Why contests?

[Pieter12]

The are numerous less than ideal venues where one basically leases square footage of display wall space, and hopes that they will sell enough pieces to at least cover their overhead, or not lose to much money doing so; or once in awhile get lucky and actually make a profit. A lot depends on the quality and expense of framing involved. But effective presentation does count, unless you're just in a street fair or flea market sort of scenario.

There are all kinds of ways to try to get your foot in the door; just be careful that your toes don't get smashed if the door suddenly closes on you. There are plenty of "artist's friend" con schemes out there already, whether temporary group exhibitions or seemingly spiffy galleries, taking advantage of the unwary. Do your homework first and ask around. And I've seen a lot of pieces outright ruined in neglected gallery back rooms between venues, or by careless staff.

Not sure how this relates to contests.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

- What is the point of submitting images to contests where the jury are people you don't know and possibly whose opinion and work you might not appreciate at all ?

Contests and competitions exist to challenge photographers to pit their skills against others, which in turn is a valuable learning and skill development. Where things go off the rails is where there is high cost involved in entering (together with sometimes an equally high cost in presenting your work e.g. matting and/or framing), and there may be something like a clause specifying how your entry can be used for any means desired by the organising body. I don't agree that should be a part of any competition or contest; the photographer is the rightful owner of copyright of his original work and nothing changes that.

You may not know a jurist, or jurists plural, but if they are established professionals in the craft, you have no argument. As a circuit jurist myself, I have encountered rather brash behaviour from over-zealous photographers who believe they should have been accorded higher scores than what I or other jurists awarded. Photographs are judged on skill — conceptualisation, visualisation, choice and knowledge of subject, skill in bringing the subject to film, aesthetics and presentation.

- Is the purpose of such contests to promote photography and artists or just to make money from submissions?

I've seen a lot of contests/competitions where money seems to be the primary objective of the organisers, not so much giving thought to how to respect and present the works they receive.

- By making a photograph with the sole goal to please such larger audiences don't you lose in the end your artistic self?

No.

 

[Vaughn]

And if one likes the challenge, there are mulit-media shows one can enter. I have been entering one for a few decades. I have not entered at times when I did not have something that excited me enough to enter, and I do not get into the show every time. I do not know the recent numbers, but there might be 750 entries (there are multiple entries be a single artist) for about 35 pieces accepted. Juried in by committee with awards usually given by two well-known artists of different media. Themed -- needs to be about one's personal experiences in/expressions of the Sierra Nevada. Many years back, there was a photo of Half Dome sculpted out of tofu. One never knows, but generally they want something more than just another pretty picture of a mountain.

One of the main draws for me was that the opening reception was held towards the end of February in Yosemite Valley. A great excuse and a great time to be in the Valley. I'd would haul my boys down with me and we'd have a blast.

 

[Pieter12]

Before I enter a contest, I look to see who is the judge. I will then base my decision to enter upon seeing the judge‘s work or gallery artists.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Years ago, I belonged to a local photo club in Queens, NYC, that met once a week. About once a month, we'd have a contest where everyone would bring in a print or two. They all would be tacked to the front board. Everyone would roam around the room looking at the pictures. Then we'd have a vote on all the pictures by counting raised hands. Often the photos would be reviewed and how each picture could be improved. Besides a social get together, it was an opportunity to have your photo reviewed by peers and to see what make pictures work and not. There was no money involved or awards other than a comment in the blurb that was published for members.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Years ago, I belonged to a local photo club in Queens, NYC, that met once a week. About once a month, we'd have a contest where everyone would bring in a print or two. They all would be tacked to the front board. Everyone would roam around the room looking at the pictures. Then we'd have a vote on all the pictures by counting raised hands. Often the photos would be reviewed and how each picture could be improved. Besides a social get together, it was an opportunity to have your photo reviewed by peers and to see what make pictures work and not. There was no money involved or awards other than a comment in the blurb that was published for members.

Monthly club contests are a good way to get evaluation ones photographic work, but one should take such comments balance by each judges [or commenter's] background and expertise.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Monthly club contests are a good way to get evaluation ones photographic work, but one should take such comments balance by each judges [or commenter's] background and expertise.

What I've found is that artistic value is judged relatively equally by almost everyone. Certainly, tastes vary. But even a layman can tell which ones are best in their view, and it will match experienced people as well. Do you need to be a biologist to know a pretty face when you see one?

 

[nikos79]

What I've found is that artistic value is judged relatively equally by almost everyone. Certainly, tastes vary. But even a layman can tell which ones are best in their view, and it will match experienced people as well. Do you need to be a biologist to know a pretty face when you see one?

