My daughter's portfolio

<p>@Bill Clark:</p>

<p>That kind of photography is more about being a salesperson than a photographer. It's no less valid than any other kind of photography, sure, but it does require a certain type of personality combined with a natural business acumen. A degree in business probably wouldn't hurt, either.</p>

<p>The "path of classical photography," while interesting and at times even lucrative, isn't for everyone, and this is true for any sub-field within photography. I suspect that the only person who really knows if it's the <em>right</em> path, is the photographer herself.</p>

<p>Bill,<br>

I remember reading about Monte Zucker many years ago in photo magazines. Thanks for the links - good stuff my friend! Minus 7 in Minneapolis right now? Did I read that right?</p>

<p>Hugh,<br>

"It's also no secret that the most successful and happy people in the world have found a passion for one thing in particular, and have worked/studied hard to do that one thing better than anyone else."</p>

<p>This is the direction my daughter is lobbying for as she wants the dual to be in Art History. We had a discussion last night about how the publishing world is changing. Newspapers shrinking, the emergence of eBooks, etc. I see things heading in what I call a micro-publishing direction. Things seem to be going in the blog direction where I publish my own material and attract a following and somehow make it valuable enough to make a living at it. If any of that is true then Journalism and creative writing may be useful skills. </p>

<p>On the other hand, being really REALLY good at one thing might be the better road.</p>

<p>I forgot to thank you for your link from Dec 18th which I found very useful.<br>

Best,<br>

Peter</p>

<blockquote>

<p>This is simply not as big a deal as you make it out to be. Granted, if an admissions committee isn't able to decide between two possible candidates for that one remaining spot based on portfolio, statement of intent, and letters of recommendation, then it may boil down to background. But background isn't anywhere near as important as those first three things for MFA admissions.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>At the schools I applied to it evidently is as the majority (90%) of the people accepted into the MFA program do not have degrees in art. How does that work with your assumptions?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>And there, I suspect, is the problem, and they're seeing it in your portfolio. Photographers who have been through primarily professional- or commercial-based programs tend to produce the kind of simple, graphically oriented images that, while great at selling or adorning products or calendars, aren't really the kind of personal work that MFA admissions committees are looking for.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Since you have never seen the portfolio that I submitted you're way off in your assumption. </p>

<p>As an example, part of the portfolio I submitted included a photographic installation where the photographs were hung matted but unframed on top of 36-inch wide white roll paper that ran across the entire wall in back of the photos. There were crayons hung under each photograph, and the viewers were invited to color the photographs. The exhibit progressed until the viewers had incorporated the photographs into an entire tableau, colored off the mats, and turned each photo into a different type of train car, and the entire series into a train. This was fully documented with photographs of how the installation changed daily.</p>

<p>There were several other series as part of the portfolio that were also as far from your projection that the photos were commercially oriented. Since you were not at any of the interviews your comments are pure speculation and projection - I was there you weren't. I had direct interaction with the interview committee you didn't. Your comments are not even closely related to my experience.</p>

<p>Bill,<br>

I remember reading about Monte Zucker many years ago in photo magazines. Thanks for the links - good stuff my friend! Minus 7 in Minneapolis right now? Did I read that right?</p>

<p>Hugh,<br>

"It's also no secret that the most successful and happy people in the world have found a passion for one thing in particular, and have worked/studied hard to do that one thing better than anyone else."</p>

<p>This is the direction my daughter is lobbying for as she wants the dual to be in Art History. We had a discussion last night about how the publishing world is changing. Newspapers shrinking, the emergence of eBooks, etc. I see things heading in what I call a micro-publishing direction. Things seem to be going in the blog direction where I publish my own material and attract a following and somehow make it valuable enough to make a living at it. If any of that is true then Journalism and creative writing may be useful skills. </p>

<p>On the other hand, being really REALLY good at one thing might be the better road.</p>

<p>I forgot to thank you for your link from Dec 18th which I found very useful.<br>

Best,<br>

Peter</p>

<p>Heat wave Peter 5 above now!</p>

<p>Be Well.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=86165">Steve Swinehart</a> But it would good fit for a Bachelor of Arts program in the art departments at a number of other colleges and Universities like the University of Nevada at Reno, University of New Mexico, University of Arizona, etc. If she wants to work into journalism, then she needs to find an art school that has a strong journalism program so she can double major or have a minor in the other field.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't want to hijack the thread but I am curious if you have any specific experience or know anything about the photography program at University of Nevada at Reno.</p>

