Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

Judging Photo Art #4 Style

I would like to start twelve new discussions for judging photo art. One at a time. I am now on element 4 Style.The PPA, Professional Photographers of America has12 elements of judging.
I am hoping that these 12 discussions go slow but become helpful for me and I hope for others.

I honestly do not have an expertise in any of these elements. This element has me confused. I do not understand style and I don’t know why the PPA would put it before composition? Your welcome to post anything you want that may shed light (no pun intended) on the style topic.
The Twelve elements listed below are in accordance to their importance.

1. IMPACT
2. TECHNICAL EXCELLENCE
3. CREATIVITY
4. STYLE
5. COMPOSITION
6. PRESENTATION
7. COLOR BALANCE
8. CENTER OF INTEREST
9. LIGHTING
10. SUBJECT MATTER
11. TECHNIQUE
12. STORY TELLING


Impact is the sense one gets upon viewing an image for the first time. Compelling images evoke laughter, sadness, anger, pride, wonder or another intense emotion. There can be impact in any of these twelve elements.

Technical excellence is the print quality of the image itself as it is presented for viewing. Retouching, manipulation, sharpness, exposure, printing, mounting, and correct color are some items that speak to the qualities of the physical print.

Creativity is the original, fresh, and external expression of the imagination of the maker by using the medium to convey an idea, message or thought.

Style is defined in a number of ways as it applies to a creative image. It might be defined by a specific genre or simply be recognizable as the characteristics of how a specific artist applies light to a subject. It can impact an image in a positive manner when the subject matter and the style are appropriate for each other, or it can have a negative effect when they are at odds.

Composition is important to the design of an image, bringing all of the visual elements together in concert to express the purpose of the image. Proper composition holds the viewer in the image and prompts the viewer to look where the creator intends. Effective composition can be pleasing or disturbing, depending on the intent of the image maker.

Presentation affects an image by giving it a finished look. The mats and borders used, either physical or digital, should support and enhance the image, not distract from it.

Color Balance supplies harmony to an image. An image in which the tones work together, effectively supporting the image, can enhance its emotional appeal. Color balance is not always harmonious and can be used to evoke diverse feelings for effect.

Center of Interest is the point or points on the image where the maker wants the viewer to stop as they view the image. There can be primary and secondary centers of interest. Occasionally there will be no specific center of interest, when the entire scene collectively serves as the center of interest.

Lighting—the use and control of light—refers to how dimension, shape and roundness are defined in an image.
Whether the light applied to an image is manmade or natural, proper use of it should enhance an image.

Subject Matter should always be appropriate to the story being told in an image.

Technique is the approach used to create the image. Printing, lighting, posing, capture, presentation media, and more are part of the technique applied to an image.

Story Telling refers to the image’s ability to evoke imagination. One beautiful thing about art is that each viewer might collect his own message or read her own story in an image.

Tea8 Loc: Where the wind comes sweeping down the plain.

I would say that the PPA puts style before composition because the style of photo you are taking can affect the way you compose an image. A portrait is very different from a landscape. They are two different styles and they are composed very differently because of their style.

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

Landscape and portraits are not two different styles at all. These are two different types of subject matter which have nothing to do with style.

Style is what your "Look" is or maybe how you finish your prints so that it is a recognizable style compared to how another photographer may portray the same subject matter. For example, Sarah Moon had a particular style in her photography. You could almost always tell if it was a Sarah Moon shot. David Hamilton also had his own style and somewhat similar to Sarah's style but you could tell the difference between the two.

Thomas Kincaid has a style of painting, no matter what the subject he chooses, which by the way, was not his own style. He copied this from an older little know British artist, who painted village scenes in Britain with that warmish glowing look and when you see his work, it is easy to see where Kincaid got the idea from. Kincaid just took that style and commercialized it.

There is a guy who manipulates photos of well know personalities to make them look like caricatures and he has his own style, all-be-it of one type of subject matter, portraits.

So a style is how the photographer goes about lighting a subject or finishing off a photo in a particular way that sets him/her apart from other. Picasso and Rembrandt and Dali and Van Gough all have their own styles, but all paint various different subject matter.

I'm sure you can recognize these individual styles in painting when you see them. Even if painting by another artist, if they look like any of those mentioned we often say the artist has painting the subject in the Picasso style or Van Gough (spelling?)style. I hope you now have a better understanding of what "style" really is.