Artistic value varies even among individuals. We had a very long discussion in another thread with respected members like Don, Koraks, and Alex about how subjective can that be where I had to admit that it is impossible to judge it ourselves objectively. I can give you an example from personal experience. Let's take the artist Nan Goldin. Since I promised to refrain from personal opinions I won't do any judgement on her work. Let's just say she is an interesting case. When my teacher asked two very respected photographers about her and how genuine/honest her work is he got two very different answers. Tod Papageorge told him "Of course her work has artistic value because it is honest". Bernard Plossu on the other hand told him "She is so fake that I think she could turn her eye black herself to take a photo with her eye being blackened from her friend". So, you see two different respected artists can judge an artistic work very differently and find very different value to it.
Usually artistic value is not judged in such contests (how can that be judged anyway...)
Usually I think that what is judged is composition, technical aspects, conceptualism, etc. And mostly a pretty photo rather than a good one

 

[nikos79]

Very inspiring conversation. I don't undermine the social value to it. We photographers need to communicate our work and loneliness is never good. So I have very much sympathy for the local clubs that get together and do these kind of events. I am also part of a local group where we show our work and review it on a weekly basis and I know how rewarding and motivating it can be for a photographer in order to keep on doing what he likes.

What I am mostly worried about is how alienated can these larger scale contests be. And even the big ones sometimes they have nothing to do about photography, if you are good in writing essays (or ask ChatGPT about it) you can write a very long statement to support any project. It seems that in these larger contests the intention is important rather than the photograph itself

 

[Pieter12]

Years ago, I belonged to a local photo club in Queens, NYC, that met once a week. About once a month, we'd have a contest where everyone would bring in a print or two. They all would be tacked to the front board. Everyone would roam around the room looking at the pictures. Then we'd have a vote on all the pictures by counting raised hands. Often the photos would be reviewed and how each picture could be improved. Besides a social get together, it was an opportunity to have your photo reviewed by peers and to see what make pictures work and not. There was no money involved or awards other than a comment in the blurb that was published for members.

Sounds more like a group critique than a contest.

 

[Pieter12]

What I've found is that artistic value is judged relatively equally by almost everyone. Certainly, tastes vary. But even a layman can tell which ones are best in their view, and it will match experienced people as well. Do you need to be a biologist to know a pretty face when you see one?

Standards of beauty vary by culture, era and ethnicity. And a biologist certainly wouldn't be the person I would rely on to judge a beautiful face.

 

[nikos79]

Sounds more like a group critique than a contest.

Yes exactly. But some local clubs in Athens do some contests quite often. It might be a good opportunity for inspiring photographers to submit some of their work and meet other individuals. After all didn't Bruce Davidson start his career with a photo contest 1st prize when he was 18?

 

[Pieter12]

Artistic value varies even among individuals. We had a very long discussion in another thread with respected members like Don, Koraks, and Alex about how subjective can that be where I had to admit that it is impossible to judge it ourselves objectively. I can give you an example from personal experience. Let's take the artist Nan Goldin. Since I promised to refrain from personal opinions I won't do any judgement on her work. Let's just say she is an interesting case. When my teacher asked two very respected photographers about her and how genuine/honest her work is he got two very different answers. Tod Papageorge told him "Of course her work has artistic value because it is honest". Bernard Plossu on the other hand told him "She is so fake that I think she could turn her eye black herself to take a photo with her eye being blackened from her friend". So, you see two different respected artists can judge an artistic work very differently and find very different value to it.
Usually artistic value is not judged in such contests (how can that be judged anyway...)
Usually I think that what is judged is composition, technical aspects, conceptualism, etc. And mostly a pretty photo rather than a good one

This is why I check out who is judging a contest before entering. Because I have seen many superficial photos win contests because they fit other criteria the judge might have.

 

[nikos79]

Fun fact: I happen to like wine too and for those familiar a very popular term is the "Parkerization" of red wines e.g. to produce wines with the sole purpose of pleasing the palate of the respected wine critic Robert Parker (high alcohol content, robust tannins, etc.) in order to win a good review that translates to $$$
Of course wine is not art although someone might argue

 

[Vaughn]

Before I enter a contest, I look to see who is the judge. I will then base my decision to enter upon seeing the judge‘s work or gallery artists.

And those new to entering contests often will enter something that is along the same lines as the judge's work. Usually a mistake. It is also nice to see some educational background in a judge.

Alan : ...What I've found is that artistic value is judged relatively equally by almost everyone...

I generally find the opposite -- sounds like your sample group from which you drew this conclusion was a pretty much homogeneous group.

