I couldn't sleep so I thought I'd write. Maybe I need a little more wine. Don't read too much into the title, it was just pulled out of the air as a place to start a discussion.

In the topic, Stirring the Pot, Part II, Sharon suggested a club in Palmdale. I would like to explore this idea further in case we are not able to come to an LPA concensus on where to go from here.

As for a schedule, I think it would be advantageous to make a decision on whether to split before the next LPA elections. Once those elections occur some of the potential "other club" officials may become unavailable for the next year.

Potential problems. Starting a new club is always a hassle, especially when it has to compete with another club for active members. On the other hand a club that can draw more of the general public is likely to have more members willing to help out, plus more support of the local politicians. I don't usually offer up much of my limited spare time but I think that this would be a worthy cause so I would be willing to put in quite a few extra hours, at least through the first year. In any case a new club should be significantly distinct from any other so as to minimize conflict and competition.

Potential benefits. Many, both to the members that join (mostly personal satisfaction) and to the general public.

My ideas on the Charter.

- I think such a club should focus just on supporting the general public. For example, the type of people who attend the local city supported basic photo classes. Workshops would focus on things like camera functions, composition, lighting, and how to get the most out of their cameras (probably mostly mini-Canons and such). There are probably thousands of people in the AV with digital cameras who want some help but don't want to become professionals or spend lots of money on software and hardware.

- We could create a mix of local meetings/workshops plus introduce the more interested members to some of the online photo groups such as Photki, Deviant Art, and the like.

- Rather than club competitions we could have individuals post online to places like Photki and discuss/critique them only if the members wanted such. In fact, much of the club activity could be internet based which would reduce costs and effort. Paper photos are going out of vogue but we might be able to support Salon-type shows and help people who want to break into the sales market.

Anyway, those were just some of the ideas rattling around in my head at this late hour. I'd really like to hear from other people as to their thoughts, should the club split. This is by no means a recommendation on such a split, just a "what if?

From my own standpoint, I don't think we need a second club. Already, we are working to rectify problems within LPA and that's the answer right there. Dave has my respect for wanting to address issues from within the LPA masses, our wonderful “do it all gal” Bonnie is willing to take issues before the board and to follow them through, people are speaking up and we seem to be headed in the right direction.

Remember, LPA is a diverse mix of people, all with those different attitudes, personalities, wants, needs, etc. we spoke of at the last Friday night discussion group meeting. By our very human nature and probability, will that not repeat itself should a second photog club start up in Palmdale? Why go through the motions to reinvent the wheel when all we have to do with this one is to oil the axles?

For the most part, LPA is suffering growing pains, a natural process of growth. I say we stay focused by keeping an eye on the prize, a better functioning LPA, by voicing our collective and personal concerns, by improving our bottom-up and top-down communication channels, by addressing other operational issues as they present themselves, and mostly by inactive people getting off their lazy rear ends and getting involved.

Don

There are now three topics that are somewhat intertwined, Stirring the Pot, Part II http://www.lpaphotography.org/phpBB3a123/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=242, Palmdale General Photo Club
http://www.lpaphotography.org/phpBB3a123/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=254, and Senior Members http://www.lpaphotography.org/phpBB3a123/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=257. This monologue could have been posted in all three but I chose to post it in this one alone.

I'm not going to waste anyone's time defending my methodology (i.e. the old 2x4 between the eyes to get people's attention), other than to say that I believe that it was the only way to get this club out of its comfortable rut and start thinking and talking. The term "seniors" emotes people who are older, set in their ways, insist on everyone doing things their way, don't care what other people think or say, and treat others with disrespect. Of course we have some more experienced members who have been providing valuable services to the club that few others are willing to do. But in some ways those same people have also been acting like "seniors." And those more experienced members who have not been part of this have remained silent while it was going on, essentially giving their tacit approval, another trait of "seniors".

I've estimated that there about 200,000 people in the AV with maybe 40,000 having digital cameras. LPA has about 130 members and, on a good night, we'll see 50-70 attend. I can't remember the numbers (John will) but I think that the AV Fair had about 300 people enter photos last year with about 25% of those being club members. I'm going to guess that the number of LPA members competing in S4C/PSA and such as about 20. Further, I believe that the average age of LPA members is over 50 while the average age of the general AV photographic community is about 25 or 30 with a large percentage under 20. We have what, three under the age of 20? Anyone and everyone can jump in and correct my numbers but the point is that LPA is such a small part of the AV photographic community that one has to wonder why it exists at all. I wouldn't call this a great success.

I've talked to several prospective and new members and I have yet to hear any one of them say they want to spend thousands of dollars, go into competitions, and win fame, fortune, and glory. What I have heard is that they just want to know how to better use their cameras. As the Hospitality Chair I'm sure Tylene can summarize what most new members want. Of the people I interact with, who've been in the club at least a year, I can think of only a few who have almost unlimited budgets for photography and a desire to get rich off photography and/or win fame and glory at competitions.

So, I have to question the direction of the club which seems to me to be

- 50% heavy-handed push toward high end competition (including RAW)
- 45% mid-level skills such as Photoshop
- and about 5% what most people want

I think that this should be reversed. But that's just my opinion.



Ok, Palmdale General Photo Club.

I think that, by reaching out to the communities, we can draw interest from at least some the other 19,870 digital photographers in the AV, maybe even some of the other 75% of the people who entered the AV Fair Photo Competition last year.

Most of the club business can be handled on-line with physical meetings being more hands-on, demonstrative, and personal. With the local governments' support we can provide workshops in schools, libraries, and other public places. I think that, with some careful thought, this can be done with a small number of people performing administrative functions. Activities might be:

- Getting out the word, talking to city officials, schools, and others to find the people who are already doing community service work (but not in the LPA)
- Coordinating events, leading local field trips to parks and such
- Maintaining a $5/month (or free) web site, moderating a forum, posting helpful information
- ??? tbd

I personally like the idea of holding classes and workshops for children to give them a start toward photography. All they need to get started is their point-and-shoot, an understanding of lighting and composition, and how to view their photos on the computer or television. Most adults need little more.

And if anyone wants to move on to the more high end stuff we can suggest existing on-line web sites and even the LPA.

There's nothing to say that this can't be a "Chapter" of the LPA, but that requires a change of mindset and acceptance of what the LPA is not currently doing. Don has asked that we now "be patient and give change its due". Been there, done that, it doesn't work. Not enough people have gotten out of their rut or recognized that they are in one. It's too comfortable down there, too easy to defend the status quo, and too easy to just sit back and let time slip by. So, I think that planning for a separate club (or chapter) needs to continue.

Here are some things I think we need to know before we get too far in planning.

- Is anyone familiar with Fotki and other photo-oriented web sites? If so can you describe the ones you think would be more suitable for this venture?
- How about web/forum opportunities, preferably ones that would be simple to update and maintain?
- A list of community photography related services, such as classes open to the public.
- Names and contact information of people who are currently instructors in photography.
- Any professionals or others who might want to participate?
- Suggestions on where and when interested people might want to get together to discuss this at length. The AV Mall has a large number of tables near the Food Court that are usually empty.

Glenn

My Canon EOS came with free software that makes quite a few adjustmentsto both JPGs and RAW. There have only been a handful of my shots over the last two years that really needed Photoshop, and those were JPGs.

As a rank amateur with a new camera and no experience I had no idea what I already had available. I think that it would be helpful for people demonstrating or advocating Photoshop to explain to the members that there are low-cost alternatives and how they might find instructions on using those. Perhaps we could have a "generic photo adjustment" workshop that explains the basics without making it photoshop specific.