 

<p>the work is pretty cool. personally i found them to be heavy on foreground but i reckon she was going for that... <br>

my 2 cents.<br>

get her hooked up with a grant writing program. it will help her understand a LOT MORE of how that site should look and how to form a plan of attack for developing the "artist" end of the career.<br>

for the record the last grant i applied for asked what camera i use and why.<br>

j<br>

www.galler7.com</p>

<p> </p>

<p>The first thing I want to say is your daughter has a great eye and her technique seems to be keeping up with her vision. I'm an architect and spent six years in Southern California and the photos brougt a tear to my eye ( particularly Autentica and Hilltop Cleaners - my favorite) I also admire that she can see a building as a building like Hill Top and as patterns like Mondrian's Hanger. I find both quite effective. On the other hand, while I like Munch Munch, the slight distottion from tilting the camera up drives m a litle batty (the architect in me) - looks like sloppy technique. Several other photos have this problem to sime degree. Asuka Chair is wonderful - the tight cropping and twin vanishing point adds to the mystery. While one or two of the beginning shots don't do much for me and the last two seem redundant, I think they are a great group of photos. The one easiest thing to do to add variety while staying with the architectrue is to get closer. As a secondary benefit it will make her think about what specifically to include or exclude in a photo although she seem to be doing a pretty good job on that. I woud also try printin some of the images in black and white - I think several would be very successful.</p>

<p>Hi Peter<br>

One thing that maybe hasnt been mentioned is that these images on the website are too large=very slow to load. Slow to load is a big turn off for web surfers. Also I noticed there are no watermarks or copyright and these are big files ( 200kb ) big enough for the unscrupulous to steal.</p>

 

<p>I like images 1, 6, 8, 10, and 11 very much. 1 is abstract but pleasingly geometrical. The restaurant shots make a nice collection and have a cool retro feel. It's as though I'm driving down Route 66, except fifty years ago when it was all new and fresh. Great character!</p>

<p>Image 2 is nicely composed as well, but it doesn't quite grab me. Image 4 would be very nice with the perspective distortion corrected. Perhaps reshoot from a higher vantage point so the building doesn't "lean."</p>

<p>I like the colors in most of the shots and they're all very well-exposed except for 9 (a tad dark) and 2 (a bit overexposed).</p>

<p>I'm curious as to why she calls them 16x20 prints when they're all just about square. Maybe she should print them at 20x20 (or 12x12) in order to maintain the original aspect ratio.</p>

<p>This is an enjoyable portfolio and it leaves me wanting to see more. (Most people's portfolios make me want to see LESS.)</p>

<p>Finally, if she wants to make millions tell her to sell her secret for great hair. I know women who would kill for locks like that! ;-)</p>

 

<p>hi Peter, enjoyed the portfolio, especially the night shots, "time to buy" is awsome. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>First, is her "bio" pic part of the presentation package? Because it says "I am emo, see me sulk".</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And this comment screams "I'm self-important and I enjoy making nice people feel bad." It's a shame that when asked to offer responsible criticism of someone's work, some people see it as an invitation to criticize the artist's appearance. This is doubly troublesome given that the artist is an impressionable minor.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>One thing that maybe hasnt been mentioned is that these images on the website are too large=very slow to load. Slow to load is a big turn off for web surfers. Also I noticed there are no watermarks or copyright and these are big files ( 200kb ) big enough for the unscrupulous to steal.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The site loaded very quickly on my computer. Maybe I'm doing something wrong.</p>

<p>BTW, I checked the portfolios of some of the "experts" who've chimed in here, and I have to say that I enjoyed this young lady's pictures more. <em>C'est la vie, mes amis!</em></p>

<p>OK, Steve. So your portfolio was stellar, definitely putting you in line to be the next Todd Hido or Larry Sultan. Your statement of intent was a gut wrenching trip into the very depths of your artistic soul. And you had three absolutely stellar letters of recommendation from recognized names in the practice or teaching of contemporary art photography.</p>

<p><strong>And yet you were rejected because of your educational background.</strong></p>

<p>Do you honestly, truly believe that?</p>

<p>Step one is the Mom to take herself out of the picture and let her daughter take charge of her admissions application portfolio.</p>

