I hate the comments of judges!

[sevo]

Originally Posted by GWT

Telling her that her pic was basically a holiday snap seemed a little cruel.

It is hard to tell whether it is a holiday snap or not - but considering it was entered in a contest, it most probably is not. If it isn't, it is a contender in the artistic landscape category, where it might legitimately be off-colour. However there ought to be some good (though perhaps not immediately self-evident, at least for viewers with no background in recent art photography) explanation why it was not properly colour balanced/UV filtered. But given that the judges might not be into that kind of photography, it is generally wise to accompany art with a fair amount of text, at least if it has a strong layer of meta content that might need explanation.

[Jamie123]

Originally Posted by jsrockit

I generally find that when people focus on the technical, they don't get, don't like, or don't want to talk about the content of the photo.

That's mostly true, although there is also the rare case where you see a picture that you think would be great content-wise if it wasn't for some technical aspect. A friend of mine recently sent me a few pictures he took and one of them would've been great IMO if it hadn't been ruined by the composition.

In any case, I'm actually surprised these judges gave any reason at all for not accepting the photo. I thought usually there's just a generic answer like 'Unfortunately your image did not make the selection' or something along those lines.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by Jamie123

That's mostly true, although there is also the rare case where you see a picture that you think would be great content-wise if it wasn't for some technical aspect.

I agree, of course.

[dct]

Originally Posted by Dylan Hope

I have to ask, why did repeat the gear used? It put a strange emphasis on the camera in my mind as though the use of the Leica and Mamiya should inherently earn more appreciation from the judges, even if that's not what your intention - it's late and I'm headed off to bed so that might be why I'm reading it that way.
I can see where the judges are coming from, the image could be interpreted as 'cold', but unlike the judges I think it looks fine as it is and if they dismissed your photo based solely on that then I'm as incredulous as you

I see your point. The gear and the kind of processing shouldn't have impact on the final result judgement. But this is true both for the artist as well the judges. Here it seems the verdict containts digital commonplaces (WB, postprocessing) which are completely wrong, because the submitted shots weren't digital. This is the part of the the complaining I support.

[astro8]

Originally Posted by back alley

i've had comments here about over sharpening my images...i don't even use the sharpen tool...ever!

Joe, your images are the sharpest I've seen....along with Jim Marshalls...may sound weird, but that's the way I see it.

Ellen, just keep doing what you are doing and stuff eveyone else.

[pieter]

I think that the judging of art hardly ever goes from objective thought towards subjective thought. So unless something is obviously wrong that can be objectively judged, the subjective judgement will never follow from objective reasoning.
So it's hardly ever the case that somebody judges art by first making up his mind about the composition, then follows up with a rational look at the color balance, then moves closer to the photograph to judge if something is in focus that should be in focus, and then finally adds up all his previous objective findings to come to a subjective appreciation of the photograph. (hardly ever: "oh, good use of the rule of thirds composition wise! Good use of color: expertly done; how the red dress on the left is balanced by the green bird on the left. And now that i pixel peep, i can see that the object is correctly focussed! = YES! I love this photograph!")

So when given objective reasoning about the judging of art, it should be seen as some afterthought. More like: "oh yes. I almost forgot. Let me write something up that objectively explains why I subjectively didn't like the photograph." In some ways the judgement has been passed way before this reasoning is written down. And very few people have the self knowledge, the technical expertise and take the effort to really dig up their subjective reasoning and put it into objective writing.
Add to this that the "no" pile usually does not get much attention after it has been placed on the "no" pile. Almost everybody prefers to spend time and effort on giving their objective reasoning for liking an object of art to doing the same for not-liking an object of art.

So if it is well thought out criticism (that might even be useful to furthering your artistic skills) you seek, don't expect it from a competition judge. Unless you really want to make the translation yourself.
You could (by yourself or with help from somebody else) try to find out what's behind this weird unthoughtful objective reasoning that the judge has given you.
For example: he remarks something about white balance. Just forget that you're not using digital raw and that it's a weird comment. Somewhere in his feeling about the photograph probably the colors aren't speaking to him. They don't grab him.
Maybe a bright yellow flower in the front would change it for him? maybe the same scene with all the trees fully green (instead of some brown ones in between), maybe the gorgeous blue sky would look even more interesting if a bright red plane would pass through it? Maybe if the lake would look more blue from another angle it would contrast nicer with the sweet green waterlilies?
Anyway who knows.

