New 39-1

[NCRblues]

Published next year huh? So by the end of this year is a hope I guess?

And nothing new, just new pictures is my guess from this way of doing them.

[NIN]

So no changes, just new photos.  Got it

No, no, not just new photos.

The new 39-1 will incorporate all the Infinite Interim Change Letters issued against the current 39-1. I believe you're going to see a number of clarifications of wear policies, some adjustments to confusing or outright contradictory info, re-alignment of the manual to the parent serivice's uniform manual format and chapter structure, the inclusion of images of badges and such created since 2005, etc.

Just spitballing here, I wouldn't be surprised if you see paragraphs in, say, the utility uniform section that are inexplicably "empty" or "reserved."  You know, maybe for something like "future use" ...

Another thing you *might* see (on a long lead/phaseout) is the migration from ultramarine-background nametapes and insignia to a dark navy blue for both BDUs (and "a uniform to be named later") and the CAP-distinctive field uniform.

I could be wrong.

[ol'fido]

Bwahahaha!

Is... Is this a joke or... ?

No it's not, just found this on the IL FB Page.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=177478149126101&set=a.177374835803099.1073741830.102320466641870

That is my deputy group commander having her uniform adjusted in the background and her husband, CT's own SnakeDoctor, adjusting the uniform of one of my squadron commanders.

[arajca]

[redacted]

[PHall]

So, seeing as the pictures were just being taken, the statements at the National Conference about a probable Nov. 2013 release were a lie. It took 4 months from "we just need the pictures" to actually getting the pictures. Maybe it'll be released by next National Conference, but I wouldn't count on it since the pictures probably still need to be reviewed and someone has to insert them into the manual, a glacial process given CAP's history.

I think "lie" is a bit harsh.  Since when is it a crime to take the time to do the job right?

If they had rushed it out then you guys would whine about the crappy pictures/artwork.

[MacGruff]

Yay. Yellow hotel lighting.

Probably not. If the photogs there know what they're doing, then there are a whole bunch of lights and shades and other paraphernalia in the part of the photo we do NOT see which will take care of the "yellow" lighting. No way for me to know from this...

[arajca]

The hell with it.

[NIN]

So, seeing as the pictures were just being taken, the statements at the National Conference about a probable Nov. 2013 release were a lie. It took 4 months from "we just need the pictures" to actually getting the pictures. Maybe it'll be released by next National Conference, but I wouldn't count on it since the pictures probably still need to be reviewed and someone has to insert them into the manual, a glacial process given CAP's history.

OK, I'm with Phil: saying its a "lie" isn't precisely true.

The manual was on track for a November 2013 release (or, probably more accurately, a November 2013 review for release and a 1 January street date), assuming that everything on the critical path was on time.   The photos did not get accomplished in time.

Last time I looked, the only two people on the NUC who get "paid" for their time are Ms. Parker and the CAP-USAF rep.   Everybody else is a volunteer like you and me.  So someone on the NUC got tasked (or, *gasp* volunteered) to do the photos, and they were expecting to get them done in time to insert into the manual in October (I'm guessing) so that the manual could be re-reviewed in November for release.

And then, surprise: Something happened and a volunteer couldn't get a tasking done in the required amount of time. Like that never happens.

Happens.  Happens every day.  Maybe the guy is a professional photographer and he got a crazy influx of senior portraits for September and October such that he couldn't devote as much time as he thought he could to the uniform project.  Maybe her husband took ill unexpectedly and she spent more time at the hospital than  on taking uniform pictures.

Who knows.

Events occur.  You adjust fire and drive on.   Its not like some gigantic criminal conspiracy designed to rob us of our uniform manual, or someone decided that they wanted to have a little fun with the membership by dangling the 39-1 carrot for November. 

The schedule projection was that the manual with photos would be ready by November.  Its not.  Nobody dies because the photos for the uniform manual are a month and a half later than expected. 

The 39-1 is coming.  Just because its not in your hot little hands right now doesn't mean anybody is lying, it means that an optimistic timeline slipped to the right.


ETA:

I can't believe they couldn't have done a random drawing for each uniform photo needed and requested a unit to provide it. Send an email to the unit specifying the uniform required, background, standards (specific page from uniform manual) including photo resolution, and date needed by.

Have you seen some of the god awful CAP ID card photo that units take every single day?  Please.  Those are tiny 1" x 1" photos where they published fairly specific standards, too! And still, we can't get decent quality, lighting, consistent backgrounds, uniforms, framing, poses, out of the field units.

[arajca]

I can't believe they couldn't have done a random drawing for each uniform photo needed and requested a unit to provide it. Send an email to the unit specifying the uniform required, background, standards (specific page from uniform manual) including photo resolution, and date needed by.

Have you seen some of the god awful CAP ID card photo that units take every single day?  Please.  Those are tiny 1" x 1" photos where they published fairly specific standards, too! And still, we can't get decent quality, lighting, consistent backgrounds, uniforms, framing, poses, out of the field units.

I have. I've tried to find the standards a few times and they weren't exactly easy to find. I ended up using Google to find them. Of course that was a couple years ago, so they may have put them in an easier to find place. There's also the notion of a direct email to a unit commander vs an annoucement made once or twice several years ago.

