VTdude wrote:
Hey everyone. I have been enjoying your posts and gaining knowledge from those who've "been there". I have a question. I enter in a Vermont photo contest every year at our state's largest attended annual 10 day fair. This year was my 4th. The first year I got an honorable mention, I was so proud. Nothing since, which is fine. I do it for the love of my hobby and the experience of being involved. We're allowed three entries each among the several categories.
My question: Many photos that win are photos I personally think should not even be considered. They're often blurry, out of focus, immature looking shots (to me). I'm very curious to know, what is in the mind of judges? Do any of you judge at for your local contests? This year as we were picking up our entries post-fair we received a paper entitled, "12 Merits of an Image" which I'm sure they're saying are what judges look for in a contest image. There is nothing on the paper which says, "Should be sharp and clear but out of focus is okay too". The paper is all about sharp, infocus, great color, telling a story sort of thing. One judge even suggested that I should have used a different color matting. Isn't this supposed to be about the photo and not about the matting? I am confused.
Thank you so much for reading this and any thoughts you send my way.
Hey everyone. I have been enjoying your posts and... (
show quote)
Your mistake is assuming photography "judges" have minds. Usually it takes particularly stupid person to believe they are capable of judging someone else's art. Photography "judges" have some set of criterion they've learned by rote, without regard to uses or impact. They grade each photo as to how well it matches their arbitrary, uninformed opinions.
The real question is: Why would anyone care what some fool of a judge thinks about their work?