Photography trends at the local summer arts festival/fair.

naturephoto1 said:

Most photographers participating in Art Shows that are transparency shooters are just ignoring the supposed restriction of no digital imaging/printing/must be hand pulled/printed by the photographer. I have been digitally printing now for 11 1/2 years and about 8? on a LightJet or Chromira machine. The shows have no idea and understanding that there is only one positive/positive conventional printing method available. The only other conventional printing method that is basically available is through internegative. However, I see that there may be some dye transfer chemistry still available- but this is very labor intensive.

Click to expand...

Have to agree with what you're saying here. I'm not at a stage where I'm selling prints but when I want prints from a slide I scan it and get it printed digitally. I've had lightjet and frontier prints made this way and have usually been extremely happy with the results. The few times I've been unhappy with the results I've gone back to the file and see that the mistake was mine. Locally, my only other option would be to have the lab make a print using an inter-negative at significantly higher cost and likely several proofs to get the colour just the way I want it. So for me, I see lightjet prints as being the only viable solution both because of the cost and because it gives me much greater control over the process.

It's also important to me that the final print "looks" like a conventional photograph. I like getting my prints on photo paper because I like that look. I like that my prints from slides don't immediately scream, "digital." Sure, people who can recognise the look of a slide shot will pick up that I had them printed digitally but for most people they just see a photo. I don't have anything against inkjet/giclee prints but it's just a different look and it can change the way that your image is perceived. I know some people will use that as a way to make their images not immediately scream, "photo," for me that's not something I'm interested in. But if it's something another photographer wants to do and it works with their style then I'm all for it.

I really don't like the idea of an outright ban on specific techniques or media. I can certainly see it if the show is for a particular media of course, I wouldn't bring photos to a show that's solely paintings. But if the images are of high quality, the printing method works with the image or style and there can be some reasonable assurances about the archival life of the print then I don't see any problem with using whatever media gets you that.

This is what I did at an Art and Craft show in my hometown near Toronto three weeks ago.
I sold 8x10 b&w prints, matted. they were conventional prints on fiber based paper and shot on an 8x10. I also showed a number of 16x20's.

The biggest draw to my booth was the fact that I had the 8x10 mounted on a tripod at the front. This was a huge draw and without it I think I would have been totally wasting my time.

As it was I sold 1 16x20 and 4 8x10's over the two days.

-Rob Skeoch

Rob Skeoch said:

. . . The biggest draw to my booth was the fact that I had the 8x10 mounted on a tripod at the front. . . .
-Rob Skeoch

Click to expand...

Yes, demonstrating equipment or technique is a big draw. Most people have no idea what an 8x10 camera is like. I've also seen interest in examples of old photography, such as Daguerreotypes, tintypes, Ambrotypes, CDVs, etc. Being able to explain these examples to people enriches their knowledge of their old family photos and helps them remember who YOU are.

The little shop that shows my prints put a couple of the Cyanotypes in the window, where they have been drawing some extra traffic. I wrote up a little explanation to go with each one. I will confess to doing color prints digitally, though from film.

Jim Chinn
You dipped into the pile of beggars eating McDonald and searching what is culinary trend. If you want to know “the trend” in US photography look e.g. at Chicago Museum of Contemporary Photography, or MOMA in NYC,… or some photographers very carefully chosen, e.g. Blansky for portraitures (but and he is valid in his area only), or get some good books e.g. from Fleming about art history...
Mostly “art and pro. photographers” today are jobless and without education people somehow got a dig. camera for weddings, so do not look just anywhere without plan. Local summer art festival/fair is running by someone as a part of his/her business and does not have just anything in common with art. It is all around N. America. Just business. You pay around $100 per a day and pitch a tent and stick in the front ART PHOTOGRAPHY. It is not a way how it works. In Toronto is the same think this week. I will go to turn myself around but I do not expect to see anything more than a sticker “Art”. But never know so it is why I go. Might be will see one nice photog among 50 “Artists”. Good enough

www.Leica-R.com

In my experience their are two types of people selling photos at the juried art shows, the "let's try it and see what happens," and the serious pros.
If their is a "trend," it is to sell bigger, with less amount of effort from the photographer. Most photogs I talk to have thrown in the towel and have gone to some form of computer assisted printing, even B&W. Most of the buying public don't really care about manual efforts, they just want that big one for their home or office. This has always created a real challenge for me, and has been the primary target of my sales/marketing efforts. Sometimes smaller is better...but try and convince the public to pay more for something smaller. I'm selling an 8x10 for $50, and the guy down the row is selling a 30x40 inkjet for $49!!! BTW, that's the type of stuff the show directors are frowning on at some shows. Overall I think the photography itself is still very good, and even inspired, but it seems printing is being reduced to the lowest common denominator...
FWIW.

I guess folks just need to visit a better grade of art fair

Dags a-plenty!