Whether we like it or not, photography competitions are part and parcel of the game for a good proportion of us. You could even look at our recent statement images membership application as a competition of sorts. But despite knowing their flaws, paying their high entry fees, some of us seem to be drawn to them like a moth to a flame.

In May 2011, I found myself somewhat perplexed to be sat around a table of peers, ready and waiting to slide through the mound of finalists for the London Street Photography Festival International Open Award and in September 2011 I found myself running the Street Reverb Reality Remade competition with Sony Ericsson.

This was never something I had banked on, applied for or even enquired about, but the experience I gained from it is something I will hold dear and take with me as I continue my photographic journey.

Until last year I never really entered many competitions, it just wasn’t something I cared about. This was until I was announced as a finalist for the Burn Emerging Photographer Fund, a competition I wasn’t going to enter until I received some strong encouragement from people close to the fund.

While the $10,000 prize didn’t reach my bank account – I didn’t win- my entry was well received, and from it’s “finalist” position it sprouted sales to international magazines with little effort to push it from myself.

For me, this was a turning point; I would now see competitions in a different light. They were no longer merely a label or something to stick on a CV, but from now on they would be more of a key to many different doors and opportunities, and at the same time a key point to how I would conduct a portion of my photographic career.

My first judging experiences running competitions and judging them came little over a year following these events, and the insights I achieved here is what I wish to share through this post.

First of all, I’ll talk a little about the structure of the judging for these particular competitions and although I know it’s by no mean the standard systems, it will however – if only in some small form – apply to others.

First up for the London Street Photography Festival, each judge was supplied with a random set of 90 entries with the goal of sifting these down to a choice of 5 move on to the next round.
Second round for this competition involved selecting 3 photographers from the pool of everyone’s previous 5’s selections. The reality remade competition was of a similar nature to this, tho I asked each judge to select 5 photographers from the whole submissions.
Finally for the London Street Photography Festival a “round the table” discussion would take place with approximately 30 entries whilst for the Reality Remade competition we ranked each and every semi finalist to create a list of finalists and then later have a discussion for the winner and for statement, well we’d view all the entrants together, have an open and frank discussion about each , but then volume wise this definitely will not be possible with all competitions.

For the first stage, Being assigned a random batch of photographers to select your 5 choices from is a pretty strange experience in my opinion. But with competitions such as the London Street Photography Festival competition where they receive some inordinate amount of entrants (1600-2000 in this case), this was definitely an easy way to reduce the workload of the judges involved. But it did come with some negative points.

The main issue here was that the random selection you were assigned could for instance consist of work, which doesn’t inspire you, maybe doesn’t really fit the theme, but then may inspire somebody else and could contain their desired winner. You could also be handed a strong selection of images containing say 10 entries that are exceptionally good work, whilst another judge could completely struggle to select any entries from their batch.

At this stage, many good photographers can be culled by what I thought of as “The Luck of the Draw”, and I’m talking about good photographers who may have otherwise reached the final. If a competition uses this method (and many do) there is no real way to ensure you’ll get past round one, it doesn’t matter how good your work is or well received it may be, you are at the whim of a single individual and you just have to hope that they play by the rules, have no hidden agendas to uncover some underdog or peoples choice angle and that they get the rules of the theme, rules and competition as a whole!

The second phase, choosing photographers to make a semi final of sorts, is a little more complex and in some instances can involve some strange thinking and guess work. And no, I’m not kidding.

Here judges are introduced with the possibility of taking photographers into the final where they could potentially win to prize and title etc.
Any photographer failing to get a single vote here is out, yet one who gets many votes is not the winner (or at least not yet).
All will seem well here, until you realize that you can only select a limited number of photographers (3 or 5 in my cases). By this point the pool of potential candidates should be strong, and failing this you should have your initial selections in there to continue with. The problems arise when you play the guessing game as some judges may be tempted to do.