My suggestion would be to never look to a competition judge for a good rational comment about your work, especially when it's not the winning photograph. Or, if you prefer, take the effort yourself that the judge lacked and try to find the real subjective reason behind the objective one given. (while remembering that often enough this is impossible because the two are just too far removed.)

[shadowfox]

Originally Posted by photomoof

You have figured out what we all do sooner or later -- the only "judges" worth bothering with are the ones with money in their pockets to buy your work.

Now that's worth repeating.

I'd like to add that the above sentiment is not a license not to be your own photos harshest judge.

[redisburning]

here's the problem with judges:

if you were to hand me a picture you took with a 200mm lens I would 99 times out of 100 hand it back and say I don't like the perspective

if you were to hand me a picture you took that was in line with today's popular understanding of street photography I would 99 times out of 100 hand it back and say I think it's too busy

if you were to hand me a picture you took where you made it look cross-processed with fake grain and super heavy vignetting I would 99 times out of 100 hand it back and laugh at you to your face

does that mean your photo is bad? hardly. does that mean that that 1 rare picture I love despite my predisposition would speak to other people? hardly.

it has been demonstrated to me that most people think in a way that is fundamentally different than I way I do and that our tastes will never overlap. so I try my best, and fail occasionally, to ignore their opinions on taste as much as possible.

[back alley]

Originally Posted by astro8

Joe, your images are the sharpest I've seen....along with Jim Marshalls...may sound weird, but that's the way I see it.

Ellen, just keep doing what you are doing and stuff eveyone else.

really? sharpest as in over processed?
i use the unsharpen mask on all my images but in a standard and very low ratio. there is barely a difference between the unprocessed and the 'unsharpened' image.

jim marshall? the music photographer?

[astro8]

Originally Posted by back alley

really? sharpest as in over processed?
i use the unsharpen mask on all my images but in a standard and very low ratio. there is barely a difference between the unprocessed and the 'unsharpened' image.

jim marshall? the music photographer?

No...sharp, as in bang on focus, solid and no shakes. That was the first thing that struck me when I first viewed your shots.

Yes, Jim Marshall the music photographer. I get the same feeling when I view his shots.

It may sound strange...but a lot of the photos I see, my own included, I get the feeling they came from some nervous character...like Don Knotts was doing the shooting.

Anyway....that's the look I'm striving for, although it's more of a feeling I get from a shot than a look.

[back alley]

Originally Posted by astro8

No...sharp, as in bang on focus, solid and no shakes. That was the first thing that struck me when I first viewed your shots.

Yes, Jim Marshall the music photographer. I get the same feeling when I view his shots.

It may sound strange...but a lot of the photos I see, my own included, I get the feeling they came from some nervous character...like Don Knotts was doing the shooting.

Anyway....that's the look I'm striving for, although it's more of a feeling I get from a shot than a look.

that's a relief...i don't care for a lot of processing and i was starting to think i was going a bit off...
thanks for the feedback...funny, i wouldn't have come to the same conclusion as you but maybe that goes to being one's own worst critic.

[taskoni]

Originally Posted by Highway 61

Okay for the second quote ; but re. the first one, I don't think that I didn't control my words, nor was unpolite with Ellen. This is a photo forum so we discuss some photos and make comments based on what has been explained by the OP, that's all.

The point is : how strange it is to hear that the judges haven't accepted this photo because of some WB problems only, because this is fully secondary when you obviously think of what makes this photo not being a great one.

And - we're looking at, and commenting, a casual landscape photography, not what is in somebody's heart and soul. So, we can be sincere and write what we think here I guess.

Might I not be Anglo-Saxon enough ?

