The first question is "Why submit work?"
If the jurried show is important to you, look at who are the judges.
If the judges seem to be whom(s) you wish to see your work, submit. They
all have an adgenda.
I submitted work for a show judged by the Getty curators. A guy got in and
I didn't showing virtually the same picture. Mine was an 8X10 contact, on
Azo using Amidol -- technically excellent.
His was a 4X10 contact, on Azo using Amidol -- technically excellent; but
his was a signature of his probably seen by the judge as a well known, while
mine was not. There were suposedly no names on any prints, but the
signature of this one photographer was his format.
Both were landscapes, both well exicuted with the same range of grey tones,
same time of day (lighting) etc.
Go figure?
Decide for youself, but consider who the judge is and the importance of this
show.
S. Shapiro
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Dyer-Bennet" <dd-b@xxxxxxxx>
To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students"
<photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: any Judges Out There?
Herschel Mair <herschelmair@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
I don't like the idea of a purely subjective /opinion-based
judgment. Then the criteria becomes: "What kind of pictures does
this judge like. OK I'll make those kind of pictures to win the
competition."
This results in a boring, sameness and a reluctancy to try
anything new, hence stagnation. I see many camera-club images
where people are still trying to be Ansel Adams clones because the
judge has a thing for the zone system.
I'm not sure I like the idea of "contests" in photography in the first
place. But let me play Devil's advocate just a bit here -- if you
have a range of judges, rather than always the same ones, then people
are forced to try different things to try to appeal to the tastes of
each individual judge. That's not stagnation, that's variety.
And if, on the other hand, you have a fixed set of objective rules, it
provides a perfect and absolute straight-jacket that prevents people
from experimenting outside the boundaries they define (if they want to
be competitive in the contest, that is).
I feel the results should be from informed and educated analysis
of the images.
Sounds great, but where would one find a diverse group of informed and
educated judges? :-)
I'll skip a detailed critique of the form -- you're clearly already
aware that a lot of the things you're marking on are subjective
anyway. (The idea of asking judges to use such a system, so they're
at least asked to think about the different areas in which a photo
could be evaluated, does seem valuable.)
Get the finalists and sit and talk about the pictures. Use a
process of elimination.
An image should stand on its own, no? And this also penalizes people
who are shy or inarticulate (or perhaps advantages them if the judges
are very forgiving).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@xxxxxxxx>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/>
<http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
