Thanks for your thoughts.This seems rather pitiful: that photographers are so desperate for opportunity that they will pay such large fees to be told by reviewers that their work is too "sentimental" or some such.
In thinking about this a minute ago, I realized that the people I know in Houston who are actually selling their work and publishing books don't seem to be on the list of local reviewers, at least for 2006. It seems that there are (roughly) two tribes of fine art photographers: those who make work that people actually like to buy and own (conceivably possibly including flowers, landscapes, and nudes!); and those who think that if you make stuff that people actually like, you must have sold out somehow, and that it's a mark of sophistication to make work that is inaccessible to most people and sometimes just plain unattractive, or so self-absorbed that nobody could be really interested in it except the artist herself. I may be exaggerating a little, and it's possible I need to refine this idea some more, but I think there's some truth to this.
There are a few reviewers who seem open to looking at anything. I think that's the right approach. Sure, there are cheesy nudes and flowers, etc, but to reject a body of work because of its subject matter seems close-minded to me. (Except maybe in the case of child pornography or something.) Some nudes of women that I have seen make the woman's body look like a commodity; others show women's bodies as beautiful and sacred, in all their individuality. That's just an example. The same is true for flowers: I don't understand this flower hatred among the reviewers. Mapplethorpe did flowers, wonderfully. Maybe all along that's what he wanted to do, but he felt he had to do the S/M body of work before he could be taken seriously enough to be allowed to do flowers!
I can just imagine Mapplethorpe at FotoFest 2008, peddling his flower pictures around, and having a hard time getting anybody to look at them. Or poor Edward Weston, trying to get somebody to look at nudes and landscapes. "We don't like nudes and landscapes here, Mr. Weston. They're silly and dated. We're tired of them. Other people have already done that, better than you ever will. Why don't you try something more...conceptual?"
--shannon On May 29, 2007, at 8:17 AM, Adrienne Moumin wrote:
Shannon,By "competitive" I meant that there are SO many photogs wanting to get in that the orgs running these things can, it appears, get away w/not listing the reviewers (so they want YOUR commitment of the money but won't give theirs about what you are GETTING for your investment), and by only giving hints about what the reviewers DON'T want.......not very helpful, as evidenced by your example.Yet people sign up in droves (as I mentioned before, I got shut out of the PowerHouse reviews, and I heard from a friend there were over 150 on the wait list!) , hungry for an oppty to get a show, make contacts, or whatever their goals are.I could name so many examples: photo contests w/glittering prizes and/or great exposure run by established orgs...but the catch is that you sign away your rights to how and how much the image is used.........and there are many other examples I come across regularly of the hyper-competitive, commerce-driven place the photography world can be.But perhaps PhotoFest is different, I heard someone rave about it 5 or so yrs ago; unfortunately I have not had the oppty to hear anything more recent.I think most if not all of these orgs assign you to reviewers based on your stated goals & work samples; but in a PhotoExpoPlus seminar I went to last year, Sarah Hasted (of HastedHunt Gallery in Chelsea, NY) suggested that photogs wanting to be "seen" by a certain reviewer should, after the formal reviews have ended, approach that person and ask if "they have a few minutes to look at your work".What is traditional landscape? Great question! Seems to me that no matter what your work is, you have to have some sort of a "hook" (to use marketing lingo) that makes it different, unique, and eye catching. It's not good enough to just be good anymore in certain arenas, the competition is too fierce.Again, just my $.02. -Adrienne Moumin *************************************** on the web at: http://www.picturexhibit.com Saatchi Gallery: http://tinyurl.com/hw6r3 Art DC: http://tinyurl.com/vtjqf ***************************************From: Shannon Stoney <shannonstoney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Fotofest meeting place Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 21:26:10 -0500Fotofest does list the reviewers I think on their website but I haven't looked at it yet. Not sure what you mean by competitive: do you mean, competitive for photographers to get in, or that the reviews competewith each other? --shannon OK, I misspoke. The fotofest site tells you who their reviewers were LAST time, in 2006. And each reviewer says what she doesn't want to look at. Usually it's "traditional landscapes, architecture, nudes, and flowers." Ok, so what if I have a picture of myself in my flowergarden, with my shirt off? I guess that's verboten, huh? Maybe that'sthe way you're avant garde these days: you manage to put nudes,flowers, architecture, and landscape all in one picture!! Maybe a babyanimal for good measure. (Today I found two wild baby rabbits in my garden. I petted them.)So, do you get to pick your reviewers at events like this, or do you have to go to the ones that they assign to you? What is "traditional landscape" anyway?--shannon_________________________________________________________________Make every IM count. Download Messenger and join the i?m Initiative now. It?s free. http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGHM_MAY07======================================================================= ====================================== To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
============================================================================================================To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
