Meaning of Camera Clubs in the past and nowadays

[jachym_rybnicek]

<p>Hello everyone,</p>

<p>I've been working on Master Thesis which is dealing with fine art photography and changes of its meaning according to the new information technologies (especially web galleries, social networks, photobanks,...). I would like to ask you what you think are the main dis-/advantages of being member of Camera Club - globally or personaly from your point of view.</p>

<p>Thanks a lot for any comment or idea (it would help me confirm or deny my thoughts and pieces of knowledge).</p>

<p>Jachym</p>

[wood]

<p>If you are only a member of a camera club and have no other source of learning or exposure, your photographic world will be very limited and you will not progress as rapidly or as well with regards to your skills and/or vision. Other than that, I consider camera clubs to be mostly beneficial. If the clubs have competitions, you do need to have somewhat of a thick skin when your work is judged.</p>

[robert_k1]

<p>I'm no historian of camera clubs, but would assume that the purposes and operations of the original ones very different from today's. An interesting research project. Here are a couple of grand daddies.</p>

<p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Camera_Club<br>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_f/64</p>

<p>Today camera clubs are as popular as ever, if not more so. The new wave of photographers starting with digital cameras at the beginning and intermediate levels would find the clubs to be good places to learn and socialize. However, the clubs are not for everyone and have their shortcomings. This thread should tell you more:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00Wzro?start=0</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>Camera clubs in my experience were about guys who liked machinery, comparing telephoto lenses etc. and winning the President's Cup for Printing. They were OK for learning the rudiments of photography. But after going round the yearly cycle of competitions, talks and so forth, it all got very tedious.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>It probably depends on the club. I belong to one that seems to be all about monthly contests. I had hoped it would be more social or more learning-oriented. (It is somewhat, but not as much as I'd like.)</p>

<p>I suspect the biggest disadvantage from photography clubs, groups, or whatever, is that people tend to channel their efforts into trends, and thus originality is lost. For instance, the members of my club have been very eager to learn HDR. One of our members who does some delightful and somewhat unique nature photography seems to be particularly interested in this direction. I don't think she really appreciates just how good her work is, because the masses jump up and down with such excitement over things like HDR.</p>

[bethe_fisher]

<p>It really depends on the club. I was a member of a decent sized club in southeast MA that was very active with many great shooters who were willing to help newbies at the drop of a hat (or lens cap). I'm now a member of 2 different clubs in western PA that satisfy a need for community, but don't (in my opinion) encourage the amount of learning that the club in MA does. A place to check for info is the PSA - Photographic Society of America. Someone there could probably give you lots of great historical info. <br>

I personally consider a web forum or two to be online photo clubs (of the best kind). They are groups of people who come together online to share info, jokes, photos, etc... </p>

[markdeneen]

<p>The appeal of clubs is that if you draw a circle around your friends and family, not many of them are REALLY interested in photography. So a club, it a convenient way to satisfy the desire to be around people of like interest. Clubs of all kinds take on the personality of the entrenched leadership. In a club of 100 people, there will be 5 who do all the decision making year after year. IME, there is little to no turnover, so the club personality becomes sort of fixed. Some being great, others being not so great.</p>

<p>Our club does a lot of critique on a non-threatening level, which is great for beginners. They also help get you into shows and competitions. I definitely look forward to the meetings.</p>

[john_macpherson]

<p>My experience of clubs is that the majority of members (and sadly the new members) judge the quality of their work by the barometer of the judgement of the monthly competitions, which in my (wide) experience are dominated by obsessive male judges with a particularly unhealthy interest in the 'boringly ordinary'. Anything that shows even the faintest hint of creativity is dismissed and thus creativity is stifled. YMMV of course!</p>

[robert_k1]

<p>The new information technologies (and digital photography) definitely offer many alternatives to camera clubs. Instead of, and in addition to, joining a club and meeting a small group face to face, you can go online and achieve the same objectives, and much more. Sites such as this one, Meetup groups, and photo communities like Flickr are all good resources for exposure, for feedback, for education, and for socializing, etc. Every one of these can be far superior to what a camera club can offer, e.g.</p>

<p>- For exposure, you get eyeballs from around the world.<br>

- For feedback, you get many more than from just a single contest judge. And you can talk back. Plus there is no ribbon.<br>

- For education, there is no limit, except your own time. You can go wide and be exposed to every equipment, technique and genre. Or you can stay focused and pinpoint what interest you.</p>

<p>While a club meets once a month, the online community is there 24/7. But there are some downsides as well. Too much time is spent on the computer, and you don't get to meet fellow photographers.</p>

 

[charles_stobbs3]

There was a time in the 1950's when CAB rules allowed airlines to offer airfares, much reduced from the then regulated airfares, to "affiliated groups" (such as camera clubs, opera clubs, dog owners clubs, etc.) to overseas destinations.You could attend a meeting or two and have a cheap vacation come summer. No need to sign up for the ground portions of the tours. I got three cheap trips to Europe that way. Haven't belonged to a camera club since.

