Originally Posted by chriscrawfordphoto
Your response, quoted above, was to me. Therefore, again, you are speaking without knowing what you are talking about.
Here's where you are wrong:
#1: I am a professional photographer, one who is a so-far proud survivor in a declining industry (photojournalism) in which I make 100% of my living with a camera. (So don't say I am an amateur. If you want to say I am a whiner, go ahead, but understand that is obscenely insulting in what should be a reasonable discussion).
#2 I love and use digital daily as a professional photographer, and have since switching over for work 10 years ago (So don't say I'm 'constantly running down people who use digital.' You are creating this argument on your own.)
#3 I said digital submissions are the norm in today's world. We agree on this, but you continue to act like I say the opposite is true. (See post #2 of this trainwreck.)
#4 No one is arguing with the opinions expressed here. Everyone has a big problem with the haughty, condescending and mean-spirited tone you have taken.
We have something in common, we both use film for our art, and we both love film. Please consider we all have this in common on APUG, and it is your tone, not anyone else being argumentative, that is the only issue pushing this to 40+ posts.
You mean you didn't write a letter and mail it?
I emailed the juror with the question...
I'm not busting your balls, here -- I am a HUGE believer in analog and the beauty of the hand-made, wet print and I very much respect your obvious love of it, too.
I'm just suggesting that this process is for selection only, and that it would be beneficial to look at it from the jurors' perspective - they need to be efficient in their work with so many artists taking part. Short of sending the actual print that will be exhibited - not an option I think anyone would take - there's some sort of leap of faith in the selection process.
I wouldn't let this stop you from showing the fruits of your hard work, nor from spreading the word about film photography with this opportunity...eye on the prize, and all that.
Chris may not be the most polite contributor to this conversation, but his post does present the facts of most juried exhibitions of any size. Our art guild has been holding an annual juried show for 11 years now, and I have been involved in all but the first one. We are still small and regional enough that most of the entries are the physical works of art, and the jurors appreciate that fact. However, we do have members who live in the States or elsewhere and cannot easily submit their originals, so we accept digital images and slides as well. Yes, many of the digital and slide submissions are poor representations of the art, and they put the artist at a disadvantage. But there is no acceptable alternative. Shipping art work for the purpose of jurying is expensive and impractical, so no one would participate if they had to do it. Slides, photos, or digital images are the only real option. In a large show, requiring all submissions to be digital levels the playing field for all entries and makes the task of the jurors much more practical.
Touche. Unfortunately, the US postal service is going through the same adjustment to the virtual world as analog photography, there's some speculation that they won't survive this year. This is not a digital vs analog thing, I now realize that large juried shows are pretty much like PSA competitions or art fairs with tons of submissions. I was surprised at this because here in Wisconsin the events are pretty small and this digital submission is sort of new for a local type event. It also explains why there is questionable work hanging at some shows. Tough job for jurors and I'm sure that those who actually get to see the shows have a little anticipation..Cheers..Evan
Originally Posted by Colin Corneau
Here is my take on this issue as someone who has been on both sides of the fence as a submitter and reviewer/juror:
You submit your slides/digital file - much easier on the artist (postage/shipping$$$$$$); much easier on the reviewer/juror (easier to view slides/digital than handle actual artwork).
If your slide/digital file is crap, no matter how good your original artwork is, you get rejected (I could tell you many horror stories of how artists think some odd presentation is cool).
If your slides/digital file looks good and you get accepted, you send in your work. Now if your work does not live up to what the slide/digital file presented, you work is rejected. As a reviewer/juror I have seen this happen on numerous occasions.
Most jurried competitions I have either entered or read about have this final step stated in their published info. It only makes sense.
Now, as an analog artist am I against digital presentation for jurried submissions? No. Having had to review many portfolios and having jurried shows I know that it makes more sense... as long as you have that final disclaimer.
My $0.02 worth.
Long live Ed "Big Daddy" Roth!!
"I don't care about Milwaukee or Chicago." - Yvon LeBlanc
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
The one juried show I entered, all of the slides were lost. One entrant sent original artwork, though, and was traumatized and incredulous that her hard work (original assemblies, one-of-a-kind stuff which would take significant effort to *try* and replicate) was simply gone.
I wouldn't send original prints off. It limits how much distribution your work can get, it's expensive, and they're likely going to scan whatever you send them so that they can share it with the jury via email or in an LCD-projected slideshow,anyhow.
Digital is simpler, and a direct scan of one of my negs (because I'm that kind of photographer; not everyone can scan the neg...) gives a much better impression than a slide or dupe. AND it's cheaper.
I agree with Chris Crawford that there's a knee-jerk anti-digital undertone to this thread, and many others on APUG, and it set the initial round of condescension in play. Like him, I shoot film because I like to, not because I need to lord a supposed superiority of medium over anyone, or because I'm infatuated with a process rather than a result. Mind you, I'm a mediocre and quite amateur photographer, not a pro or even a good photographer by any means. But the sentiment still bothers me, for what it's worth to anyone here.
Hi, I did 10 years of digital along side of my film photography. Digital prints frequently don't come close to their web representations...EC
Please see the APUG post:
Well done Bill Spears - B&W Magazine (UK)
From the press release,
"Black & White Photography is the only magazine which caters specifically for photographers working in black & white. The competition accepted entries from digital and film photographers but entries had to be supplied as prints."
[Emphasis is mine. -Ken]
Not exactly a local or regional juried exhibit. Larger than that. But still, not every judging venue appears to see the need to look only at scans of the submitted artwork. And I'll bet that just about everyone involved with this competition are professionals earning the bulk of their income from photography.
P.S. Congratulations to Bill...
"They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back they’ll still be there looking at you."
— Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs