The Forum dates to 1939. That was also the year that WW2 started, in September. At first, membership consisted of individuals who were ‘printers’. They were involved in the printing trades, newspapers and books and magazines, etc. They were a ‘craft’ group, interested on photography as an adjunct to their work. The Forum was a discussion group about their hobby, photography. It didn’t take long before other photographers joined them. Remember, they were not alone … there were camera cubs active in the city, in Canada, and around the world. But the Forum was different. The ethos of: ‘We are all Equals’ was a key difference. That still holds today. We know that we are not all equally skilled as photographers or print makers, but we are all experienced and capable and together form a happily diverse group of peers.
The TFF also developed a meeting format that was unique. Meetings became social events as well as photographic events. (A long-time member, Jim Beverage, observed about 25 years ago that he wasn’t certain if Forum members were a group of photographers who liked to socialize, or a social group that liked to take photographs.) Being, by design, a small group, made for personal friendships. Having dinner together strengthened personal connections as well as learning from your friends. That is not unique in society-at-large but is in photography. Today’s continuing format of drinks/dinner/discussion is one of our strengths.
Our meeting locations have been many over the years. Most camera clubs have met in the same location for many years. Not so The Forum. I think my personal count is 14 locations since 1977 when in became a member. At first, we met in small hotels with meeting spaces and services, that were generally happy to get a regular mid-week event every couple of weeks. We’d contract with the hotel for 13/14/15 meetings at a fixed price for dinner/service and meeting space. Drinks were an individual choice/cost. The annual membership fee would have about 20% used to ‘manage the Forum’ and 80% as a meal subsidy. A membership of 30 members would pay $100 each with $20x30=$600 to manage the Forum and $80x30=$2400 for meal subsidy. That would be about $10 per member attending the meeting, so if we were charged $20 per meal by the hotel the member paid only $10 to attend each meeting. Most members did not get to all meetings, so it usually worked out as anticipated each year. Usually. We continued to manage our finances this way until we moved to Katz Deli about 4 years ago. Their financial process was different, so meals became on individual member expense. It has been the same at Seoul House. It works.
Photography has changed over the years. Greatly so (in the opinion of some) with the general move from film to digital. Up until the 70’s the TFF was all Monochrome/Black and White. Most prints were made in home darkrooms, often tiny spaces. Some members had access to commercial labs for personal use. Members were responsible for every aspect of the final image. Film was available from several manufacturers (Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, others). Members would process their chosen film. In early days they mixed their own chemistry, but then moved on to commercial, available chemistry to develop/fix the film. They knew how to make processing variances to get differing negative characteristics. They chose paper characteristics and paper grades, anticipating a final result. ‘Test-strips’ were critical. And some members were creative in the prints they produced. In the 70’s some members started processing colour prints from colour-negative film. It was a greater challenge than most monochrome because of time/temperature/process issues, but COLOUR! Prints! Wow!
Along with the possibility of colour prints from home darkrooms there was another colour change in photography … the colour-positive transparency … the ‘Slide’. In the 60’s and 70’s Slides took over Camera Clubs. They even had a place in the Toronto Focal Forum. When I joined the Forum in the 70’s we had ‘Slide Nights’, 3 each year. They usually had fewer members at the meeting and the slides seemed generally less interesting, probably because you couldn’t ‘improve’ them. Slides were removed from the Forum by a vote of the membership in the 80’s. The next change-of-process came with the Cibachrome (later called Ilfochrome) process. This let home-darkrooms (provided they were really dark!) produce acceptable quality colour prints from slides. Colour prints became a growing part of the TFF norm.
My memory tells me that the first digital print at the Forum was made by Carm Griffin. It was probably from a slide that was scanned with a film scanner to a digital file in his computer and then printed by a colour printer. Carm said he left the computer processing the file to the printer, went to bed, and saw his print the next morning. (Yes, things have changed!) The move to digital cameras started about 2003. That was catalyst for the balance of prints presented moving to colour rather than monochrome. It took 50 years! And that’s where we are today.
