I noticed when I applied to the St Louis Art fair that they specifically banned Photoshopped booth images. I do not know if this is a new policy, or if other shows have this same policy or not. I would assume from the prevalence of Photoshopped booth images I see from people on this site that it is not.
I also noticed that they would accept a grouping of you work in an image if you did not have a booth shot, which is not common for a big show. I wonder if any of this is in response to the ever increasing level of expectations and perfection around booth shots.
In my opinion I think not allowing Photoshopping is a good policy. First of all it should start to curb the expectation of perfection from a booth shot, as altered images will always look cleaner and nicer that un-altered ones. And isn't that one of the big complaints from artists, the crazy expectations of both shots? It's like women on magazine covers, once you go down the road of airbrushing out flaws, real women start to look bad.
And secondly I think it is a good idea because it really has nothing to do with making or displaying art, and therefore has no importance in the art fair process itself. My carrer as a potter should have no bearing on how good I am at Photoshop, or how much I am willing to pay someone else for it. It gives a false representation of what your booth actually looks like, so how can that be of any use?
I am glad St. Louis has this policy, because when it is allowed, then it becomes the norm, and eventually you are at a disadvantage if you don't do it.
(Just to be clear I am not arguing for a ban on altered art images, I understand the need to get rid of glare, or bring out dark areas, etc, etc., and that images are often used for advertisement.)
Replies
Larry, I will report on the viewing in the thread I started about it.
When I was applying to my first shows last year before I had a tent I made a mock up in Google sketch up, which apparently was not acceptable as I didn't get into that show. Thankfully there were a couple that didn't require booth shots that I got into.
Ok, so I talked to the Director tonight. She said what they mean is no booth images that are constructed digital images, like what Larry was talking about. I told her there was some confusion on the issue with the way it was worded.
Good to know, Greg. Perhaps they'll reword it next year. How about a report on the viewing?
As a final note, my first year, I got into several shows with a construct. They weren't top notch shows, but they let me illustrate (and plan) what I was going to display. The perspective was faked in Illustrator and the images were all imported. It didn't look real, but it didn't look bad. It worked to get me into a few shows, where I shot a real booth shot. And it wasn't done in Photoshop.
Nowadays, you could use Google SketchUp to do the same thing, and it would look way better.
Sounds like a case of one show copying the wording from another show's information. It needs to be clarified.
When we were jurying with slides back in the dark ages, When I ordered my first Craft Hut, I cut out a picture of a Craft Hut from an ad in Sunshine Artist Magazine and including it in a the slide sheet with my art slides. Shows were a lot more flexible or forgiving back then.
Larry Berman
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
"they specifically banned Photoshopped booth images" -- I see this sentence and I have no idea what it even means. Thoroughly puzzled. Did they have a definition of this? and then could they tell the judges how to detect it?
Connie, I spent so much time on my reply that you snuck in ahead of me. That's the problem with popular semantics. No one knows what it means. And there you have it. A meaningless, unenforceable rule. Just what we need more of.
Kudos on your reply, Jim. Didn't mean to step on your toes.
I still want to know how a jury will know an image was "photoshopped." Any ideas?
Mine took longer to write . LOL.
To answer your question, most juries can spot an obvious fake. It's the little stuff that helps the booth shot though, and helps the image.
If it's done well, there's no way that a juror can tell. If it's done poorly, it's obvious.
Giveaways:
And so on...
Things that you absolutely cannot tell have been changed, without seeing the original, if done right:
None of the items in the second list have anything to do with the content of the image, except to clean it up and simplify it. Things in the first list are more likely to catch the eye because they look wrong, and will disqualify a booth shot. It takes artistry to be a retoucher, just like it takes artistry to do pursue any other creative muse.
I'll use my model analogy again. If a beautiful woman goes out in public, and no one notices her makeup, but only how good she looks, her stylist has done a good job. Attention is focussed on the right areas, whatever that might be. If, on the other hand, her lipstick is smeared, her mascara has run, and she looks like she's been beat up, then it's a bad makeup job.
As long as the booth shot does not draw too much attention to itself, and lets the jury direct its attention to slides of the work, artists should be allowed to do whatever is necessary. The idea is that it should look like the actual booth in real life, not too cartoon-y, not too overdressed, not too overworked.
IMHO anything that helps the artist simplify the presentation to the jury and tell her story should be allowed, as long as it reasonably resembles reality in the actual booth.
All you buy/sell vendors that are sending in fake booth shots -- don't blame me if you get rejected!!!
I'm wondering... what, exactly, is the point of "fixing up your booth" for a booth shot - making it more presentable than it will be in reality at the show? If we all agree that we're making our booth look better than it might be at the show (less pots, better lighting for the photo or painting etc.) does that NOT defeat the purpose and intent of the booth shot? I mean ... if the lighting is a particular way inside your tent, then shouldn't it be represented as such... and would you REALLY want your pots to be thinned out for the show (if you haven't tried hauling replacement HEAVY pottery through a crowd, I guess you wouldn't know that answer)?
I really think that the ORIGINAL need for a booth shot was to portray a neat, SAFE and exceptable addition to the show... not to be a contestant in a beauty pageant! Maybe we should go back to the basics and common sense and save showing off your wonderful photography skills for those who ARE photographers... and leave those of us that fumble along with our very plain pictures of what the booth WILL look like at the show to focus on OUR art - whatever that may be... ?
This is coming from one that never even mastered a little "Brownie" camera. But that doesn't mean that my pottery doesn't rock!
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next