I
couldn’t really believe it could work. But it does. Neil had a truly
remarkable close upshot of Sally, a Yorkie, which made an impressive 7 x
5 ‘head & shoulders’. And this from quite a small negative
image - the Compact focusing works only up to a yard
(sorry, meter). What has this to do with colour, you say. Well
nothing, really. Except that Neil left me the camera to try out for
myself.
I,
put a 20exp. Ilford colour film through it. (Konica, of course) and the
results, in the main were disappointing. Mainly my own fault. My shots had
mostly overhanging trees forming a sort of framework. And of course my
camera’s auto-focus couldn’t cope. Obviously it was of the type that
takes an all-over reading. Whilst I was used to my center-weighted Nikon.
But the open beach scenes were good. And I quite enjoyed the convenience
of being able to carry the thing around in my pocket and fire away quickly
- almost without thinking. There’s certainly a place for this sort of
instrument for the enthusiastic worker.
Sjnce
the October issue I have written to all Area Leaders, primerly I must
admit, to ask to be included on their mailing list for their regional
newsletters.. For, In truth, L can do with some help in compiling this
regular Here & There column.
The.
replies, as could be expected, produced most varied accounts of the
diverse activities around the Areas Few, unfortunately, are able to hold
regular meetings. So the get-togethers are confined to letters and
telephone calls Yet, I find, even this hindrance fails to dampen the
enthusiasm and interest in the Club. A few even find it possible to meet
occasionally and informally. Many are the friendships thus blossomed.
Which is absolutely marvelous.
The
few who are lucky appear to have everything in their favour. In
Middlesbrough, for instance, there is a community centre catering for many
organisations and Area ‘4 up there have a monthly meeting which costs
members a mere £1.50 per year for the use of a comfortable
room, with a projector and screen thrown in. This, obviously is in
addition to their C.R.C. sub. Cant be bad. A go-ahead Area this with a
yearly syllabus giving details of lectures, demonstrations and so on. The
Area is known locally as the Colour Photo Processing Club (C.R.C. Area 4)
and is affiliated to several local Camera Clubs and the Area Federation.
Area
15, under the expert guidance of Bert Saunders is another
very active outfit -as one would expect as the late Will Griffiths was one
of its brightest and most dedicated members. There is I find a Will
Griffiths Memorial Trophy Slide of the year - competition, and I cannot
but agree with Bert Saunders that this should become a C. R. C. National
Competition that a tremendous memorial that would be, indeed, to Will.
It
is sad to read, though, that there is some dissension within the ranks
over the question of competition rules. Something I didn’t know was that
the National Competition rules forbid the use of filters and/or other
gadgets to produce ‘special effects’ and I gather Bert has had
somethin2 of a battle with a few of his members who disagree rather
vehemently - with this ruling.
Bert
rightly says there has to be rules. And who can argue with that. But
I gather that his members have disregarded the National Rules and drawn up
their own version. This, of course is totally wrong. The situation should
have been included, on the agenda of the Annual General Meeting and if
that meeting decided to have the rules changed, a vote would have decided
the issue democratically. There can be no argument without this. None at
all. Bert is right obviously the National Rules must apply to ALL Areas.
But
I disagree, personally, for what it’s worth, with the ruling that
‘special-effects’ gadgets should be barred. For where does that ruling
start. Or finish.
Must slides be taken only with a 50mm lens? Is a
“fish-eye” not acceptable? No! Provided the slide is taken
‘legitimately’ - by the ‘entrant’ inside a conventional camera
then ‘I feel this should. be ‘the sole criterion. Maybe a separate
category’ for ‘special.’ effects- filters, solarisation and perhaps
another for the ‘space-like’ pattern type Picasso picture produced
without a camera at all.
So in effect, I both agree and disagree with Bert1 I agree
wholeheartedly with him that there MUST be rules. Of course, rules there
must be. But ‘special effects’ - produced optically and legitimately
within the camera (and not of course copied.
from
somebody else’s slides) …. these there must also be. So please Area 15
I implore you - Bury the hatchet. Agree to disagree. Please!
oooooooooooooooooooo000000000000000000oooooooooooooooooo
During the
Central Committee Meeting at Worcester on the 16th of November the
Club’s Rules were dealt with extensively and we feel that a good working
set of rules was worked out These will be passed on to all Area Leaders
for their approval and a final draft will be produced and sent
to all C. R. C. members. However, to settle one point that Ron
mentions in his extended column (Filters, special-effects etc. these are
now welcome as part of the club’s activities either in local meetings Or
competitions. It must still be considered whether these types of slides
should be in direct competition with normally exposed slides or should
have a separate category of their own.
Personally, I
feel that they shouldn’t compete with normal work as not everyone has
the talent or inclination to carry out this type of work. This in no way
belittles the author’s work, I shall forever remember the excellent work
of Colourisation and Polarisatiori and pin-point work that Will Attree
used to produce from Area 18. They were so good most normally exposed
slides couldn’t stand much chance when competing against them. So
perhaps it would be best if they came under a separate category.