The Print Discussion process that is at the heart of the TFF has evolved over the years as well. When I became a member, we could present 2 prints per meeting. Probably 50% of the members did so at any meeting. That meant that a meeting of 23 members would discuss 30-35 prints that evening. The Moderator was very much in control and would limit the number of members making comment on any print to ensure the meeting finished by 10:00 pm. Much of the discussion dealt with technical issues such as choice of paper grade, tonal range, or a darkroom technique used to make the image more unique. Prints that challenged pre-conceived norms were treated with some distain. ‘Big prints’ were 16x20 inches and were probably 50% of those presented. The vote was taken by a show of hands and a precise count was made and stated by the Moderator. Five or Six Gold seals in an evening was the norm. (The awarding of ‘Seals’ for merit was common in camera clubs and has been traditional in the TFF. Seals were affixed to the back of prints by printmakers as a sign of merit. In National or International competitions, it was not unusual to see prints with multiple seals affixed to the back of the print.) At each meeting there would probably be 5 or 6 Re-makes, but we didn’t see a lot of Re-makes re-presented. As colour prints became more usual, the evenings entry was divided into 4 piles: First B&W/First Colour/Second B&W/Second Colour. Each group of prints was presented segregated from the other groups. We might, or might not, get to the second set of prints for discussion.
In the early 90’s we experimented with both the Moderator role and Voting. For a couple of years, we selected about 5 members considered to be ‘good Moderators’ and each of them served as Moderator for 3 or 4 meetings that year. It worked OK, but after a couple of years we reverted to using a wider range of Moderators. There was also some concern that the voting decisions of some members (especially if seated in the back of the room) were influenced by the decisions made by ‘experienced members’. We created ‘Voting cards’ with 3 choices (Gold/Silver/Re-make). Members showed the Moderator their personal decision using the card, but other members did not know the choice and so voted without undue influence. That worked well for several years. As the membership evolved this too fell out of favour and we returned to the traditional ‘show of hands’. More recently, not all members felt that the vote/decision/seal process was an important aspect of their Forum experience and they have chosen to participate in the discussion process but not receive Seals, if awarded.
About 20 years ago we designated one or two meetings each year as ‘Experimental Nights’, without voting/Seals. This was done because of the range of possibilities created by computers and imaging software … so we saw some weird stuff as members experimented. These lead to our current ‘No Seal Night’ process. Simply put: Over the years we have become more flexible in our procedures reflecting the wide range of photographic style and content that we now view. That seems appropriate.
Camera Clubs have trophies. So, did we. We had an assortment of about 7/8 by the mid 90’s. They dated back to the Drew Trophy, presented to the Forum by George Drew, later Premier of Ontario. Subsequent trophies honoured some of our founding members. That was a lot of hardware for a group of 30 +/- members! In the mid 90’s we retired all but the Galbraith Trophy. (Where did the trophies go? They sat in a box in my basement for about 10 years. When we celebrated our 75th Anniversary I brought them to the event, displayed them, and they were taken home by members, usually ones with their name on the trophy! Finis!) We have continued to present the Galbraith to a TFF member for his/her contribution to the Forum, usually in year of presentation. It can be presented for outstanding photography as well, but that has happened rarely.
Until a few years ago we had an Executive position for ‘Activities’. For many years that meant organizing one or two week-end events each year. The format was straightforward: Find a Hotel/Motel/Resort during their ‘off-season’ that could provide rooms/meals/a meeting space over a weekend for 12 to 20+ TFF members and spouses/what-ever at a cost participants were willing to pay. Hopefully the geography around the location would be photogenic too! (This was my first ‘position on the TFF Executive. I had never been to an outing event as I did a lot of business travel in those days and liked weekends at home. Yes, it was a ‘learning experience’!) Over the years we went to St Jacobs, Muskoka, Bruce Peninsula, Haliburton, Prince Edward County, Rice Lake, etc. and often returned to the same location/lodge at a different time of year. It was a nice mix of photography/social/entertainment! Sandy Schoenhofer made it a 7-day trip to Death Valley … about a dozen folks participated.
In some ways the TFF has been, and is, an outlier in the Toronto photographic community. Our membership is smaller, our focus narrower, our format different from other photographic groups/camera clubs. But we have participated, over the years, in several ways. We were a founding member of the Greater Toronto Council of Camera Clubs (now Ontario Council of Camera Clubs). We managed a GTCCC annual Competition/Exhibition, back when Kodak hosted the event. We have had our own exhibitions in galleries and our 50th Anniversary event included a 2-week display in the rotunda of Toronto City Hall. Individual members have staged personal exhibitions in galleries, etc. over the years.
The Executive of the Forum currently consists of 6 positions, plus the current Past President. That’s about 25% of total membership. Nine current members are Past Presidents, 30% of current membership. Our total membership has worked best, in the past, when we have about 30-32 members. Because of our small membership and limited photographic focus most executive positions do not require a lot of time/effort. Usually. We are a group of peers, photographically. Most members should be willing to accept a role on the Executive from time-to-time.
