Blog

     Somewhere along the line (right here on AFI!) I learned that jury images need to show a constistency. The pieces need to look like they are all from the same DNA, so to speak. Ever since hearing that, I have had a concern that my jury images are too dissimilar, and that someday I should make them more cohesive. 

So this month, “someday” arrived. I designed and built new statement pieces that are similar to another jury image. In the process of designing, I gave thought to my design and thought processes. Then I started to wonder if anyone else has a similar process. Here’s mine: 

http://sandyartparts.blogspot.com/2016/09/harmonious-blends-making-show-piece.html

It would be very interesting to hear from the rest of you, as to your creative process, as well as thought process when it comes to making a show piece. Please share!

Copied from my blog:

I had my world shaken by one person's images while jurying an art fair. Today was the jury for the art fair that Michael Kifer and I run in Kalamazoo Michigan. Because this is a different type of art fair (the Garage Sale Art Fair), Michael and I jury the show ourselves. It's something I'm very comfortable doing and really enjoy. This time it was even better.

Without permission I can't use the person's name but I will tell you that I wish the images of my own work evoked the strength of the feelings that these did for me. Just when you've seen your fill of overworked, over Photoshopped images, one person's work comes up on the screen and reaches up to grab you by the heart. I caught my breath and just drank it in. 

There's a lesson to be learned here for all of us. Make your images speak. Let them tell a story. Don't worry about making those big expensive pieces of your work because you think that's what a jury wants to see. Let the jury feel your work and they will get it. And you'll probably get into more of the shows that you want to do. I know I'm rethinking my own images...

We juried the Royal Oak Clay, Glass and Metal Show Monday.  A few observations. 

First it amazes me every year how creative people are able to get within these few mediums.  One hundred and twenty booths and each stands out as creative and unique.

Secondly, while I did not feel that the booth shots were given more weight than the work images, the majority of rejected work had poor booth shots and the majority of accepted work had professional images for their booth.

I say majority because it is not universally true.  We accepted some work from artists with poor shots, even from an artist that had no booth shot.  For this event at least you can't entirely blame the "fourth image".

I try to be communicative with the applicants so I did send some specific notes to artists regarding their displays.  Of course those reflect only my opinion, but if you would be interested in seeing them, you could check out the posting on my website- Integrityshows.com/blog.

If you have not looked at R. C. Fulwiler's blog yet- Can the System be Improved?  I would suggest doing so.

This is copied from my blog

You’ve applied to hundreds of shows over the years. You know what to do and not do with your images. ZAPP and JAS have made it really easy to quickly apply and not really think about it. BUT, when was the last time you went into ZAPP and checked your profile? Checked that all your information is correct? Checked your capitalization, spelling and punctuation? Have you checked your artist statement to make sure it’s current?

 The same things are important on JAS but on there your artist statement is even more important. When you’re being juried on JAS, your artist statement is right in the center of the page, easy for the juror to read. And you wouldn’t believe how many people make mistakes in there. The wrong words, extra punctuation, missing letters and the big one is your name! Sometimes just the first name, sometimes the full name, “James does this”, “Mary Smith likes that”. I was shocked during my latest jurying how many statements had names. Have you checked yours lately?

 Your artist statement should be current and if you want a juror to read it, it should be short. I don’t need to know where you went to school, what your life’s path has been or how many years you’ve been doing this. I need to know anything critical to what you’re showing me in your images. This is not your resume, please don’t list all the shows you’ve done. Short, readable and to the point.

 And then there’s the old issue of a name in the booth image. There are still many, many booth shots that have either the artists name showing or the business name. Please, please remove it. It will not help you and it may hurt you. Take down the booth signs that the show gives you even if you can’t read your own name on it. Anything that distracts from what you want the juror to be looking at which is your booth and the work in it. Leave the chair, that doesn’t bother me at all but get out all the signs.

 And I’ve learned a couple of new things in this last round of jurying that I’ve done. Photographers as a group have the most odd looking booth images of anyone. Many of them look like they’re 20’ x 20’ booths and amazingly they show under 10 pieces with no flip bins! Wow! Please don’t take offense if you’re a photographer because it’s probably not you I’m talking about but you probably know someone who fits this. Just something to think about.

