From Vermont
Sep 9, 2017 07:41:39 #
Photo contests other than those run by professionals (National Geographic, etc.) are subject to a great deal of variability in ability and experience of those judging. If you participate in a camera club and see their competitions - where you can see the photos submitted - you quickly learn that the photos that win seem to not always correlate to photos that are actually good and which demonstrate a good eye and competent use of one's equipment. That is why I do not compete in contests. I also don't compete in the professional competitions where you give them all rights to use your photograph simply by entering. Such organizations may get hundreds or thousands of high-quality photographs for the cost of a $5,000 grand prize trip or camera. Why sell ourselves so cheaply?
Sep 9, 2017 07:46:56 #
sb wrote:
Photo contests other than those run by professiona... (show quote)
I agree with you on that. I got published ONCE and I had to give the shot away. It was a slide of the World Trade Center that I wish I had now. Was it worth it to say I've been published???? Not really.
Sep 9, 2017 10:29:07 #
I've judged a few shows in my lifetime. I use a scoring sheet based on a 0-5 rating in several categories, one of which was technical. That includes the focus - the use or non-use of it. Another was presentation, and that includes the matting and framing. I've seen really nice images severely downgraded because they were presented badly. The presentation of an image has a lot to do with how that image is viewed.
When the shows were amateur ones, I gave the resulting scoring to the participants so that they would know how their image was judged. And they could even ask me if they wanted.
One of the things I learned early on when entering judged shows - no matter what kind: You're paying for one person's (or 2 or 3) opinion.
When the shows were amateur ones, I gave the resulting scoring to the participants so that they would know how their image was judged. And they could even ask me if they wanted.
One of the things I learned early on when entering judged shows - no matter what kind: You're paying for one person's (or 2 or 3) opinion.
Sep 9, 2017 11:38:56 #
Valsmere
Loc: New Jersey
I entered a local judged exhibit last year, even though I didn't place at all I felt it was a good learning experience. It was my first one. To be honest it was a huge step for me as I wouldn't normally enter an exhibit. But seriously it was fun and I got to meet and talk to other local photographers, some seemed rather stuffy but there is always that element I guess.since its a yearly event I plan on entering again primarily for the learning experience.
Sep 9, 2017 12:44:37 #
I've studied this a lot. Yes, judging photography is subjective. But the problem is most people don't have a system to organize their choices in ranking and scoring. In other words, most people know what they like but they haven't given much thought to how to rank and score those opinions.
Live judging goes fast and you don't get a second chance so if you don't have the experience or proper method you are going to miss many all the time.
One way to mitigate this is to institute "Remote Judging", where a judge can take his time and judge on his own desktop. Of course this doesn't apply to prints, only digital.
Live judging goes fast and you don't get a second chance so if you don't have the experience or proper method you are going to miss many all the time.
One way to mitigate this is to institute "Remote Judging", where a judge can take his time and judge on his own desktop. Of course this doesn't apply to prints, only digital.
Sep 9, 2017 13:50:19 #
Even if it is sometimes hard to believe, judges are real people too with their biases for certain types of photography, even if they deny it, even to themselves.
One of the tips we were given at a Photography Club meeting is that one of the best ways to improve your chance of getting a ribbon is to do some research on the types of photography venues the judge shoots and enter something that he/she intuitively likes. For example: if you enter perfectly composed and processed photo of your wife's gorgeous feline, and the judge hates cats, your photo is "toast" before it is even hung. The fact it is selected as the "people's choice" doesn't matter, if the judge even looks at it with more than a passing glance, "ya' done good".
Don't let it bother you; we've all been there
!
One of the tips we were given at a Photography Club meeting is that one of the best ways to improve your chance of getting a ribbon is to do some research on the types of photography venues the judge shoots and enter something that he/she intuitively likes. For example: if you enter perfectly composed and processed photo of your wife's gorgeous feline, and the judge hates cats, your photo is "toast" before it is even hung. The fact it is selected as the "people's choice" doesn't matter, if the judge even looks at it with more than a passing glance, "ya' done good".
Don't let it bother you; we've all been there
!Sep 9, 2017 13:59:42 #
I was entered in a contest last year where the "judged" winner was so bad, that sponsors of the contest awarded a second "first" prize to another photo. The judge for this contest was a art teacher from a local college. One would think that person was qualified. This incident had many scratching their heads. What was this judge thinking. You really had to see this "prize winner" to see what I am referring to. I am no expert by far, but I know a good photo from a bad one. I can make allowances for many styles and skill levels, but this was beyond the pale.
Sep 9, 2017 14:32:20 #
VTdude wrote:
Hey everyone. I have been enjoying your posts and... (show quote)
-----
Why would you listen to any a$@hole judge who believes they are THE arbiter of "worthwhile" photography? Such judges are basically stupid and very conventional.
-----
Sep 9, 2017 15:22:08 #
When you say out of focus, I'm guessing the shots have a very shallow depth of field that puts just one part of the pic (the focal point) in focus. It's hard to imagine a totally out of focus shot would win a photo contest, unless it was some sort of abstract photo.
Sep 9, 2017 15:47:21 #
Well, you make a good point about selective focus. It takes a trained eye in photography and art to recognize the value there. The general public will not "get" selective focus. They will be thinking even they can do a better job of focusing than that. So you have all levels.
Bobspez wrote:
When you say out of focus, I'm guessing the shots have a very shallow depth of field that puts just one part of the pic (the focal point) in focus. It's hard to imagine a totally out of focus shot would win a photo contest, unless it was some sort of abstract photo.
Sep 9, 2017 15:52:17 #
Meaning also, that the art teacher might even be looking for stuff that looks arty to him, and selective focus and abstract content fits the bill there.
Sep 9, 2017 22:46:19 #
This may help you. I was helping at the Western North Carolina Fair one year and happened to be working near the judges as they were judging the photos. There were 2 men and 1 woman. The interaction was so interesting I listened for quite a while. Neither of the men saw what the woman saw. They argued at length over some of the shots. After hearing their discussions and looking at the pictures, I never entered again. Men also seem to look much more at the technical side. Another interesting thing to do, which I got a kick out of, is stand near your picture(s) and listen to the comments of the public. I did win best in show one year and the comment I remember from a lady is "What is it? That should never have won." I'll send it if I can find it. Has to do with the white squirrels.
Sep 9, 2017 23:28:46 #
I found the picture but I don't know how to insert it into this thread.
Sep 10, 2017 11:42:23 #
You have to select "Quote Reply" and you will get the provisions to attach pics.
Yes, men and women will disagree as will art lovers and scientists. That's why you should have 3 judges.
Yes, men and women will disagree as will art lovers and scientists. That's why you should have 3 judges.
one shot wrote:
I found the picture but I don't know how to insert it into this thread.
Sep 10, 2017 12:10:29 #
Fotoartist wrote:
You have to select "Quote Reply" and you will get the provisions to attach pics.
Yes, men and women will disagree as will art lovers and scientists. That's why you should have 3 judges.
Yes, men and women will disagree as will art lovers and scientists. That's why you should have 3 judges.
I looked at the ribbon again (been a long time ago) and it was Judges Choice, not Best in Show. I called it "White Squirrel Squabble". I was lying on my stomach shooting squirrels and saw movement out of the corner of my eye. I turned, shot, and the squabble was over. I understood why the lady said, "What is it?" Thanks Fotoartist for telling me how to include the shot.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.