With turn over, the folks who did know about the standards are probably gone from the unit, either to another unit, higher HQ, or gone from CAP. The ID photo standards were probably a minor point to them and they didn't think about mentioning them to anyone else.

[dwb]

Have you seen some of the god awful CAP ID card photo that units take every single day?  Please.  Those are tiny 1" x 1" photos where they published fairly specific standards, too! And still, we can't get decent quality, lighting, consistent backgrounds, uniforms, framing, poses, out of the field units.

You know, it's actually pretty tough to take a good ID card photo. Especially if you're indoors and don't have overhead lighting (and sometimes all that does is cast shadows).

As it happens, I just did a new CAP ID card photo. My membership renewal was due, and I wanted a better picture for my card. After rearranging a couple lamps and 15 failed attempts to get a decent photo (and a patient wife), here's what I ended up with:



The original was a little sharper, but it got resized and a little blurred when I uploaded to eServices. So even the perfect photo might not look perfect once it gets mangled by the photo uploader.

Even looking at it now, I should have tried to photoshop the door I'm standing in front of to make the background flat. It looks like I have an arrow through my head. Oh well.

arajca - The NHQ photo guidelines are linked on the page where you upload your photo, which isn't an illogical place to put the link.

[arajca]

1. As I said, it was a few years ago I was looking for them.
2. I don't need them now as that is not in my pervue.
3. Does it really make sense to put them where you upload the picture to if you don't go there until you have your picture ready to upload?

[a2capt]

Maybe. I figure that is the "center" of the activity for that, and the way CAP has everything (dis)organized, I'd at least expect it to be there, or a reference to where it really is, that might even work. How many links in online tests are no good anymore? But you can at least find a document name to google for.

Google site: *cap.. is the best way to find stuff. Between CAP's multitude of domains and hokey SiteVis CMSs. Blech.
I hope whoever did that stuff is at least proud of it.

[Eclipse]

Your local Walgreen's can take a decent ID photo in 5 minutes.

[ol'fido]

The manual will come out when the manual comes out. Complaining about delays is just futile wailing and gnashing of teeth. Granted, I on occasion see violations of the current manual when I go to activities. Most, if not nearly all, are small, easily correctable problems that the member was unaware of the regulation or the member had not noticed that something had "moved" on their uniform such as ribbons shifting on the holder, nameplates losing pinch clips, etc. I do not frequently see the "egregious" uniform violations that are apparently rampant in some areas given the stories I see on here.

Wearing the blues, the BDUs, flight suits, and their "corporate" equivalents is not rocket science. Yes, we occasionally have members come on this forum and ask questions about whether they can wear this or that or whether they can wear this or that in this or that manner and the answer is usually forthcoming in rapid response. Sometimes, these are legitimate queries and sometimes they trolls looking to stir the pot. I notice that many times we answer the replies from seemingly legitimate members in a somewhat curt and discourteous manner. At other times, we let the trolls herd us like cattle into multi-page threads where splitting hairs seems to be the order of the day(See ABUs, HMRS gear, and blue berets, et al).

However, in 999 times out of 1000 situations the answers are pretty straight forward. Again, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to use the material already provided to get the answers we may need. Our missions are not going to come to a screeching halt because we don't have a up to date uniform manual. Get a little perspective, please.

[NIN]

Dude, you totally made my point!

Nice arrow. I think Steve Martin had that trademarked. Your C&D letter is on its way.

[dwb]

Dude, you totally made my point!

Nice arrow. I think Steve Martin had that trademarked. Your C&D letter is on its way.

Well, unless you're suggesting that NHQ purchase portrait studio-quality equipment for all of its units, then this kind of photo is the best you can hope for.

[Eclipse]

However, in 999 times out of 1000 situations the answers are pretty straight forward. Again, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to use the material already provided to get the answers we may need. Our missions are not going to come to a screeching halt because we don't have a up to date uniform manual. Get a little perspective, please.

No, of course not, however the issue is a symptom of the larger problem. Not to mention even that even what we have isn't properly or evenly enforced

How about ES curriculum?  Outdated pamphlets?  Internally self-conflicting regulations which are simple to fix, pointed out and ignored?

Any one of these things is minor and par for the course of a larger organization, but taken together and they add up to a general malaise,
not to mention a gradual and but increasing chipping away of our credibility.

It also contributes significantly to our churn - new members come in the door excited to get started, ask what to the average person
ar simply questions, and the answers are "complicated, conflicting, or simply incorrect".

It's unnecessary and ridiculous for nationally, congressionally funded organization with 60k members, half of them adults, and
which encompass largely professional and military background.

[dwb]

Can you get digitals? Not every unit has a scanner.

[Eclipse]

Can you get digitals? Not every unit has a scanner.

Yes, and every unit has a scanner.

[NIN]

Well, unless you're suggesting that NHQ purchase portrait studio-quality equipment for all of its units, then this kind of photo is the best you can hope for.

A 3ft piece of white butcher paper would solve your "arrow thru the head" problem.

My larger point is: the standards are there, yet almost nobody follows them. so you get people who upload a scanned copy of their senior photo (and it gets approved), they're not square to the camera, they're standing in front of a brown wall. They're in civvies. The shot is them from the waist up (not ribbons or badges up), etc, etc, etc.