For example: Photographer A has fantastic work and a broad appeal, however, they aren’t your winner of choice, but maybe a good runner up? So you consider at this point that some of the other jurors are likely to vote for them, and you’d rather bring in an alternative to the table, maybe a solid third or fourth placed vote that you feel may otherwise be overlooked for the more popular options?

It’s at this point that some good contenders could be lost in the mix if several members of the Jury have the same thinking, particularly if someone is more keen on pushing the boundaries, creating discussion and being “different” rather than simply selecting deserving winners and finalists.

The final stage is where the winners are chosen.

Right now, your in the hands of the judges, you’ve got to hope they stick to any given theme, rules and by their choices as there is always the possibility of strong personalities being able to get what they want through the power of persuasion alone.

At this stage there is more taken into consideration than just the images. It’s about the sequencing, the artist statement, the biography of the photographer, their reputation, history of winning awards and how the work compares to other well known or award winning pieces. Say, if the work is reminiscent of some amazing work, which has won a previous competition, then chances are, someone could raise this as a negative point in an effort to not have the competition follows in the footsteps of another.

This point didn’t particularly come up in my case, but through speaking with other photographers, it had in theirs and from the point of someone who has been responsible for running a competition, I can sort of understand it.

Other possible weights could be placed on underdog stories, shock and awe, how appropriate the work is, whether the photographer is a deserving winner, judging whether the photographer is arrogant and expects to win, and whether the work fits into some pre defined ideal of what the winner of the competition should be.

With all of this in mind, I will take the following notes with me into any competition:

Be consistent with the images.

It’s obvious, but you’re only as strong as your weakest image. And like it or not, a strong theme, idea or purpose to the images can beat a random selection hands down every time.

Have a well-written statement.
The statement should add more insight to the work including how and why it was created, a poorly written statement could be the difference between being a winner and not at a close tie. The statement is your representative to speak for your work when you can’t. You should also keep that in mind that it should aim to answer questions raised through the work.
Get someone else to read it for you and for the sake of humanity run a spell check on it.

Play by the rules.
Make sure you fit the theme and history of the competition. You’re not as likely to progress if you’re not a good fit for what they want to present as a winner.

Do your research, look at past winners if they have them, or look at what they use to promote the competition. With first year competitions it’s hard to judge, and this is why some have fewer entries, especially if they are quite prescriptive with the theme. But as they don’t have this history you will have more chance to help shape it.

But look at what they present as a whole, if they have a history of showcasing portraiture, hold back on that reportage submission and save the cash for something more appropriate.

Try to avoid direct comparisons to the work of others.
This may sound strange, especially after what I’ve just said, but if you submit a story which many others have covered, you are putting yourself in direct competition with everyone else. We saw that this year with the statement membership applications. At times it seemed that everyone had covered a boxer or fighter of some sort, with few taking a unique approach to the subject, and it only showed the flaws of some of the projects as we could compare the like for like.

The last thing you want a judge to say is “oh, another…” so I’d suggest to just steer clear, or document it in a completely new way!

Take note of timing.
You don’t want to jumpt the gun and enter a competition straight away and at the same time you don’t want to run out of time.
Take your time, do your research and pay attention to your submission. A lot of photographers make this mistake of last minute submissions and see the deadline more as the date when they should submit on rather than the last given opportunity.
Last minute submissions rarely get anywhere and you can usually spot them a mile off, they’re the ones who have little mistakes, poor writing, grammer and spelling in their statements and more than likely they’ve not let their edit sink in and it will show.

Add to this that a lot of people are submitting at the same time you could end up being hit with some technical difficulties and your entry could be lost, it’s just not worth the risk.

Don’t take it personally.
With the luck of the draw and anomalies in other rounds of judging, good images and photographers can easily fall by the way side and it isn’t always because they didn’t like your work. Keep your chin up and keep plodding on.

This is especially true when it comes to membership applications such as statements. Sometimes we loved the work that an applicant had submitted but felt it may not have been a good fit with us, nothing wrong with that, and you’d definitely not want to lose confidence if that was the case, so pick up and move on to better opportunities.