Doe Loc: N, Augusta, South Carolina

I am going to like reading this thread!

rodpark2 Loc: Dallas, Tx

Food for thought: Over my lifetime as a photographer and photo teacher I've had numerous opportunities to take part in competitions. To prove a point to myself I once entered 2 of what I considered to be my BEST images, and 2 that I thought would win. Sadly, that was exactly what happened. The BEST images were rejected because they didn't add up when all of the categories were numerically graded and averaged. I don't enter competitions very often for this reason. You can almost build a paint by number type image that scores high, but may not really be that interesting. I have many very passionate photography friends who have said the same thing. A good formula for judging winning photographs is difficult at best. Someone once said "It's not what an image looks like that counts, it's how it makes you feel." A lot of the best art throughout history actually breaks the rules, so judging by rules misses some great images. Just a thought. It's amazing how many times throughout history that "rules" were re-written after great art was produced in contradiction to existing rules.

CamObs Loc: South America (Texas)

I have the same background and I agree totally. I once entered several prints in a Washington DC contest which I thought were deserving. The first over all went to a photo of an apple with a pipe cleaner worm coming out of it on a white background. Amazing...

Linda Hamilton

I attended the Rhode Island School of Photography 1990-1992 B & W courses in portrait, commercial (using a 4x5 format), enviromental and film development, print and tone finishing for presentation. Students were critqued on their work using the 12 steps used by the PPA. We were taught that 'Style' is a component that identifies the image to the maker ie a signature. Style can be anything from an artist using a specific fine art print paper, such as one that is considered a cool tone or finishing a print in a sepia tone for a warm effect.
I am attracted to images with back light, so much of what I consider to have impact is back lit. If I am not careful, this could become my style or signature.
Style is a part of the maker and the way an image is presented. I have been involved in both exhibiting works and judging others. The set of rules are a standard for all to go by, but I for one don't always follow the rules. As mentioned earlier "the best images are usually out side the rule box"!
My best advice is to go out and shoot what you feel, what comes from your heart is always a first place image.
Several years ago I entered a B & W print close up image of an old weathered shingle barn. Basically it was considered an abstract, one shingle was shaped and weathered, falling in the rule of 2/3 position. The print title was 'Gray Beard' it placed Best of Show and to this day even though there have been more worthy awards given, Gray Beard still means everything to me.

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

Thank you all. Lucian told me what I wanted to know. Explaining style very well. The pros that pointed out the best photos don't always get the most points on a judging. I agree and understand. I again want to say that I am trying to gather some notes on all 12 elements to help the "amateur". I really am not trying to judge the photo, I am trying to break down the aspects of photography for a newbie to think about in his or her growth. Great discussion.

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

Judging of prints is very subjective at best. We hold a monthly comp at our photo club and some months you just don't understand what the judges could possibly see when you look at their scoring, other times they seem to be in complete agreement with what you think. We have a different set of 3-4 each month.

Also from watching the judging at the annual state PPA comps again, sometimes you feel the judges must be from another planet. So basically there is no pleasing them all every time and plenty of mediocre prints go through high as does some fantastic shots too mind you.

Don't hold too much weight to what judges score, just listen to the things they say about the prints and absorb that.

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

Do your judges use 12 elements or less? Do they show the exact numerical scores to the artist? This could be a great learning experience for the judges and the photographer.

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

We use the same guide lines as PPA and these are gone over with the judges prior to the scoring.

Judges have 9 points each with 5 being average and 9 being the very best. Total score is shown for each photo and then a judge (in order) one per image scored, will give some critique, good or bad.

When the member gets their print back, the score is marked on the back of each judges given score. Digital does not afford that.

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

Thank you. I last was in a club that was still using slides. I had to take my digital photo and Power Point it then take it to a lab that would create slides. We had to compete in a theme for the slides, but none for the prints. We were not allowed to name our print, nor used mats. It still got expensive printing large format. I wish all were digital.

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

We did print, slide and digital, but last year we dropped slides and this year divided prints and digital comps evenly through the year with largest print being 16x20 or mat being no larger than that. You can mat or leave it edge to edge print. Once out of the print comp is a "Small Print" comp, nothing larger than a 10x8. Makes for a fun evening So you could have a 4x20 as long as the total dimensions don't exceed that of 80 inches total.

We have titles but these are read after the image is judged. We tried it with it first being named last year, which I prefer but have gone back to name after point score again.

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

Thank you. I like 8 x 12 which is 4 x 6 enlarged. The mats and frames are not as easy to find, but the ratio is the same as most cameras. I like this wider view. I had a point and shoot that did 4 x 7 to convert to 8 x 14 which I liked even better. I don't know why they should tie your hands so much.