User ID

Have no great disagreement with the overall tone or contents of your comments. I would only point out out that I was never informed of the gamelike rules before I said Yes to a request from a coworker. It was as simple as the college photo instructor asks the college photographer for a favor, a seemingly very suitable favor. The page of rules I recieved on arriving offended me. I could not accommodate it.

FWIW I was on a three judge panel, so its not as if I could completely upset the applecart. I could, at most, be somewhat disruptive of status quo that encourages producing mind numbingly boring photos.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I could have politely informed them, on seeing the rules, that they were having a two judge panel without me. Instead I harbored hope that there would be some (many?) stimulating photos in the mix to which I could assign high scores despite ignoring the rules.

I lost that gamble. There was a parade of boring cliches that for the most part ticked many of the boxes to earn good scores. But, I cannot reward mediocrity even faced with a system engineered to do so, so I departed from the system.

Cliches have a useful purpose as compact easily digested messages. I cranked out cliches to deliver the colleges messages "Great Athletic Program", "Up to date technology", "Diverse community" come to our campus for all that. Unfortunately Photo Society generated cliches had no message or purpose other than to tick boxes on the scoring sheet. As you say, its a game (I dont watch game shows).

Thanks for letting me bend your ear !

OzWizard

I have been a judge of photography; for international salons, national salons, and local camera clubs for at least 15 years. There is a criteria we have to follow. starting; the class of the photographer (beginner, intermediate, advanced) and the subject (creative, wildlife/ nature, portrait, ect). Most judges are selected for one two categories. Then I have to consider how the club/ organization want me to classify the images (1st 2nd 3rd some have other rankings).
All this information is given (or should be) in the judges instructions. The judge is usually chosen by his experience in photography, and previous judging experience With all this considered, the judge picks what he likes. And is sometimes overruled, for unknown reasons.
Especially in international competitions. AI will never be able to do this, the variables are endless, and each competition has it's own complications.

Klickitatdave Loc: Seattle Washington

The problem that I would have with AI being the only judge in a photography competition is that the contest criteria would be solely based on the technical aspects of the photos rather than the aesthetic value of the entries. For example, Luminar Neo has a AI cropping algorithm which suggests what it believes is the best compositional choice. In almost every instance where I checked out it's suggestion the result was aesthetically uninteresting or displeasing. Technically perfect photos in general do not automatically translate into great photographs.

terpfan Loc: central coast, California

It takes 5 photography judges to change a lightbulb. 1 to change the bulb and 4 to tell them how it could have been done better.

Klickitatdave Loc: Seattle Washington

JimGray Loc: Albuquerque, New Mexico

I too was surprised by the reply. In my view, a lot can be learned from photo contests. I agree with the need for a tough skin.

BArthur3

Baseball minor leagues are in the process of implementing AI umpires in place of human judgment. Perhaps an inkling of what lies ahead.

Klickitatdave Loc: Seattle Washington

Actually, after giving this more thought, it would be theoretically possible to have an AI learn from samples of photos that people have identified as being aesthetically pleasing, and applying the subsequently generated algorithms in the process of judging photos. Of course, this will need to be refined by having human judges identify those specific aesthetic factors that lead to a positive evaluation and not limit it to it's technical achievements. However, whether this will happen sooner or later is dependent on the fact that it would be extremely difficult to achieve due to the vast variations in how people respond emotionally to any given photograph. For as we all know what one individual might judge to be an excellent photograph someone else might see it as absolute rubbish. Frankly, I don't believe that photographers have much to worry about at this stage of AI development and might be more helpful to learn to look upon it as a tool rather than as a threat.

Klickitatdave Loc: Seattle Washington

Sports officiating unlike photography, art or music is more technical than aesthetically driven and would lend itself better to these types of activities. However, I'm not sure whether I would like to see an AI umpire calling an out or a base runner safe. There is a bit of acting involved in umpiring that actually adds to the romance of the game. I can see where it would assist in determining whether a call is correct or in error.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

Our club judges with the 3 judges and the 9 point system. And the usual categories, but after we finish we go back over them and discuss the reasoning for the score, both good and low points. We show the picture for judging also by category, beginner etc. This is to guide the judges to separate the beginners from the more experienced photographers so they don't get discouraged.

JimGray Loc: Albuquerque, New Mexico

It is apparent from this discussion that one size does not fit all. I agree with Jack that camera club competitions are the best learning experience for improving your photography. I would never recommend that all serious photographers participate in such club competitions, especially if they are fully satisfied with their own creative style. However, many on this list seem interested in learning how to make better images. I have been a member of camera clubs since 1992. Judges vary dramatically in their ability to be good judges. Being an excellent photographer does not make a person a great judge. I have seen a number of judges who were not very good and little was learned from them. Some were so nice in their evaluations you did not know what was good, bad, or indifferent about the images they were judging. You can probably learn more from most mean judges than from one who is too nice. I suspect a few posters have been burned by a bad judge or two. If you are one of those, I recommend you give the club competition another try. You do have to have a thick hide to participate. Another thing you may get from being in a camera club is meeting and becoming friends with other members whose work your admire. Personnally I have learned a lot from my involvement in camera clubs.

User ID

One thing you can learn is to please judges, aka gaming the rules. Is there a second thing ?

JimGray Loc: Albuquerque, New Mexico

I cannot tell if you are serious or just being sarcastic. The camera club I belong to now does not expect judges to follow rigid rules that some people have described. There are many rules of composition that apply to painting as well as photography. I do not know if you are skeptical about learning rules of composition like the rule of thirds, the golden spiral, leading lines, etc. There are also technical details. Do you consider learning those things to be gaming the rules? In my opinion, the impact of a photo is the most important aspect of what makes a great photo. Seeing many photos judged helps me to assess impact.

User ID

Not only did I ignore rules when judging, I also ignore compositional rules when photographing. But I do look both ways when jaywalking across a oneway street.

Am I serious or sarcastic ? Hmmmnnnn ... are those two mutually exclusive ?

As to "composition" ... all I seem to do about it is just let things fall into place.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Luft93 Loc: Finger Lakes, NY

Anything is possible in this crazy world. Some group will think is a good thing to try.
Back in college days I joined PSA for a couple years and had slides accepted at salons. A 1950 article in the journal titled How to Please the Judges end r that membership. What rot! Never entered anything like that again-