Where there’s feedback, take it.
It’s rare that competitions will offer feedback on submissions, especially for free. But should they offer it, then you should jump to the chance to receive it. I’m not talking about entering into a discourse with the judges here, but maybe just receiving a note on why your entry failed, or maybe a critique on the work overall. You entered the competition valuing the reputation of the judges and their experience, so you should surely want to hear their thoughts on your work!

With the reality remade competition, whilst the judges themselves didn’t personally enter into any discussions, it was also nice to see that the community themselves got together to discuss each others work

If you have any tips for people entering competitions, or a story you’d like to share, add it to the comments section!

Each seller pulls up to their pitch with their car rammed full of remnants of their lives: the books they’ve read, the gift’s they never wanted to receive, the clothes they feel no longer defines them and the hobbies and collections they no longer desire to peruse.

Each stall is almost portrait of the seller, a piece of themselves spread out right there on decorating tables and on the floor for all to see and buy.

What began as a photographic exercise and a way to keep me sharp in-between other projects and assignments eventually developed into more of a personal journey to understanding the value of goods and perception of quality.

It’s not only my thinking that’s changed, but also my buying habits. I buy whatever I can from car boots. From clothes to household goods and it comforts me to know that each item has their own back-stories in a way, which is incomparable to new goods.

This is what keeps drawing me back, week in week out… the voyeuristic experiences, the bargains and cheap bacon sarnie’s.

This is the first episode in a series of posts on Sunday Morning sales as the work continues throughout next year.

A book of the series can be purchased here.

Recently described by the …The Observer’s New Review as “a riveting series of photographs”, the exhibition features 8 images presented in light-boxes within an atmospheric darkened gallery space.

The exhibition marks the halfway point between the start of Dodd’s photographic project and the 2012 games.

The exhibition runs until the 30th September, but will be moving on to new locations shortly (more details to come).

Please help support the haiti appeal.

Photographers are auctioning off images in the following flickr group:

www.flickr.com/groups/charityprintauctions/

The image to the right is my offering, which will be printed at 16.5 × 11 inches (A3ish).

To place a bid on any of the images in the group do so on the images comments section. The amount of your bid that will be donated to the charity and the phootographer will pay the print and delivery fees.

There are more details in the group at:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/charityprintauctions/

and you can bid on my print at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesdodd/4276152805/

update:

the print sold for £80 ($130) to tala- who chose this image (after I gave the winner the chance to chose almost any image from my collection as opposed to the original offered).

http://jamieslist.wordpress.com/2009/12/10/internship-for-james-nachtwey-nyc-unpaid/

please not that in this scenario boy could be girl and girl could be boy, boy and girl could also be the same person, in which case would usually be a girl but also possibly a boy:

boy: hi, girl.
girl: hi boy… oh wow! whats that?
b: it’s a film camera… used to belong to my dad or something?
g: nice.
b: oh you’re one of them beautiful people aren’t you?… I have an idea.
g: what?
b: lets go to the woods and you can take off your clothes and be mysterious and stuff.
g: that sounds like it’s just up my street because I’m so quirky and unique.
b: yea you are… we both are… and so is my photography.

[group hug]

OK, that’s one scenario, but for anyone still wondering what type of photography I’m discussing, here’s a nice little list of some common features for you.

naked people in wilderness (with or without snow), people facing away as they enter water, people facing away in wilderness (with or without snow), naked people in water. naked people looking vulnerable. deers and similar animals (including horses + with or without snow). hunters. dead animals. dead animals on walls. dead animals as rugs. dead deers. dead horses. bears. strange trees. strange dead trees. mysterious floating limbs. people who seem to be trapped in the past. mysterious limbs entering water. portraits of the elderly looking vulnerable. people photographed naked on their bed looking vulnerable. just pretty girls. just boobs of pretty girls. people wearing masks. etc. etc.