 The other thing I’ve learned is that sterling silver must no longer be a precious metal. No one told me! Jewelers - if there are two categories, precious and non-precious and you work in sterling silver, fine silver pmc or gold, you belong in the precious category. And trust me, you don’t want to be in the non-precious category if you don’t belong there. There is some absolutely wonderful jewelry being made these days without the use of precious metals and you don’t want to be competing with them if you don’t have to. Of course if you’re applying in the non-precious category then I’m not competing with you for a space so maybe I shouldn’t be telling you this…

"Setting up an art fair scheduled should be referred to as  "The Art of the Educated Guess".  You have to decide which shows to apply to.  You have to decide which images to send.  Once you have your acceptances you have to decide which shows to actually participate in.  Each of these decisions is based on so many factors that you can never have enough information about that they are really guesses, hopefully the educated type."

See my newest blog post for more:

This is Kathy Coons writing, not Don. I am standing on my soapbox!

We were at the Smoky Hill River Festival in Salina, KS last weekend. As bored artists are wont to do, conversations ensued. The favorite topic is of course, "Why can't I get into shows anymore?" Well, the conjecture seemed to revolve around, "It's Zapplications fault!" There is a rumor (I call it a conspiracy theory) that Zapp offers shows the opportunity to have Zapp jury the show for them. They pay extra for this service and that the bigger shows do this, i.e. Cherry Creek, St. Louis, etc...This presents a very real chance for unfair bias, or vendetta's against certain artists or styles. This is why established artists are not getting accepted into shows that they routinely or at least occasionally used to be invited to.

Does anyone have any solid evidence for this? And why would a show do this? More importantly, Why would Zapp risk their reputation by doing this? I guess it could cut down on the promoters expenses by not finding, bringing in jurors, housing and feeding them. But it seems like the shows would want to change up jurors every year, and have a choice in who picked their shows.

I can imagine that this "jury" would get really tired of seeing the same images, over and over. They would be inclined to say, "Seen it, been there, done that, rejected."

So, if this is the case, do we need to get a new body of work images as well as a new booth slide every year! It is quite a challenge to come up with a new set of jury quality work, have the pieces professionally photographed and go to the expense of framing them. And then finding a place and appropriate light to set up your entire display, set it up, photograph it, tear it all down, pack it up again. Hey folks, many of us are retirement age. This is a lot to ask of a greying population of artists!

Why do the applications rarely tell artists who the jurors are? I think that is a fair question. Why would a traditional painter apply to a show with only contemporary museum quality jurors? I would think shows would want one experienced art fair artist on their jury. Don't they realize that the reason shows are in business is to provide the public and the artists a chance to meet and buy art goods for their home? Most people want a good mix of art to choose from. Not all Realism or Nonobjective art. 

So, has anyone else heard of this?? Anyone have any proof?? If it's not true, then we should quit speculating. If it is true we should be uproarious with our hearty disapproval.

My photoshop guilt is gone-- or at least subsided-- thanks to finding a display of late 19th Century photographers called "pictoralists."

the Phillips Collection museum in Washingtron DC recently had an exhibit on their work. As more amateurs were using cameras, these high-level photographers wanted to move away from plebian reality into what they saw as something more artistic. They used a variety of techniques to create "photographs that were more like paintings and drawings than the work of commercial portraitists or hobbyists."

They even added and subtracted segments to their "originals."  Gasp. Way beyond simply using different papers and chemicals. This was roughly 1850- 1940.  These pictoralists were supported and joined by luminaires such as Steinglitz, but eventually were overtaken by "Modernists" who primary goals were acuity and accuracy. (Steinglitz later switched sides.) I guess this is what produced the common belief that a photograph represents reality.

I still use photoshop quite sparingly, as I want to keep faith with the "original"  but feel better about the whole thang now. And it's handy for shrugging off folks who say in an accusing manner "That was photoshopped!"

Thanks old timers. 

(to whose for whom this is all old hat, I apologize for my late arrival.)