[tom_cheshire]

<p>I have never been in a camera club but, generally, the biggest benefit I see in a club is to meet people who have a similar interest and see what sort of eq. they are using, swap experiences and, maybe, make a friend or two. Otherwise, learning is best done by book and practice. Contests are limiting because it is the judgement of a small group whose likes/dislikes may not reflect the real world. Clubs tends to have a pecking order and playing "king of the hill" has nothing to do with photography. Generally, clubs are boring until they cover a subject that you are interested in. One side benefit is having an opportunity to buy used eq. from other members ocassionally. If you are in a club the likes of the original f64 and have Edward Weston or Ansel Adams as a mentor, fine, but, generally, clubs are composed of people interested but not fully knowledgeable and "stuffed shirts" whose talents, if any, are limited and just want to lord over others. </p>

[Brad_]

I've found formal clubs stifling. Much better to develop a large network of photographer friends with similar interests

who like to go out and shoot and have a few beers. I recognize though that's much easier in a large city like San Francisco and the Bay

Area where I shoot...

[tonmestrom]

<p>it could be a cultural thing but what I see over here is mostly the same regardless of the club:</p>

<ul>

<li>predominantly male</li>

<li>average age well above fifty</li>

<li>average membership of around 20 people</li>

<li>annual club contests telling themselves how good they are and on and on and on</li>

</ul>

<p>for the most part background, skill level and activity are not as obvious as the lack of passion. While most seem to share a basic interest in photography more than anything else it seems to be a good excuse to get out of the house every fortnight.<br /> Tell them there is a Richard Avedon retrospective in Amsterdam, which is only two hours away by train, and you won't find them there or a impressive and extensive Elliot Erwitt retrospective which would only take a half hour drive: not interested (if that is they even know the work of those photographers). While there are of course exceptions basically you'll find no more than 2-3 people with a genuine interest in photography as a whole and a passion to take their own photography further.<br /> Generally speaking people in most clubs are far more interested in what you shoot with than they are in your results, it's often the first question asked. Judging a contest there is always fun because while constructive feedback is officialy welcomed it is "understood" that most of it will be neglected no matter how much work you put into it.</p>

[keith selmes]

<p>I've never been to a Camera Club, because my impression, partly gained from talking to club members, is that they are very competition oriented, very much scoring points, and that doesn't interest me.</p>

<p>I might visit one though. I checked the website of one local club, and I like their work, so it might be worth a look.</p>

<p>On line sites are another matter. These are not clubs as such, although we join and become members, and not specifically about cameras or point scoring. As much as we can take part in the game of seeing how many points you score in an on line gallery, we also can display work and recieve useful critique right around the the world.<br>

Just as important, we can see what others are doing, study the work of the great and famous, and learn ourselves by doing critique on the work of others. So this is all very beneficial.</p>

<p>And can also get help with technical problems, and generally discuss this or that aspect of photography with a global community, and we can still, if we want, talk about our cameras.</p>

<p>The only thing is, unless we organise an occasional meeting or trip with other forum members, it doesn't actually get us out of the house once a fortnight.</p>

<p>That said, I have been to some exhibitions and met people occasionally that I came across on line.</p>

[pat trent]

<p>I'm the coordinator for the camera club in my gated community of people 55 years or older. For over a decade, we've been meeting in our clubhouse twice monthly to share a mutual interest. We have rank beginners and experienced photographers. We never have competitions, although we share our photos when inclined to do so, usually after a group outing or after a member has returned from a trip. At each meeting a presentation on some aspect of photography is given--often by me, but the other members also take a turn at this, sometimes after reading a book or article. We occasionally display photos in the main room of our community clubhouse. Occasionally one of the many other clubs in our senior community will ask that a member of our club take photos at one of their events. Our membership is about equal when it comes to gender.<br /> The purposes of our club have always been: (1) to be with people who have a similar interest, (2) to share experiences and knowledge, (3) to plan and take group outings to a local event or scenic place, (4) to have fun! As coordinator, my goal is to insure that every meeting is a pleasant experience and that every member feels free to ask any question or offer any insights to the others.</p>

[felixg]

<p>I found camera clubs fitted a particular phase of my life and development.<br /><br />I had been "doing" photography for about five years, learning "by book and practice" as somebody said above, and had hit a point where I needed people to learn from.<br /><br />I was thirteen at the time ... the club was full of people at least twice my age, mostly four times or more. They were people I would later in my teens see as boring, limited, stuffy (probably just like I am, now!) but they were kind to me, generous with their advice and help (which I was free to accept or reject, and which was different from each person so I could test one against another in actual practice) and I owe them a tremendous debt of gratitude.<br /><br />There came a time when I no longer found anything more to gain from the clubs, and began to be stifled by them, so I moved on. There came another time (somewhat later) when I really had outgrown them. But none of that alters the fact that they were an absolutely vital stage in my early photographic development. I remember them fondly, even though they no longer offer me, personally, what I need now.<br /><br />Incidentally, Photo.Net maps (from my viewpoint, not necessarily from others) almost exactly onto them. I came into PN out of a feeling that I had a debt to pay; but others do it so very much better than I, so it didn't work out that way...</p>

[steven_f1]

<p>In my city there are two clubs. One is a compitition type club. The other is a learning discussion type. The only difference digital has made is that there is more interest in both clubs Other then the frequenty use of computers with digital projectors digital hasn't changed the focus of the clubs that much.</p>

<p>While much of what goes on in a club can now be done on line, many people still prefer getting together to discuss equipment or comment on others work. The main disadvantage of a club is that I sometimes miss the meeting due to my work schedule. Photo.net however is available all the time but the discussions are in general more limited to one subject while in a club the discussions are more free flowing.</p>