I’m pretty sure most photographers could tick a few off on that list (myself included), so it’s not that I don’t like the subjects or the aesthetics. It’s more how they seem like the easy option. The HDR, sunsets and kittens for the more established tastes of photographers.

I just fail to connect with these sorts of pictures anymore. For most the results seem empty and meaningless surface layered images, but with the added fluff of poetic quotes, song lyrics, artist statements and a bit mystery to go along with the T&A!

There are hundreds of photographers out there produce similar work. Similar looking subjects in similar looking surroundings, composed in similar ways. So it’s no surprise that you may find that this work can blur together.

And because there are so many photographers producing this sort of work I really do have to question whether they are indeed showing parts of their lives, or whether it’s simple a more contrived process, all in the aim of getting a bit of attention.

Anyway, I suppose the thing I’m trying to question is that if these images are preconceived, what is the point in taking them? Can they truly hold any more value than a simple landscape? A pretty pretty? a kitten or puppy? or baby in a bucket?

Are these images simply destined to be the new commercial wall art? The HDR sunsets for those with a more educated photography palette?

Then again, maybe it is me who is missing something? Maybe there are thousands of  young, skinny, beautiful and naked people out there, dancing in the moonlit woods, around campfires while people take their pictures, performing for the cameras. Young, skinny, beatiful and naked people who sit on their beds looking expressionless, while deers stalk the outsides of the snow ridden fields and stuffed bears stand tall in the hallway on leopard skin rugs?

I have two 30 second videos featured in art in unusual spaces as part of the Short Shorts showreel.

Thes videos are excerpts from the ballroom video and some swimming footage.

The projection will (hopefully) play from dusk until dawn daily between 4th dec -27th feb.

42 New Briggate
Leeds, LS1 6NU.

www.artinunusualspaces.co.uk/home/

“Knowing it’s not a formula, I know that I have to keep shaking these up, so I do something fast, then do something that takes years, trying different things. Do the stuff where I work alone, do the stuff where I work collaboratively. Sometimes it will fall flat, but hopefully magic will strike at some point.”

Alec Soth – Interviewed by Big Red & Shiny

While I usually find photographers musings on why they do what they do, to be more than a little whimsical, I really did agree with Soth here.
There isn’t a set formula to photography (books and project making) or if there is people keep it to themselves. So to a certain extent a perfect method or system can’t exist. And despite this, I still search for one. And in a way photography almost becomes a never ending quest for the the holy grail. My only hope is that I don’t ever find it, because at that point I may possibly lose interest in photography.

We buy into it on some level tho. Even if we are only using it as more of a networking attempt and news distribution platform than a check up on the celebs and gossip sheet.

Anyway, our account is @statementimages. Be sure to follow us.

We’ll be updating it with site activity, project news and loads of stuff from the larger community base we’re part of.

Excluding newspapers from the equation, paid for news content happens every day, and people don’t seem to mind the cost!
It comes in the form of television fees such as TV Licenses, satellite and cable subscriptions etc; all of which covers the costs of all those wonderful instant and up to the minute news services we can watch from the comfort of our arm chairs.

In spite of this trent, the UK general population are not willing to pay for online news content according to a recent study.

So what is it about the internet and newspapers that makes people say no?

The report by Lightspeed Research, which was commissioned for digital research outfit: The Global Web Index; found that less than 10% of the UK population are currently willing to pay for online news content. Which must surely send alarm bells ringing in ever newspaper office in the land as UK newspapers look towards the web 2.0 boom as a revenue platform. This surely begs the question: can there be any future for UK’s newspapers in the internet marketplace?

And why don’t people want to pay for content? Have the many years of free services from newspaper websites spoiled us? Do people believe a free alternative will still be available? Is written news no longer a valued?  Or is it that people now see news as a free commodity attached onto their entertainment and broadband subscription packages?

Personally… I’d speculate that it would be the latter.