Because I was the first one to say the photo isn't good enough I might have to apologize to Ellen first, but it's not going to make this shot good anyway. I just find it strange that this photo made it to the judging level. In the landscape photography, where everything MUST be perfect - presumingly the landscape photographer takes all the time needed to set up the camera, wait for the proper light, choose carefully the framing etc. shots like this one are usually not acceptable. Even if the WB is great!
So, I agree with Highway 61 on his thoughts on the subject as I would like to get honest comments on my pictures I am posting too.
And because was previously flagged in the thread that she didn't looked for comments on the photo, IMO the judges were absolutely right to reject that landscape.

Regards,

Boris

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by taskoni

Because I was the first one to say the photo isn't good enough I might have to apologize to Ellen first, but it's not going to make this shot good anyway. I just find it strange that this photo made it to the judging level. In the landscape photography, where everything MUST be perfect - presumingly the landscape photographer takes all the time needed to set up the camera, wait for the proper light, choose carefully the framing etc. shots like this one are usually not acceptable. Even if the WB is great!
So, I agree with Highway 61 on his thoughts on the subject as I would like to get honest comments on my pictures I am posting too.
And because was previously flagged in the thread that she didn't looked for comments on the photo, IMO the judges were absolutely right to reject that landscape.

Regards,

Boris

Dear Boris,

In many of the things I've judged, this would certainly have made it to what you call 'the comments level' but it would have fallen short on a very personal test, "Do wish I had taken this picture?"

No, because I have. Not exactly the same, but many like it. Technically excellent; can't tell about white balance on my internet computer, no problem with Velvia saturation. But nothing that really grabs me: a good record. But what am I looking at? A good record of an attractive scene that I've seen in real life a thousand times (and normally failed to capture well myself). It's mnot really an interpretation. It's nothing new. On those grounds I might reject it. But not on the grounds given by the OP, which are pure ignorance and stupidity on the part of the judges.

In a weak competition, it might have won. In a strong competition, no. But with weak judges like that, it's always going to be a meaningless competition.

Cheers,

R.

[taskoni]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Dear Boris,

In many of the things I've judged, this would certainly have made it to what you call 'the comments level' but it would have fallen short on a very personal test, "Do wish I had taken this picture?"

No, because I have. Not exactly the same, but many like it. Technically excellent; can't tell about white balance on my internet computer, no problem with Velvia saturation. But nothing that really grabs me: a good record. But what am I looking at? A good record of an attractive scene that I've seen in real life a thousand times (and normally failed to capture well myself). It's mnot really an interpretation. It's nothing new. On those grounds I might reject it. But not on the grounds given by the OP, which are pure ignorance and stupidity on the part of the judges.

In a weak competition, it might have won. In a strong competition, no. But with weak judges like that, it's always going to be a meaningless competition.

Cheers,

R.

Dear Roger.

You have summarized all thread comments in one wonderful way!

Regards,

Boris

[Turtle]

Roger makes the point. Had it been a cracking shot (the one posted by Ellen) it is doubtful that WB would have had anything to do with anything. It could well be that the judges did not rate the image very highly and recorded whatever was easiest and most concise to record as their reason for rejection. Subjective comments given to a thousand photographers might generate even more negative responses from entrants than inappropriate technical ones.

As well as being a straight record shot, I think the image is a bit cold too. That in part is a product of shooting in unflattering light, so if you link the two bits of logic together, there is perhaps an answer.

The message for Ellen is perhaps to take it on the chin, pick yourself up and keep striving to improve. Getting rejected is far more common than accepts, no matter how good your work may be. How right or wrong they are does not matter much if your goal is to succeed. You just have to keep loving what you are doing, keep learning and keep plugging away.

[patois]

I feel for you. Comments like that can be extremely infuriating and worst of all won't help you at all.

[Bill Clark]

I wish & wish some more, cross my fingers that every judge of photographs adopts the philosophy/technique used by Toastmasters.

Public speaking is an art just like making photographs. I believe not too many strive to make a lousy photograph. Same for a person making a speech.

Here is my recommendation based on how we do evaluations with Toastmasters:

1. Start out stating at least two positives you see with the photograph. If you can't find any, look again, find them.

2. Then, instead of pointing out faults, find one or two areas you see that could be used for the photographer to work on for the next time s(he) makes more images and submits them for evaluation. This process should be to help the photographer, creating a positive atmosphere to make better and better photographs.

