AV News Magazine | Page 41

AV News 187 - February 2012 As I stated in my previous letters and as also indicated by Chris, it is not the expectation of winning that's important, although this is a very welcome bonus, it's the pride in taking part and showing ones work to others. To put it another way involving and encouraging every AV worker who dares to enter competition and hopefully raise the standard of AV production. By referring to my previous letters readers will note that my rejections in 2009 appeared to be on grounds other than AV quality. To quote from my letter in Feb 2010 'future Nationals are to be taken over by the RPS AV Group and I will be interested to see if future rules are aimed at encouraging a wider group of entrants or biased towards elitism and federation club membership'. I was assured that future pre selection would be handled on a much fairer basis and when I read the competition rules, initially, I felt reassured that the rule regarding entrants with more than one entry would bring about a fairer pre selection. I am now however disappointed to note that some entrants appear to have flouted the rules regarding multi entries and got away with it. If entrants flout the rules by not indicating the acceptance priority of multi entries and there are too many entries then the first action the judges/committee should take is to simply randomly reject one of the entries thereby giving more entrants a chance of being shown. As I felt then and indicated, as many entrants as possible should be encouraged to enter and not be cast aside at the first hurdle. There appears to be a wide difference in judges opinions and so who's to say that the entry rejected at pre selection will not be praised at the final event. If there are too many entrants/entries then pre selection is necessary but all entrants should where possible be given at least one entry, not some two and others none. As I have stated previously all entrants need to know they are all competing on a level playing field. I feel we need to encourage as many participants/competition entrants, particularly new entrants, as possible in this fantastically expressive form of photography. All rejections at pre selection level surely deserve a short note on why their entry was rejected, at least to make the lost entry fee a little more palatable and to encourage improvement to acceptance level. Perhaps there should be some discussion in AV News as to what method of judging is used at pre selection and the main event in order to make sure judging is on a fair basis and aimed at content and quality not just a judges likes and dislikes and whether or not the entrant will be attending. Like Chris I would also be interested in knowing how 77 entries could be judged in what appears to be one day but only 64 judged in two days. This year I submitted only one entry, feeling this was the fairest way to enter and if I was to be rejected again, fortunately I was not, then I had not thrown away two not inconsiderable entry fees, that's £24.00 for the pr