That’s it. I expect that I have been wrong about some of the content. Corrections will be accepted.
The objective has been to provide a current view of the past. Perhaps that will have some influence as we look to the future, a future that is currently clouded but can be whatever we wish it to be. That is up to all of us, together. A Forum.
The TFF also developed a meeting format that was unique. Meetings became social events as well as photographic events. (A long-time member, Jim Beverage, observed about 25 years ago that he wasn’t certain if Forum members were a group of photographers who liked to socialize, or a social group that liked to take photographs.) Being, by design, a small group, made for personal friendships. Having dinner together strengthened personal connections as well as learning from your friends. That is not unique in society-at-large but is in photography. Today’s continuing format of drinks/dinner/discussion is one of our strengths.
Our meeting locations have been many over the years. Most camera clubs have met in the same location for many years. Not so The Forum. I think my personal count is 14 locations since 1977 when in became a member. At first, we met in small hotels with meeting spaces and services, that were generally happy to get a regular mid-week event every couple of weeks. We’d contract with the hotel for 13/14/15 meetings at a fixed price for dinner/service and meeting space. Drinks were an individual choice/cost. The annual membership fee would have about 20% used to ‘manage the Forum’ and 80% as a meal subsidy. A membership of 30 members would pay $100 each with $20x30=$600 to manage the Forum and $80x30=$2400 for meal subsidy. That would be about $10 per member attending the meeting, so if we were charged $20 per meal by the hotel the member paid only $10 to attend each meeting. Most members did not get to all meetings, so it usually worked out as anticipated each year. Usually. We continued to manage our finances this way until we moved to Katz Deli about 4 years ago. Their financial process was different, so meals became on individual member expense. It has been the same at Seoul House. It works.
Photography has changed over the years. Greatly so (in the opinion of some) with the general move from film to digital. Up until the 70’s the TFF was all Monochrome/Black and White. Most prints were made in home darkrooms, often tiny spaces. Some members had access to commercial labs for personal use. Members were responsible for every aspect of the final image. Film was available from several manufacturers (Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, others). Members would process their chosen film. In early days they mixed their own chemistry, but then moved on to commercial, available chemistry to develop/fix the film. They knew how to make processing variances to get differing negative characteristics. They chose paper characteristics and paper grades, anticipating a final result. ‘Test-strips’ were critical. And some members were creative in the prints they produced. In the 70’s some members started processing colour prints from colour-negative film. It was a greater challenge than most monochrome because of time/temperature/process issues, but COLOUR! Prints! Wow!
Along with the possibility of colour prints from home darkrooms there was another colour change in photography … the colour-positive transparency … the ‘Slide’. In the 60’s and 70’s Slides took over Camera Clubs. They even had a place in the Toronto Focal Forum. When I joined the Forum in the 70’s we had ‘Slide Nights’, 3 each year. They usually had fewer members at the meeting and the slides seemed generally less interesting, probably because you couldn’t ‘improve’ them. Slides were removed from the Forum by a vote of the membership in the 80’s. The next change-of-process came with the Cibachrome (later called Ilfochrome) process. This let home-darkrooms (provided they were really dark!) produce acceptable quality colour prints from slides. Colour prints became a growing part of the TFF norm.
My memory tells me that the first digital print at the Forum was made by Carm Griffin. It was probably from a slide that was scanned with a film scanner to a digital file in his computer and then printed by a colour printer. Carm said he left the computer processing the file to the printer, went to bed, and saw his print the next morning. (Yes, things have changed!) The move to digital cameras started about 2003. That was catalyst for the balance of prints presented moving to colour rather than monochrome. It took 50 years! And that’s where we are today.
The Print Discussion process that is at the heart of the TFF has evolved over the years as well. When I became a member, we could present 2 prints per meeting. Probably 50% of the members did so at any meeting. That meant that a meeting of 23 members would discuss 30-35 prints that evening. The Moderator was very much in control and would limit the number of members making comment on any print to ensure the meeting finished by 10:00 pm. Much of the discussion dealt with technical issues such as choice of paper grade, tonal range, or a darkroom technique used to make the image more unique. Prints that challenged pre-conceived norms were treated with some distain. ‘Big prints’ were 16x20 inches and were probably 50% of those presented. The vote was taken by a show of hands and a precise count was made and stated by the Moderator. Five or Six Gold seals in an evening was the norm. (The awarding of ‘Seals’ for merit was common in camera clubs and has been traditional in the TFF. Seals were affixed to the back of prints by printmakers as a sign of merit. In National or International competitions, it was not unusual to see prints with multiple seals affixed to the back of the print.) At each meeting there would probably be 5 or 6 Re-makes, but we didn’t see a lot of Re-makes re-presented. As colour prints became more usual, the evenings entry was divided into 4 piles: First B&W/First Colour/Second B&W/Second Colour. Each group of prints was presented segregated from the other groups. We might, or might not, get to the second set of prints for discussion.
