I am really perplexed about this especially regarding some of the top shows. We're experienced artists at shows. Often a promoter's instruction sheet, instructs artists to submit the photos representing the full range of their work which means if you are a 3D artist with functional ceramics, you are to show not only your more intricate items but also your "more ordinary," for lack of a better word items: the ones that are less complex to produce and less impressive and lower priced. When 3 or 4 pictures are required, (not counting a booth shot, we always submit the more complex pieces requiring and showing more skill and more imagination. We also have those pieces and others like it in our booth. One year after getting into a top rated show, we were approached by a jury person who walked around and we were told that our photos didn't include the full range. That was true as we make about 20 different items and certainly didn't think it would be impressive to do a group shot of the lower range items. The following year, we submitted one out of 4 photos that did show a more ordinary piece. We were not accepted that year and speaking to other artists, we were later told not to listen to those instructions in the paper work. Always send the best of your work, other artists advised us since the competition does the same. I now think the jury who looks at maybe several thousand photos is not going to be impressed with the artist who includes the mundane photo. I'd like to hear from artists as well as jury people. What is your experience with photos and also a jury person's response at shows when you see a booth that doesn't include the full range. I'm not speaking here about artists who apply in one category, but then slip into their booths a high percent of something else that would actually fit into a different category. I'm talking about one body of work that holds together. Thanks for your response based on your experiences.
You need to be a member of Art Fair Insiders to add comments!
Comments
Thank you all for your comments and ideas. I agree completely with Barry Bernstein's idea of the "continuity of quality and style" which is what the judges should be looking at and do see in our work and booth. Also the booth shot as you mention should show the range of work. Thanks to all who commented.
Always post your best work. What the judges should be looking at, if they are competent, is a continuity of quality and style. For the most part, when someone sees a piece of mine they know immediately who the maker is. Your booth shot should have the wide range of work that you will have with you. That's my opinion.
and don't forget that it also matters what category you are in. and what kind of skills you are showing in your work. Sometimes, if you're lucky and don't have a lot of competition it doesn't matter but if you're a jeweler or some category that has a lot of ocmpetition it matters how you represent yourself. i always find that if you call to ask not only do you get a better picture of who they are but you also may become a little bit more of a known quantity....
Very few shows project the entries these days, David H. 99 percent of shows jury from computer monitors.
I was advised by a well-known expert to show only nautical, or only landscape in my booth, not a mix. I wonder if that kind of "range" also affects jury decisions?
As a painter, I realize my smaller paintings don't look as good as the bigger ones when projected on a big screen, so I usually submit larger ones.
I think that the Iowa show, and any others that think price range is important, should go ahead and state the average selling price, over the past three years, at their show, for a painting, a ceramic piece or a jewelry piece. This openness would help each artist evaluate the risk before spending the app fee.
Full range of what? Price, quality, sizes, time spent, best sellers, materials, etc. I no longer loose sleep or time in selecting photos. I pick them at random in 1 minute or less and don't even care much about the photo quality. Take it or leave it. Everything depends on the makeup of who is looking at them. You cannot ever get a clue to that. I have gotten into shows over the years with some pretty poor submittals.
I can't remember the shows I've been in that have asked for the full range. I don't usually have a problem with that, but it does bother me a bit and makes me rethink an application when this is asked of us. Quite normally one of our smaller works at the lower end ($1,250) will work nicely with the other application images. But certainly the higher end ($3,200) work shows the most ambitious art if not the most mature and artful art. It's easier to push the art boundaries with major rather than minor art.
It seems that these shows are tipping their scales more toward merchandising than toward art. I suppose they could argue that it's a show where we sell our work and thus it's a merchandising concern. But then there are artists who will jury with the best art, but stock their booths with less of that and more of the lesser expensive lesser art. I've seen this often and have even had discussions about it with the artists who do it. I don't feel bad that they do this. It's their game and I've got mine.
Marion Arts Festival in Iowa carries this a step further by asking artists to state their most common selling price, and then offers the following explanation about it to artists in the application:
It hurts everyone when an artist's work is priced beyond that our audience typically supports - we want you to have a great day, not a lonely one. By way of example, paintings priced over $1,500 are a harder sell, as is jewelry over $250. If you'd like more information or guidance before applying, please do contact the show director. Being a working artist is hard! Sincerely: we ask for this level of specificity because we're trying to look out for you.
I don't agree that they should venture here, to state what they think someone will pay for art and thus tell artists whether or not we're likely to do well or poorly. Better art will enrich their lives, and if it's more expensive, that's the price to pay if they want to continue living with it. I don't view their explanation as sincere concern for just me. I don't know how they came up with this information, but it is a committee decision. That means it has to do with a group of show staff's and volunteers's judgement who all agree this strategy is good to implement.
It's the atypical art that really makes a difference, hands down. And it should be atypically priced because it's worth more.
I think shows should leave showing a range of work out of the application process.
I think that everybody sends in some of their best work for jury photos. After all, you are also expected to show a "cohesive body of work". If you send in a picture of one or more of your lesser priced items, I'm sure it hurts you with the jury, and I'm sure that most of your competition is not doing it.
Whoever makes up those rules isn't really being very realistic. I would like to apply for that show in Cedar Rapids, and they told me they actually want this (to see the range.) Not that I would get in anyway, but I haven't applied because I don't know what to do. I'm pretty sure it's a lose-lose situation.
I'm going to keep using pictures of my higher end pieces until I'm convinced I shouldn't.