3. Finally, end on a high note. You can restate what you said in #1 then follow up with something like, "I look forward to looking at your next photograph(s)."

Humans, especially artists, are sensitive. It is easy to crush someones desire and get turned off by your review and not submit any photos in the future. Is that what you want? Don't we want to help someone along the way and have them submit again and again? Smiles are better than frowns!

If you are the judge, it's in your hands.

[ornate_wrasse]

Originally Posted by Bill Clark

I wish & wish some more, cross my fingers that every judge of photographs adopts the philosophy/technique used by Toastmasters.

I was in Toastmasters for a number of years and could not agree with you more. Being in the Toastmasters program helped transform me from a person who was afraid to speak in public to someone who became vastly more comfortable with speaking to a group of people.

That being said, I did want to reply to the numerous comments made after my original post and to clarify what actually happened.

First of all, the images I submitted were prints. We were to submit 5 prints in size 8x12. I requested and received permission to submit in 10x10 for my medium format print (the image I posted in this thread). It was scanned in a drum scanner and then printed out.

One of the prints we were to submit was "unjudged", that is, it would NOT be given scores by the judges and would be in the exhibit no matter what.
This was done so that each of us in the group would have a chance to have at least one image in the exhibit. My Mamiya image was actually not judged or scored. I only heard about the "white balance" comments when the group organizer took me aside at the meeting on Saturday and told me some of the judges commented on the white balance. She said I may want to change it but that it was entirely up to met if I wanted to make changes since the image will be in the exhibit no matter what.

There were 4 images of mine that were judged by the 3 judges. Each of the three judges gave each image a score of 1, 2 or 3. A score of 3 meant the image should definitely be in the exhibit, a score of 2 meant "maybe" and a score of 1 meant it should not be in the exhibit. Thus, the maximum score was "9" and the minimum score was "3".

Of the 4 of my images that were judged, two received a score of "9" and will definitely be in the exhibit, one image received a score of "7" and will be in the exhibit, and one image (the Leica image for which I used Velvia) received a score of "4" which was considered too low of a score to make it into the exhibit.

So I am quite pleased with the overall results and perhaps I might hear that one of more of the images were sold (including the medium format image). I guess I was just irked at the comments made. And I was feeling frustrated and probably looking for support from RFF members, as another poster suggested.

The Mamiya shot was picked by me because it had received numerous positive comments from others. In fact, when I recently took the image to a frame shop to be framed (this was done before I had the image printed from a drum scan for the exhibit), I was told when I picked it up that it was a very nice picture and numerous people at the frame shop had commented on how much they liked it. The folks at the frame shop handle many, many images including some by local artists of outstanding ability.

To another poster who asked about the ages of the judges, one was in her 40's, another was in her late 50's or 60's. As to the third judge, all I know is that it was a woman. I don't know her age.

The funny thing about the woman in her 40's is that she actually took the negative to the printer to be scanned and printed for me as she lives close to the printer. She told them to print it in 8x12 and the printer had to call me to tell me that I should be printing it in 10x10. My medium format image was the only print in size 10x10, the rest of the prints were 8x12.

I am glad each and every one of you took the time to post, I have indeed learned a lot from your comments.

Ellen

[FrankS]

I just submitted 3 prints to a juried art show. Fingers crossed.
Last year 2 of my 3 prints were accepted, and one of them won first place.
If the judges like them, that would be great, but if not, with my experience in photography including judging, I'll still think that they are good images and not like them any less.

But if a judge makes a comment about not liking the photoshop conversion to black and white (I shot with black and white film), I'll be ticked off just like Ellen was.

Below are my crappy scans, not exactly what the wet prints look like.

[ornate_wrasse]

Originally Posted by FrankS

But if a judge makes a comment about not liking the photoshop conversion to black and white (I shot with black and white film), I'll be ticked off just like Ellen was.

Good luck! I hope all of your images are accepted into the show. I really like the first one. It also happens to be very similar to the Leica image I mentioned in my post, although mine is in color.

