Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,704   Posts: 1,482,740   Online: 1011
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48

Thread: Juried shows

  1. #21
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,916
    Images
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by chriscrawfordphoto View Post
    Its obvious who in this thread has ZERO exhibition experience. Those of us who do know that juried shows almost never (and never have) used the original prints for judging entries. Before digital, they demanded slides. That meant taking pictures of your prints using slide film and the results never looked as good as the original. Its done digital now because slide jurying is a logistical nightmare. You have to keep track of who the slides belong to so you can mail them back and before the jury can see them they have to be loaded in slide projector trays. Its much more efficient for them to ask for a CD or email of JPEGS and frankly, having done both slides and digital submissions, the digital ones are MUCH truer in appearance to the originals than slides ever were.

    Like another poster said, this is how its done, don't like it, then get out of the way of the professionals. Your narrow-minded bigotry is only hurting YOUR career, no one else cares.
    Look, I don't need another career, I already have prosperous 30 year career making expensive, highly decorated pool cues. I'm not a bigot and am curious about this process, seems like a poor way to do it despite it being the way it's done. I have had favorable portfolio revues by people with good credentials and have been in juried shows which required print submission. Honestly, I would love to see your prints and could care less about seeing the web pics. Why be so nasty? I didn't claim to have experience..EC

  2. #22
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,916
    Images
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    I expect that the experienced judges are reasonably good at interpreting the digital facsimiles of analogue prints. By that, I mean that a good judge will be able to tell whether the original photograph is likely to reveal more/have more positive qualities than the digital image of it that they see.

    If these juried shows require that accepted work be printed to be displayed, I would expect that the real challenge would be lousy digital prints made subsequently from digital images reviewed and accepted by judges.
    That's the issue with this particular show, the local people who will be involved in this have sort of a camera club background and I'm sure there won't be any analog photography. The juror who will be selecting just did a large show in San Diego and was happy that all the prints were pretty good but appears to have been a little apprehensive...EC

  3. #23
    chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fort Wayne, Indiana
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by billbretz View Post
    Chris-
    If you are going to be insulting and attempt to speak with such authority, please know what you are talking about.

    There are plenty of shows that accept, even require, physical prints.

    I will now provide my proof.

    Last I saw, all with a year or so, these shows required physical prints:

    Philadelphia Sketch Club annual photo competition
    Perkins Center of Art annual photo competition
    Center for the Creative Arts annual competition

    Yes, they are local or regional shows. You've likely never heard of them, fine.
    But they do, to use an examples just off the top of my head, show why you should not be so damn sure of yourself.

    If there is anyone here showing "narrow-minded bigotry" it is, well, you.
    Look, I'm telling you how its done. Don't like it? Too bad. The art world isn't going to bow to a bunch of whining amateurs.

    The hate toward digital of some of the people here makes all photographers look like fools who only care about process. That is precisely why photography was not accepted as art for so long and why some still refuse to accept it as art.

    Like it or not digital printing processes are here to stay and they're fully accepted in the world of the professional artist. You don't have to use them. Hell, I still shoot film for 100% of my work. You can use any processes you want, but when you constantly rundown people who use digital you make only YOURSELF look bad. Curators and gallery directors have no time for people who have to talk bad about how someone else works to try and elevate their own work. It makes you look like a nasty backstabber, and no one wants to deal with that type of person. If your work is good, it'll stand out no matter what others are doing. If it sucks, then no amount of badmouthing digital users will make your work suck any less.

    I joined APUG because I like to shoot film and wanted to talk to other film users. I have no need to fight a crusade against digital. I'm too busy making and selling my work for such silliness.
    Chris Crawford
    Fine Art Photography of Indiana and other places no one else photographs.

    http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

    My Tested Developing Times with the films and developers I use

    Become a fan of my work on Facebook

    Fort Wayne, Indiana

  4. #24
    Greg Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Crestview Hills, KY
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,869
    My original comment was harsh, but close to the truth. A juror has to look at hundreds of images from possibly hundreds of artists. They have an intern que up all the discs and then they go through them rather quickly and narrow it down to the works they want to show. Rarely do they want prints because it is more effort to shuffle through prints than to click the next button. Slides are falling out of fashion because they are so small compared to a screen image. They usually do not put the slides into a projector, they just lay them on a light box and look.

    The fact of the matter is that nobody is going to care about the craft of your image as much as you do, so they aren't going to look at your prints and marvel at them then put them up because you are a good printer. I wish it were so, but they aren't. They don't want good craftsmen, they are looking for clear visual communication. Most jurors know that a certain amount of craft must be used to communicate clearly through images, but some artists just don't care enough or know enough. I had to come with terms with the fact that just because I demand a high level of craft in my images, doesn't mean they do. I don't lower my standards because they aren't needed for shows, though, it's my work and I'm only going to show it if it meets my satisfaction. But I also know that no juror is going to show a beautifully crafted photograph of dog crap just because it's printed very well unless it clearly communicates something to the viewer.

