The Booth Monster Rears its Ugly Head Again
This was sent to me today from an artist who participated in the jury review this morning at the St Louis Art Fair. I did a twenty minute interview with the artist which will go up on my web site when I have time to transcribe it.
"I just viewed my first webinar with the St Louis Art Fair. They had a streaming video with jurors reviewing slides submitted by 190 artists. Most of us need better booth shots. It was interesting to see the competition. A few, and only a few, get the whole package of images and booth shots right. Some of us need work still. I did pick up that the jurors do not like grid walls in the booth, they would rather see them covered. They like an open airy space with color to bring the "eye" into the space. They do not like seeing a booth full of inventory, mirrors, chairs, or floor mats that might distract from the work. It's hard to balance that with the reality of being in the booth at a show."
It was the same at Cherry Creek jury review in November:
http://bermangraphics.com/artshows/cherry-creek-jury-workshop.htm
I'll speculate that these two directors might have been at the NAIA conference last May where the directors all agreed that the booth picture can be taken at a show. Maybe it's more about the instructions that they give or not give the jurors prior to jurying.
Larry Berman
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
You need to be a member of Art Fair Insiders to add comments!
Replies
I don't have time to stage and reshoot my booth right now, so I just did some photo clean up on my old one. I know I need to get rid of the chair and shelves on the left and at least half of the clutter. This will have to suffice until I can do it over. *sigh*
www.evenbetterimages.com
Nice clean up!
I attended the workshop in person, although I was only there for the first two hours while they did ceramics then I had to leave. I think it was a great opportunity to see what judges are looking for in a submission. I am glad that They put it on and I was able to go.
I have been thinking a lot about what was said, and now about peoples responses on here. Here are my thoughts.
-You should not attack or diminish the jurors that were there for what they said. Even if you don't agree with or like it, they were simply reflecting the reality of the situation for shows at that level. Yes, at times they did not agree with each other, but I don't think anything they said you would not here from someone else, and the Jury pool is far from homogeneous.
-On not having the jury look at booth shots, but instead just the promoter. I think this can create just as many problems. Would the promoter simply have veto power if a booth was not up to par, or would they score it as well? This would partially negate blind jurying as the promoter is going to recognize many peoples booths. A booth shot can and should be used in the decision to accept someone. If you have a really amateur looking booth a high end show is not going to want you.
You can make the argument that the booth should be judged differently by the jury. Perhaps not included in the score of the artwork but rather pass/fail, or maybe used to pic when scores on artwork are close. Yes the artwork is the most important thing, but presentation is important too.
-I think the jurors at the event were just trying to be as honest and helpful as possible. I am sure that if you clean up your booth shot and make it more visually appealing that it will have a better impact on judges, you cannot argue with that.
-I also think however that perhaps there should be a culture change in the area of jurying booth shots. It seemed as though the jurying for booth shots had become so insular that the image was more important than the booth itself. I understood the points that the jurors were making when they said to leave out things like plants, tables and signage. and to think about your booth shot compositionally. Yes those things make your image look better. But is that the point of the whole process? Isn't the point to see what your booth "actually" looks like at a show. And what is more important, how a booth looks in a slide, or how it looks to a person inside it. A customer at a fair for the most part is not going to see a wide angle unobscured view of your booth. They are not going to come into your booth because you work is arranged in a way that keeps you eye moving around the booth, they are going to come in if they like your work.
So maybe the jury should focus more on if the booth is well put together, professional looking, and meets the standards of the show they are jurying for,and approaching it more as pass/fail. Instead of comparing and rating it against other booth images (as what inherently happens when you score a booth shot).
Maybe there should be a new standard that your booth shot should look exactly like it is when it is set up, tables and all, so that there is an honest representation of what it will look like for the show. Maybe the requirement should be you need to include a booth shot from an actual show to prove that you are representing yourself honestly. I know the head of the STL Art fair said they have had issues with booth images not looking like what actually happens on show day.
I REALLY need a better booth photo. I only attend shows in Iowa, Southern Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Western Illinois areas. Can anyone give me a contact that might be able to help me out with this in my area?
Hi Lori,
Shoot your own booth picture using the instructions on my web site:
http://bermangraphics.com/artshows/photograph-booth.htm
Larry Berman
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
The thing that I find confusing in all of this is that it appears that the booth shot we submit should represent something that is a little (or a lot) different from what we will set up at the show. Larry gave me a lot of help a few months ago with offline suggestions that a friend helped me implement. So now, my booth shot looks more sterile than my real booth - and frankly my show booth will never quite look like that. Still didn't get into Krasl, and I have completely new, different shelves on order so it isn't even accurate that way, but at least it shows that I strive for a booth that is professional and inviting. Before and after shots are show below.(and darnit, I just realized I didn't crop out the basket in lower left that I won't be using this year for lawn pieces!).
The real changes that will be made before our first show this year:
1) natural wood color shelves of two heights (higher and lower than these shelves),
2) curtains will be shortened appropriately and hung differently so that they have cleaner lines top and bottom.
3) some sort of mesh wall in one ore two places to allow hanging of wall pieces that I have been working on this spring (thus some of the lower shelves)
4) NO TABLE in back. No more white table cloth, everything on a shelf or the wall.
Why wouldn't the jury rather see a real booth, with maybe a place for me to list my planned upgrades? I have been buying the new pieces - but I live in Chicago and there is just no where to set up my "new booth" until the weather gets better - just after the last application is due.
One other interesting comment is that the decisions to make most of those upgrades came from looking closely at this booth shot - not at the sanitized one that I sent in, but at the real one that was the best of the ones we took during shows.
DSCN0888.JPG
Tent_a.jpg
Your second picture is certainly "improved". After that open jury thing, I can tell you they would have said to 1) crop out the ceiling 2) get rid of the white covered table completely 3) replace metal shelves with podiums of different heights 4) remove at least half of the art 5) get rid of the yellow basket 6) change floor covering to something solid or less distracting 7) line back wall with podiums of different heights
That's not me talking. That's what I took away from the judges.
Robin Ragsdale
www.evenbetterimages.com
Thanks Robin, that's about what I get too. But that's my point. This is pretty close to what my booth looked like in real life. I can mock up something that meets their criteria, but it's not what I will present at the show. So - why are we being judged on our ability to create a one time image that fits their guidelines - if it's ok to have something else in real life? Especially "remove half the art", I may have a little too much clutter, but I would never at a show remove more than about 20% of what is shown here. I love the rug, people actually come in to tell me how "welcoming and comfortable" my booth looks and many point out the rug. Many of them stay and buy. So again, I could remove it from the picture but then the show is getting a sort of bait and switch due to their own rules!
On a more personal note, I am dropping the baskets and table for next year, but that is not for my booth shot, it is because I am evolving my booth. I am replacing the metal shelves because I wanted ones that looked more like furniture. I am losing the baskets because they didn't work as I had hoped. Here is the mock up of what I have planned (google sketchup rocks!). Shelves are "natural" wood. Chairs behind the displays so non display stuff is hidden, wall pieces hanging on right and left walls, banner in back. Thoughts are welcome but I am not trying to hijack the thread. I'm more curious if in a realistic world it wouldn't make more sense to use this as a jury image.
folding2v2.png
I'll be giving a report on the workshop later on today. It was a valuable experience amd more than worthwhile to attend. The booth issue was covered and consistency of submitted work was another. I'll be doing this as a blog as soon as I return home. We finished up after 8:30PM after almost 12 hours, so my wife and I decided to stay overnight rather than drive home very late.
I was at the workshop and thought it hugely beneficial for all of us artists. It was like getting a peak behind the curtain. Thank you!
Robin
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next