Be sure to let us know if the judges make comments about the Photoshop conversion to B&W. Ha Ha!

Ellen

[jody36]

i like it. judges give good marks for what they like. Dont worry shoot for yourself.

[sailor]

I find that there are some pictures which I always hold close to my heart despite what others have to say about them. I'm not talking about personal or family pictures but photos which I've taken as my idea of good examples of the photographic art. Sometimes however it does pay to listen to the comments of others.

A while back I was trying to get a panel of photos together for a go at the LRPS. I'm a member of a self help group of the RPS where the members offer advice to each other in our attempts to get RPS distinctions. My panel was generally well received but one member pointed out that a bird photograph just lacked critical sharpness in the eye. He was right of course - why I hadn't noticed it myself I've no idea. I changed it for another version which was technically better. One other photo divided the members. Half of them thought it was one of my better pictures, the other half couldn't understand why I had it in my panel. As it was one of my favourites I decided it was going in.

A few days before judging I had small copies of the prints spread out on the floor trying to sort out the best positioning of the images when the postman came in with the mail. He looked at the pictures and asked what I was doing. When I told him, he kicked the picture there had been all the debate about and said that he wouldn't give it house room. My nerve cracked and I took it out. I was awarded my LRPS. Would I have got it with the original picture? Who knows but it seemed sensible to cut the odds of failure.

As an aside, I noticed that when the panels were being judged, very often the criticisms were of a technical nature (blown highlights etc.) I think it's easier to explain these faults rather than compositional issues.

On the subject of RPS judging, the recent Gold Medal winning photo of the girl with the dead deer bugs the living daylights out of me. The deer isn't sharp - a fault it would have been easy to correct. It wasn't going anywhere after all! But what do I know?

[ornate_wrasse]

Sailor,

Thanks for sharing that story. Good that the postman walked in at the right moment!

Above all, what I get from reading replies to this thread, is that people can have very different opinions about an image. Also, that it helps to have an open mind and to learn and grow from the comments that others make.

[Jamie123]

Originally Posted by ornate_wrasse

The Mamiya shot was picked by me because it had received numerous positive comments from others. In fact, when I recently took the image to a frame shop to be framed (this was done before I had the image printed from a drum scan for the exhibit), I was told when I picked it up that it was a very nice picture and numerous people at the frame shop had commented on how much they liked it. The folks at the frame shop handle many, many images including some by local artists of outstanding ability.

Here's the thing, though. Just because a lot of people say good things about a photo it doesn't mean it's objectively good. I probably get most praise for my crappiest pictures. And yes, even from people who 'handle many images' like the people at the pro lab or other photographers. It's very easy to make eye candy. Go to flickr's 'Explore' page and see what kind of pictures are most popular.
Frankly, I get far more annoyed by people complimenting me on a bad picture than when people criticise one of the good ones. No amount of praise will make me like a picture that I think is bad but some constructive criticism might make me reconsider my opinion on one of the presumably good ones. Or it might not but at least it makes me think.

If I were you I'd just pick the image I liked best instead of going with the one that received most positive comments. Otherwise you're just playing it safe which is pretty boring more often than not.

I haven't seen your Velvia picture but I must admit that 99 out of 100 pictures I see that were taken on Velvia make my eyes want to vomit. I really despise that film. That's just my opinion, of course, but it just shows that some people just don't like that kind of aesthetic and this judge seems to be one of them.

[Turtle]

I agree with Jamie. You can listen to everything everyone says, but the inner voice makes the decision. If I produced projects by majority verdict they would never end and the final selection would stink. I would be a very much weaker photographer had I listened to all the people with valid opinions. Athena sells more posters of howling wolves than anything else and what does that tell you? Most popular photos on the net? Cute cat photos.

Think of it how some people view single malts vs blends. Many of the top blends are better to many people but they arguably lack the singular, pure voice of a single origin/creator and so don't ever scream of the same brilliance. As a photographer, your work needs that same purity of origin and, while I could say 'for better of for worse, it is invariably for the better (even when you dont realise it).