualism has destroyed the acquisition of skills needed to communicate the artists vision.
All art is about communication, this is always on the artists terms.

Conceptual art doesn't need to be visually poor, yes, it does need to communicate the vision, properly. It doesn't mean at all neglecting visual aspect of it. All depends on the concept.

 

[Box Brownie]

FWIW

Some many years ago (in the 1980's to early 90's) when I was a member of the Woking Camera Club there were various highly skilled practicioners of the darkroom in the membership.

Including two notable ones, the first one sadly I cannot recall his name, printed his own amazing Cibachrome portraits.

The other one was Tim Rudman an FRPS holder whose work was already widely recognised with I think one book published.

Edit ~ Also, just remembered Barry Barker???

IIRC Tim's work was all monochrome including 'toning' and science & practice of the methodology.

To refresh my memory, I have looked him up and his is now apparently is a 4 times awardee of a Fellowship. With more books to his name.

 

[Phil V]

Yet, if it's someone's opinion that it's wrong, then it's equally possible that the opinion that it's wrong is wrong.

If the colour of an object is measured using scientific apparatus as Red, so the scientist concludes it’s Red, but the village idiot declares it purple.
Well… they’re both ‘opinions’, but jeez…

Rather it's a fact that I cannot understand how a judgement can be made beyond "this many people like the item, this many dislike it, this many have viewed it and have expressed no opinion".

You almost get that you really don’t have an understanding, but still think your ‘opinion’ could be right despite your admitted ignorance

 

[Chipper]

Well, it' s also an indication of something I have yet to define to dismiss anything as a nonsense or a complete waste of time because it does not do something that you are looking for; the Licentiate has a specific purpose; as another member has stated on here. It gave them a great deal of pleasure and a sense of achievement. Neither the RPS nor the PAGB will "work with you". You present work to theses organisations and they are either assessed as a body of work or as a set of individual images. With both organisations there is an opportunity to get feedback but it is not an ongoing mentoring, for example. As was suggested recently, maybe on page 2, your academic course/s will have given you the tools for reviewing your own work. It seems that you are looking for feedback so why not post a set of images that you have taken here? This forum is something of a broad church; perhaps tone down the dismissive tone regarding amateurs. And no, I am not having a go; as per Gerry the moderator's suggestion, I am being friendly.

 

[TimHughes]

It seems that you are looking for feedback so why not post a set of images that you have taken here?

Great idea