In the early 90’s we experimented with both the Moderator role and Voting. For a couple of years, we selected about 5 members considered to be ‘good Moderators’ and each of them served as Moderator for 3 or 4 meetings that year. It worked OK, but after a couple of years we reverted to using a wider range of Moderators. There was also some concern that the voting decisions of some members (especially if seated in the back of the room) were influenced by the decisions made by ‘experienced members’. We created ‘Voting cards’ with 3 choices (Gold/Silver/Re-make). Members showed the Moderator their personal decision using the card, but other members did not know the choice and so voted without undue influence. That worked well for several years. As the membership evolved this too fell out of favour and we returned to the traditional ‘show of hands’. More recently, not all members felt that the vote/decision/seal process was an important aspect of their Forum experience and they have chosen to participate in the discussion process but not receive Seals, if awarded.
About 20 years ago we designated one or two meetings each year as ‘Experimental Nights’, without voting/Seals. This was done because of the range of possibilities created by computers and imaging software … so we saw some weird stuff as members experimented. These lead to our current ‘No Seal Night’ process. Simply put: Over the years we have become more flexible in our procedures reflecting the wide range of photographic style and content that we now view. That seems appropriate.
Camera Clubs have trophies. So, did we. We had an assortment of about 7/8 by the mid 90’s. They dated back to the Drew Trophy, presented to the Forum by George Drew, later Premier of Ontario. Subsequent trophies honoured some of our founding members. That was a lot of hardware for a group of 30 +/- members! In the mid 90’s we retired all but the Galbraith Trophy. (Where did the trophies go? They sat in a box in my basement for about 10 years. When we celebrated our 75th Anniversary I brought them to the event, displayed them, and they were taken home by members, usually ones with their name on the trophy! Finis!) We have continued to present the Galbraith to a TFF member for his/her contribution to the Forum, usually in year of presentation. It can be presented for outstanding photography as well, but that has happened rarely.
Until a few years ago we had an Executive position for ‘Activities’. For many years that meant organizing one or two week-end events each year. The format was straightforward: Find a Hotel/Motel/Resort during their ‘off-season’ that could provide rooms/meals/a meeting space over a weekend for 12 to 20+ TFF members and spouses/what-ever at a cost participants were willing to pay. Hopefully the geography around the location would be photogenic too! (This was my first ‘position on the TFF Executive. I had never been to an outing event as I did a lot of business travel in those days and liked weekends at home. Yes, it was a ‘learning experience’!) Over the years we went to St Jacobs, Muskoka, Bruce Peninsula, Haliburton, Prince Edward County, Rice Lake, etc. and often returned to the same location/lodge at a different time of year. It was a nice mix of photography/social/entertainment! Sandy Schoenhofer made it a 7-day trip to Death Valley … about a dozen folks participated.
In some ways the TFF has been, and is, an outlier in the Toronto photographic community. Our membership is smaller, our focus narrower, our format different from other photographic groups/camera clubs. But we have participated, over the years, in several ways. We were a founding member of the Greater Toronto Council of Camera Clubs (now Ontario Council of Camera Clubs). We managed a GTCCC annual Competition/Exhibition, back when Kodak hosted the event. We have had our own exhibitions in galleries and our 50th Anniversary event included a 2-week display in the rotunda of Toronto City Hall. Individual members have staged personal exhibitions in galleries, etc. over the years.
The Executive of the Forum currently consists of 6 positions, plus the current Past President. That’s about 25% of total membership. Nine current members are Past Presidents, 30% of current membership. Our total membership has worked best, in the past, when we have about 30-32 members. Because of our small membership and limited photographic focus most executive positions do not require a lot of time/effort. Usually. We are a group of peers, photographically. Most members should be willing to accept a role on the Executive from time-to-time.
That’s it. I expect that I have been wrong about some of the content. Corrections will be accepted.
The objective has been to provide a current view of the past. Perhaps that will have some influence as we look to the future, a future that is currently clouded but can be whatever we wish it to be. That is up to all of us, together. A Forum.