Today people get news content delivered to them by many different platforms… all of which seem carry the same basic content (plus the odd exclusives and feature content). So if one of them decides to kidnap their content and demand ransom for it’s return, it really doesn’t suprise me that people would rather move to an alternative, even if it is at the cost of quality, just so they can keep it free!

The concept of the “free news” has been around for a while. I’m not talking about salon chats and gossip, but the delivery of real news on different platforms. And newspapers have failed to deal with all of them. Some companies evolved or branched out into these new an alien areas, but it’s never been that successful. From radio, TV, teletext (don’t laugh at the inclusion of teletext, when the digital switch over comes many people are going to mourn the death of ceefax) and now the internet, no one seems to have gotten the sales part of it right.

Newspapers do have some things going for them. Their names. And add to that the fact that for many people genuinely believe that better value comes if you pay a higher price! Look at fashion, food, technology and the car industry. The name sells it, and the prices make people want to aspire to own it. But in this chosen marketplace the concept of value is completely different.
The internet is an open marketplace, where content can be purchased, and free alternatives are available. Free alternatives from individuals or large companies, which have the potential to deliver content vastly superior to that of the paid for content. And it’s a marketplace where people ilegally distrube copyrighted work on a peer to peer basis. People are happy to search harder and longer as they can do it at home where they aren’t getting soaked in the rain and the coffee is cheaper.

The paradigm of free content over quality is an interesting one, and one which should be tackled head on by all newspapers. Even if it is looked at, newspapers are still trending towards the use of paid for wire services over staffers and freelancers, as it offers better value for money for their stock holders and businessmen. This content (which is seen by many as free as it incurs no additional costs) is even used instead of work by freelancers or staffers even if theirs is beter. To paraphrase a well respected picture editor of a UK national newspaper “even if the freelancers work is 10-15% better than the wire service, we’re still going to use the wire service as it doesn’t effect our budgets. The freelancers work really does have to offer something unique or be of a much better caliber”.

Despite all of this I do think paid for content for newspapers away from the print run could all be possible. And the quality and value aspects of it are integral to the solution.

But if newspapers can’t see it in their budgets to pay for better content, then why should the average reader pay for content that isn’t a million miles better than that of the free alternatives?

There could still be hope for newspapers who wish to keep the existing platform. The study found that the younger generations were more likely to be willing to pay for online news content, so if any newspapers can last with their print models for another 20 years or so, they could start making those big online profits without having to rework what they are producing.

Screen capture: content copyright Sheffield Papers

The public perception of the media and “press” in particular has been diminishing or on a low level for some years now, but could this be a new low?

The comments section on my local newspaper’s website (The Sheffield Star) always seem to insight heated discussions (particularly across the more “patriotic” or “political” subject matter) from it’s readers.

A recent story stemming from a surfaced image which depicted a student urinating on a local war memorial, produced some predictable reactions:

“Good God”, “What a disgrace!”, “how disrespectfull can u get??”,  “Kick him out of Uni, he is a disgrace.

But the following struck a cord:

“Whichever low-life took the photograph, kick them out too as no doubt they thought it highly amusing and had a ‘good laugh’ about it, probably ‘goading’ him on.”

woodseats neil

I know that the public find it hard to put their trust into images and reports (thanks to “entertainment” styled news and the like). But to automatically presume that someone who took a photograph was on the side of the wrong doer, or has created some wrong doing themselves, is something I can’t quite fathom.

Of course the possibility existed in my mind that it was a friend of the party who took the picture, but I didn’t rule out the possibility of a bystanders wanting to document the wrong doing…. the citizen journalists of our world.

But this doesn’t seem to be how the minds of the general public view things. So how are news photographers viewed?

You can read the article mentioned and the reader reactions over on the star’s website.

We’re utilizing the existing “News” “Blog” category to distribute this and will use it for website announcements, updates about the photographers and their work, as well as general news which may be of interest to readers of the site.

This content will be completely separated from existing content, and won’t show up in the A-Z and won’t show up in the front page block. However it will show up in the searches and RSS feed.