One of the weirdest judging I have seen was by one of EW's son's. He chose a large badly color-balanced print as Best-of-Show, saying something along the lines of "That will cause some talk." as he left. I think he was pissed at the local photo scene...and he moved out of the area right after. I don't blame him for moving...who in their right mind would live in Redding, CA.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Artistic value varies even among individuals. We had a very long discussion in another thread with respected members like Don, Koraks, and Alex about how subjective can that be where I had to admit that it is impossible to judge it ourselves objectively. I can give you an example from personal experience. Let's take the artist Nan Goldin. Since I promised to refrain from personal opinions I won't do any judgement on her work. Let's just say she is an interesting case. When my teacher asked two very respected photographers about her and how genuine/honest her work is he got two very different answers. Tod Papageorge told him "Of course her work has artistic value because it is honest". Bernard Plossu on the other hand told him "She is so fake that I think she could turn her eye black herself to take a photo with her eye being blackened from her friend". So, you see two different respected artists can judge an artistic work very differently and find very different value to it.
Usually artistic value is not judged in such contests (how can that be judged anyway...)
Usually I think that what is judged is composition, technical aspects, conceptualism, etc. And mostly a pretty photo rather than a good one

I chose the wrong word. I should have said "Artistic appeal varies even among individuals..." instead of artistic value... Your example is about value. I'm referring to what gives pleasure to our viewing and is appealing in that way.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Sounds more like a group critique than a contest.

Mostly you're right. But they also count votes and the winner gets applause. Positive reinforcement is good. Competition makes you try harder. All positive aspects of contests, at least like ours.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Standards of beauty vary by culture, era and ethnicity. And a biologist certainly wouldn't be the person I would rely on to judge a beautiful face.

No I wouldn't. But they are the ones who would measure all the aspects of the face and try to decide based on centimeters which face is the most beautiful. Often, that's what we do when judging photos. We get into rules, and measurements, and details that have little to do with what makes a great photo. It;s really innate. I know in two seconds whether I like a photo. How long does it take you?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Fun fact: I happen to like wine too and for those familiar a very popular term is the "Parkerization" of red wines e.g. to produce wines with the sole purpose of pleasing the palate of the respected wine critic Robert Parker (high alcohol content, robust tannins, etc.) in order to win a good review that translates to $$$
Of course wine is not art although someone might argue

Especially by the third.

 

[Pieter12]

No I wouldn't. But they are the ones who would measure all the aspects of the face and try to decide based on centimeters which face is the most beautiful. Often, that's what we do when judging photos. We get into rules, and measurements, and details that have little to do with what makes a great photo. It;s really innate. I know in two seconds whether I like a photo. How long does it take you?

A bit longer. I may be drawn to a photo in seconds, but I like to study it a bit before I decide whether I like it or not. I like many photos that did not necessarily initially draw me to them. Maybe it's just me, but I don't take to "pretty" pictures. I find them boring. Sunsets are pretty. I generally detest them. I prefer the real experience.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

A bit longer. I may be drawn to a photo in seconds, but I like to study it a bit before I decide whether I like it or not. I like many photos that did not necessarily initially draw me to them. Maybe it's just me, but I don't take to "pretty" pictures. I find them boring. Sunsets are pretty. I generally detest them. I prefer the real experience.

Seeing beautiful light is a real experience. Catching them is a bonus.

 

[nikos79]

A bit longer. I may be drawn to a photo in seconds, but I like to study it a bit before I decide whether I like it or not. I like many photos that did not necessarily initially draw me to them. Maybe it's just me, but I don't take to "pretty" pictures. I find them boring. Sunsets are pretty. I generally detest them. I prefer the real experience.

Same here. I am usually drawn to photos that are not "pretty" at all. I also tend to find pretty photos boring. I am mostly drawn to photos that wouldn't have existed without the eye of each photographer.

I am mostly quick in judging. But I have to differentiate between he photos that immediately tend to impress in a sense that are "appealing" to the eye (beautiful subject, vivid colors, impressive framing and contrasts) with the ones that tend to impress you in a more "photographic" level. I am not there yet but constantly working on it

 

[nikos79]

A bit longer. I may be drawn to a photo in seconds, but I like to study it a bit before I decide whether I like it or not. I like many photos that did not necessarily initially draw me to them. Maybe it's just me, but I don't take to "pretty" pictures. I find them boring. Sunsets are pretty. I generally detest them. I prefer the real experience.

Winogrand said it beautifully. When you take a picture and then print it and see it is the exact thing that you saw throw it away. A photo should magically transform (and not beautify) the reality according to Gary. But then how could you judge that? Difficult stuff....

 

[MattKing]

Winogrand said it beautifully. When you take a picture and then print it and see it is the exact thing that you saw throw it away. A photo should magically transform (and not beautify) the reality according to Gary. But then how could you judge that? Difficult stuff....

Perhaps he was overly influenced by a self-portrait or two

 

[DREW WILEY]

Wow! That was rabbit punch, Matt. I'll have to remember that one.