Does that apply to a set? I have a brooch and earring set that are pictured together, and offered for sale together. I did not have my photographer shoot them separately. I think they come off better as a set, as they impact each other visually. If the earrings and brooch were separated they would not have the same impact. For this purpose, I treat them as one piece. I consider this my best and strongest image.
I have always considered that that requirement applies more to the inclusion of several unrelated pieces in an image. In the “old days” of slide and photo jurying (I’m talking about 20 years ago) that was fairly common. But now in competitive shows with jurying being done quickly that would be very distracting.
But perhaps I am eliminating myself from the competition by using this image of a set, when the prospectus states one piece per image? Thanks!
Replies
I just did a set of seven bracelets for a jeweler because it was the same bracelet in seven different colors.
Larry Berman
I am asking about just that situation: where a show specifies one piece per image.
I have been including it anyway, because not only is my strongest image, it goes well with the other pieces I normally send. The others are more labor intensive and the inclusion of the lower-priced set shows what I can do with a strong design, but less labor and materials. It’s been pictured often on postcards and programs, because (I assume) shows liked it. But I don’t recall if any of those were shows that requested one piece per image.
Without asking each individual show whether they would “read” this set like one piece, I am wondering if other jewelers do the same with acceptable results for shows that specify one piece per image. Or, do potters show a sugar and creamer SET, or feel they have to split them up? Ditto, fiber artists a hat and scarf set?
It's the only image I have that shows a set, so I don’t feel I have overload going on in general.