    And, Bill, it is not the actual show I'm talking about. It is the submission to try to get into a show. With only one exception, every show I have been in has been a print on the wall in the end.
    www.gregorytdavis.com

    Did millions of people suddenly disappear? This may have an answer.

    "No one knows that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." -Matthew 24:36

  5. #25
    chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fort Wayne, Indiana
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by eclarke View Post
    Look, I don't need another career, I already have prosperous 30 year career making expensive, highly decorated pool cues. I'm not a bigot and am curious about this process, seems like a poor way to do it despite it being the way it's done. I have had favorable portfolio revues by people with good credentials and have been in juried shows which required print submission. Honestly, I would love to see your prints and could care less about seeing the web pics. Why be so nasty? I didn't claim to have experience..EC
    Submitting stuff to get in exhibits has always been a compromise. Like I said, slides are the traditional method and they sucked. The originals always looked different than the slides, and I don't just mean my slides and prints; I have seen a lot of other people's work too and have always felt that submitting slides didn't do justice to the original (and this applies to painting, drawing, sculpture, etc...they had to use slides too).

    Now most places want digital photos instead of slides. Honestly, compared to slides a well made digital photo of a piece of artwork is FAR better than a slide. With digital you can color correct the photo to very closely match the original print or painting or whatever. Its also reduced costs for us, because we no longer need to have huge numbers of slides made and keep track of who we've sent them too and risk the people not returning them. Shoot each piece once, send copies of the digital file. Its a good thing for us artists, really!

    My problem is with the knee-jerk anti digital bigotry that condemns it JUST because its digital and for no other reason. I can guarantee you that 99% of the people who have screamed the loudest in this thread about the awfulness of submitting digital files wouldn't have complained a bit about having to send slides that didn't look at faithful to the original as a well made digital photo.
    Chris Crawford
    Fine Art Photography of Indiana and other places no one else photographs.

    http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

    My Tested Developing Times with the films and developers I use

    Become a fan of my work on Facebook

    Fort Wayne, Indiana

  6. #26
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,807
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by chriscrawfordphoto View Post
    "...you make only YOURSELF look bad."


    Ken
    "Hate is an adolescent term used to stop discussion with people you disagree with. You can do better than that."
    —'blanksy', December 13, 2013

  7. #27

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    63
    Don't pay any attention to that guy. He's a firestarter and a troll. He thinks because he ekes out a living selling the occasional print that it makes him a PROFESSIONAL and no one else has a valid point of view. If you leave it up to him, only a PROFESSIONAL (not sure what his definition of that is) is 'qualified' to make photographs that matter, enter contest, attend workshops, what have you...If you just ignore him, maybe he'll go away.

  8. #28
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,304
    Images
    188
    I've done arts festivals, for over 15 years, all of which are juried. I'd estimate I've submitted over 300 times in that time span.
    It's true that it's mostly (not exclusively) done by scans now. A few will accept slides, and some will look at prints. The vast majority are digital, though.
    I preferred when it was slides. Analogue (especially monochrome) photographers are at a disadvantage, as their work is another generation removed from the original. In speaking to jurors, over the last few years, most of them stated that the analogue work they see at shows is much better than the scans they juried with. Jurors who had juried shows when slides were the norm were especially aware of the differences. In my case, I generally display large prints (20x24 inches) but need to make a print no larger than 8.5 x 11 for scanning purposes. This size doesn't allow for the control of dodging/burning/toning in my work. Alternately, I can use digital to photograph a large print, but that has issues, too.
    As an aside, the improvements in digital, over the years, has substantially increased the number of submissions. 15 years ago, you had about a 1 in 10 chance of jurying into a good show in the photo category. Today it's closer to 1 in 20 or 25.
    A few years ago, there was some talk of separating analogue from digital, in the photo category. I don't think it went very far...

  9. #29
    chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fort Wayne, Indiana
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by Exeter2010 View Post
    Don't pay any attention to that guy. He's a firestarter and a troll. He thinks because he ekes out a living selling the occasional print that it makes him a PROFESSIONAL and no one else has a valid point of view. If you leave it up to him, only a PROFESSIONAL (not sure what his definition of that is) is 'qualified' to make photographs that matter, enter contest, attend workshops, what have you...If you just ignore him, maybe he'll go away.
    If making my living selling my work doesn't make me a professional artist, what does? I won't go away. You don't like what I say? Too bad. My experience in this area is helpful to those who actually want to exhibit and sell their work. The rest? Well keep whining, it won't make you a better photographer or a more successful one. There are a handful of people on this forum who actually earn their living, all of it, from sale of their work. If someone's asking about professional practices in the art world, then yes, the professionals are the only ones qualified to talk about it. Anyone else is just misleading people.
    Chris Crawford
    Fine Art Photography of Indiana and other places no one else photographs.

    http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

    My Tested Developing Times with the films and developers I use

    Become a fan of my work on Facebook

    Fort Wayne, Indiana

  10. #30
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,304
    Images
    188
    I make my living from my work, but I would never demean the work of those you call "amateurs", here. I've seen too many superb images produced by the "amateurs" to make such a blanket statement.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin