AV News 187 - February 2012
PAGB Distinction Adjudication
Keith D Long ARPS
We were promised a full day of AV photography when a group of eager
applicants, friends and impartial observers (which included several of the PAGB
executive) gathered in the council chamber of Braunstone Civic Centre at
Leicester on 29th October 2011. The event was the AV adjudication for PAGB
awards and was hosted by Leicester & Leicestershire Photographic Society.
There were 10 applicants;
one for CPAGB, seven for
DPAGB and 2 for MPAGB. The
Assessors for the day were
Keith Leedham, Keith Brown
and Richard Brown and they,
in turn, were 'managed' by the
MC for the day, Peter Brown.
All the submissions were
anonymous and few of the
assembled gathering openly
admitted to having an entry,
other than to close friends. The participants had travelled from points as far apart
as the wilds of deepest East Anglia to the Grampians and observers from
Yorkshire and Wiltshire.
The form of the assessment is that each participant can offer a set of
sequences of between 10 and 30 minutes in length (depending on the level).
Most chose three or four sequences to meet the requirement. The assessors
retire for conference after each viewing and the scores are announced after each
of these conferences. At CPAGB and DPAGB level individual assessor scores
are allowed up to a maximum score of five per assessor, with the totals (only)
being announced to the applicant and audience. At MPAGB level the scores have
to be unanimous amongst the assessors, before an announcement.
We started at 10.30 with a lively set of sequences from the only CPAGB
applicant which was unfortunately not successful. The DPAGB submissions were
a mixed bag, most of documentary style and some using archive materials. One
sequence cleverly used recent photographs of the Falklands, styled as archive
material and produced a result which received plenty of positive comments from
audience members (needless to say this took place whilst the assessors were out
of hearing range in their own deliberations.)
Some of the sequences submitted showed gimmicky presentation, which didn't
flow smoothly at times. Some of the photography was not very tidy in as much as
many images could have been cleaned of e.g. intruding road signs or parked
cars, which distracted from the main and key subjects of the sequence.
There were a couple of sequences which finished with an increased sound
level which unfortunately spoiled the overall effect. A fair number of sequences
presented real mood and sympathy with the subjects and utilised the combination
of pictures, music and commentary to excellent effect. There was the inevitable
war memorial sequence and two of Swaledale from different authors and with
different approaches.
Page 20