Message:

[

Previous   Next

]

By Topic:

[

Previous   Next

]

Subject:

Re: Atlas Contest rules

From:

Edward Boyd

Reply-To:

Date:

Tue, 26 Feb 2008 05:05:42 +0000

To everyone reading this post. Someone wrote me a post earlier in which I fired back a message defending my earlier harsh words. I wrote her back privately, but have decided that I want to put what I have to say out there for everyone to read (mostly so I don't have to rewrite it several times). Perhaps you didn't like what I wrote earlier, perhaps you didn't ( I have gotten a few negatives so far, but quite a few that supported it, so those that didn't please fire away). From the positive responses, it seems that I said exactly what a lot of folks wanted to say but couldn't. Anyway, let me explain more in a follow up to my email from earlier:

A lot of what I posted today was written several months ago when all of this started out and saved to a draft that I never fired off. Today's posting by Karen Morley only reopened the the thoughts that I never finished and I took that as a cue to get them out.

Most of the active bird photographers of this state were also some of the same people that worked the hardest on the Atlas Project itself. When I wrote that I did not consider myself one of the premier photographers of the state, it's because I haven't had the time to spend in the field to take the thousands of photos that are necessary to glean a few truly fabulous photos out of. I also haven't invested in the top end gear that some of these folks have, nor have most of the people that are reading this. I have the same set-up that most of the amateurs share; a canon digital body and a 100-400mm lens, or something similar. It does an adequate job but doesn't equal the quality gotten from a true 500mm or 600mm fixed lens. I have a few images that I am proud of, but I usually can't equal the likes of George Jett, Bill Hubick or some of the others that pour their hearts into this. They have the guns and the experience that I haven't had the time to gain.

As for not including myself in the group of hardest working volunteers, I managed to do 2 quarter blocks and some free-lance work, but I certainly didn't equal the levels that many other people did during the collection period. Perhaps it was the time invested in caring for a dying sister-in-law and 3 dying parents from 2004 through 2006 that prevented a lot of my time being invested elsewhere, but I would have like to have done more. These were the reasons that I didn't include myself in the groups of my previous message but I still had enough interest in the process to care about the project's development and outcome.

When the rules were posted, the folks in these groups were shocked and insulted. They were more than just a little hurt that they would be shunned in the manner in which they were. I got to listen to a lot of them talk on this and they were all outraged.  

For the organizers to put the restrictions on the entrants that they did, they have insured that this publication will become a lesser effort than it could be. Why would they do that? Do I want as many people getting their photos published in this work as possible? Absolutely, but not at the cost of watering down the product. I'd rather have as many spectacular pictures in the book as possible, even if that prevents some peoples' work from making it in the publication, even my own. Most of these people deserve recognition for their work and their skills. They've worked hard to amass these photos over the years and put in more hours in the field than most of us can imagine. Should someone get their photo in this publication because a set of rules limits submissions by others? I for one don't think so. It would be like locking out the best athletes so some other people get to make the big leagues. Where's the prize if you don't compete with the best? If two outstanding images of a sp
ecies come to a choice, then by all means give someone without another submission the selection over someone else that has other images that are being used. Perhaps as a consolation, after the publication is complete, a web-based site can be developed to present more detailed information gained from the project. There should be and some of the additional images could be used that didn't make it to print?

When Karen had reposted the rules earlier, what was posted was a repeat of the original rules; 1 image per disk. This has continued the confusion of this whole process and is exactly one of the reasons why so many people are outraged. Later today, Bill Ellis wrote that the rules have been altered and multiple entries can be sent on a single disk. I remember now that this message came out some time ago, but there are other issues that have everyone's feathers ruffled. The release of the images for use as the publishers feel appropriate under the guise of being specific to the project has some folks very concerned. The way in which the requirements are written leaves a lot of leeway for them to use the images as they see fit. For people like myself, this isn't so much of an issue, but for others it was a great concern.

A group of folks from the two groups that I referred to pleaded with the organizers from the beginning to change the process and the atlas group has refused to budge, with the exception to allow multiple images (1 per species) on a disk only when Bill Ellis volunteered to step forward and assist in organizing them. Did the pleas from the volunteers get them anywhere? Hell, no, their pleas mostly fell on deaf ears and then they got angry. Instead of just maintaining full control over the project and doing what they want, should the organizers care about what everyone feels on the issue? Absolutely, and the reason is to maintain the support for the project when it becomes published and to maintain the volunteer base for future projects. Perhaps when the Atlas project comes around again in another 20 years many of us will be gone or have forgotten about this mess, but there will be some that will remember and they will remind everyone else. 

It wouldn't have taken much to remedy this mess and make it more enjoyable and exciting for most folks to stay involved (No, I am not in the opinion that everyone can be made happy). The organizing folks should have listened to their support base. Most of these people have enough experience through other work to lend a knowledgeable hand in making useful suggestions and improvements. 

If my failure to restrain my words has some folks upset, that was my intent, maybe it'll wake some people up. There are a lot of emotions over the many hours and years of work that went into this project not being expressed. A lot of people wanted to say much of what I have posted on this subject today and either couldn't find the words or were afraid it would affect their standing in the community and couldn't say them. I'm sorry but these are my opinions and I am afraid that I will not be persuaded otherwise. 

Thank you for your time.

Ed Boyd
Westminster, MD