I had the pleasure of attending the open jury for the 2010 Artigras Show. Boy, were my eyes opened. I had heard about it but seeing it helped me greatly to understand the process and I saw some unbelieveably beautiful pieces of art. I create jewelry but nothing like what I saw. I knew, in the first few slides, I would not be participating the the upcoming show but I also learned how I could level the playing field and possibly participate in 2011. There were 159 applicants, the largest catagory in the show. They did not say how many jewelers would be accepted but Artigras tends to be balenced, so only the cream of the crop was going to be invited to attend. There were five jury members. The room had 4 very large screens opposite the jury. The photos of entries were flipped ramdomly as the judges settled in after a break. Nothing was said as they sat at their computers. Then the process began. Each set of photos was put up on the screen. All four submitted images submitted by the artist were shown at once with the booth shot the final image on the right. They were show in the order they were received. Each artists work was projected and removed. The next projected and removed. This first viewing was not more than probably five seconds long. All 159 entries were shown. The second showing was in the same order as the first but slightly slower as the Artigras committee members read the artists discription. Misprounciations were corrected but no other communication was given. The process took one hour and fifteen minutes to jury 159 artists. The photos of the submitted work had to jump off the screen and grab the jury. Believe me, many of them did. They had eye popping color, great directionality, and gripping beauty. I felt like I was watching a group of museum curators trying to choose what pieces they wanted to display in their museum. I walked away drained, as I'm sure the jury was, because of the intense situation. The first pieces shown were new and fresh but by the end of the session things began to blurr. I do believe that those items that were seen first made a better impression. I still remember some of them. The photography also was a key. The subtle shading, perfect color and the clarity of the photos made an impression. This really showed me how key the good photographer is. The right photographer and the unique piece of jewelry working together create the knock out jury photo. And that is what is needed. It must be clean, crisp, perfectly focused and color balenced. Close enough to see every detail in less than ten seconds with no flaws allowed. It was an amazing process and my hat is off to Artigras and the Fort Myers show as both had open juries. Fort Myers went one step further and broadcast the process on television so those who could not be in attendence could still watch. I hope this is a trend in our industry because there was as much transparency as possible and the jury process had the veil of secrecy removed. The artists now can understand the process and what is required to make the top shows.
You need to be a member of Art Fair Insiders to add comments!
Hi Connie,
That's not an accurate assumption. The only thing we can derive from what Sherry wrote was that the order of the preview slide show matched the order of the image projection for the jurying. Without knowing how the show ordered the images in the medium categories, we can't say that early applicant's images were seen first, though that's what artists assume is happening. ZAPP gives the shows multiple ways to order the images. Alphabetical is the order that the Three Rivers Arts Festival uses, and they state it on their "jury details" page. Additional options are based on the time and date the application is started, the time and date the application is submitted (our preference) and by artist identification number which was assigned when they initially created their ZAPP profile.
Checking ArtiGras' jury details, they have not filled out that page at all but give a description of the process on the page you apply from, with no mention of the order the images will be projected in.
One thing that did bother me was the mention of the random projection of the images when the jurying wasn't happening. I don't think that is fair if some artist's images get noticed by the jurors more often than other artist's images. I'm going to recommend to ZAPP that they stop trying to entertain jurors with artist's images who have applied.
Sherry wrote a wonderful review. I spoke with her for over an hour last night about it and have written it up as an article for my web site.
quote - The majority of artists do not apply to art fairs until the last minute, putting it off as long as possible. But what would happen if an artist would submit an application shortly after the applications opened? Their images would be at the beginning of the slide show! Another great idea for improving chances for being accepted. - end quote
What a great review. Thanks for this, Sherry. You mentioned something important. The images were shown in the order in which they were received. As a result of this the later images had to be even stronger in order to be something more than a blur.
The majority of artists do not apply to art fairs until the last minute, putting it off as long as possible. But what would happen if an artist would submit an application shortly after the applications opened? Their images would be at the beginning of the slide show! Another great idea for improving chances for being accepted.
Replies
That's not an accurate assumption. The only thing we can derive from what Sherry wrote was that the order of the preview slide show matched the order of the image projection for the jurying. Without knowing how the show ordered the images in the medium categories, we can't say that early applicant's images were seen first, though that's what artists assume is happening. ZAPP gives the shows multiple ways to order the images. Alphabetical is the order that the Three Rivers Arts Festival uses, and they state it on their "jury details" page. Additional options are based on the time and date the application is started, the time and date the application is submitted (our preference) and by artist identification number which was assigned when they initially created their ZAPP profile.
Checking ArtiGras' jury details, they have not filled out that page at all but give a description of the process on the page you apply from, with no mention of the order the images will be projected in.
One thing that did bother me was the mention of the random projection of the images when the jurying wasn't happening. I don't think that is fair if some artist's images get noticed by the jurors more often than other artist's images. I'm going to recommend to ZAPP that they stop trying to entertain jurors with artist's images who have applied.
Sherry wrote a wonderful review. I spoke with her for over an hour last night about it and have written it up as an article for my web site.
Larry Berman
Digital Jury Services
http://BermanGraphics.com
Test Your Jury Images and Presentation
http://JuryImages.com
412-401-8100
quote - The majority of artists do not apply to art fairs until the last minute, putting it off as long as possible. But what would happen if an artist would submit an application shortly after the applications opened? Their images would be at the beginning of the slide show! Another great idea for improving chances for being accepted. - end quote
The majority of artists do not apply to art fairs until the last minute, putting it off as long as possible. But what would happen if an artist would submit an application shortly after the applications opened? Their images would be at the beginning of the slide show! Another great idea for improving chances for being accepted.