<p>Hi! I'm not a big fan of 7 due to the shadows, they are distracting. I think your daughter should collapse those photos into a series. She should also do a series of portraits and some other series of photos as well. So on the website you can have the "landmark" series, the "blank blank" series, the "blank blank2" series, etc. so the college can see a more diverse portfolio. Also, on the "about me" page, please change the "Don't Know Yet!" to "Undetermined" or something, "don't know yet!" sounds valley girl-ish. Otherwise, I hope she makes it into her college, good luck!</p>

<p>A mom named Peter?</p>

<p>If there's one thing i've learned from my job in the arts, it's that the single most important thing of all is to stay true to your own vision. Tailoring things to what you <em>think</em> other people may or may not like, <em>never, ever</em> , works. You are weakening your own statement, and at the same time very likely to misjudge what you 'think' someone else is into, when in reality, you probably don't know.<br /> In art, or music, what everyone is looking for is a singular, strong vision - or, a person capable of that. That means, if you like photos with lots of foreground (for example), and know why they're there, then great, be true to that, and keep your foregrounds in, whatever anyone says. If you like photos to be personal, keep them personal. People respect focus and vision, and comittment to your own ideas, never forget that. If it matters to you, then do it. What your vision is, that's your business, but stay true to it and yourself - <em>your own mind is the only thing we can ever know for sure - try and second guess someone elses and you'll always be surprised and mostly wrong.<br /> </em> <br /> At the end of the day, the only thing you can really be confident about is your own judgement - your inner likes and dislikes. If you stay to that, trust me, you'll be fine. And hey, this is why we do it in the first place, to make something that we feel inside ourselves is worth creating.<br /> My ten cents, and best of luck to your daughter peter.</p>

<p>I would also like to add, that in my opinion, having people around you that are supportive is the most valuable thing a young artist could have.<br>

Peter, i think it's fantastic you're here getting peoples thoughts and trying to help and support your daughter, trust me, this matters the world. You can have all the talent in the world, but if you don't have someone who supports and believes in you, it can mean nothing if you don't have the confidence to continue.<br>

Once again, kind regards to you both and good luck!</p>

<p>

 

<p>I'll offer an opinion, but I have to state up front that this genre of photography is foreign to me -- I do landscapes. So I have either an open mind or an uninformed mind (perhaps both). In reading the posts above, I find myself in particular agreement with the advice given by Hugh J.; I think his several arguments and suggestions make a great deal of sense, especially to someone like myself who has been involved in education for a long time (although not in advanced art education). That said, I'll offer a few personal opinions. I like the changes your daughter has obviously made to her bio page. In particular, I appreciated knowing her goal in taking these photos (the conveyance of a sense of isolation). I'll leave it to others to argue whether one should show a range of abilities or an ability to say "this is who I am," although I generally agree with the approach cited by Chris Rok above. The photos that I think are strongest are 1, 5, 8, 9, 10, and 11, although there is a lot of similarity among the last three (lit commercial buildings shot at night); she may want more diversity here. The photos that seem to be weak to me (again keeping in mind her stated intention) are 6 and 7. I don't like these aesthetically because of the shadows, and relative to the the others, they just don't adequately convey a sense of isolation. I wish your daughter the very best in this exciting time of her life.</p>

 

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>At the schools I applied to it evidently is as the majority (90%) of the people accepted into the MFA program do not have degrees in art. How does that work with your assumptions?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The only assumption I'm making is with your apparently unique situation, because it doesn't jive with the facts. Since you haven't been specific about a) what was in your portfolio, and b) what program(s) you applied to, I can only speculate as to what the cause of your rejection was. And the fact is, in the overwhelming majority of cases, rejections are based on an insufficient portfolio. Statement of intent and letters of recommendation play a supporting role, and all of this together is used to eliminate the first round of applicants, leaving the remainder who go on to interview, after which the applicant pool is finally whittled down to the accepted/wait list. But the portfolio is the centerpiece of the application, and this is true for MFA programs in any field, whether creative writing, sculpture, painting, ceramics, or what-have-you; not just in photography.</p>

<p>But just for argument's sake, let's have a look at an example that everyone has access to. Yale is currently ranked by US News and World Report as the #1 MFA Photography program in the nation as of 2008. Their current roster is here:</p>

<p><a href="http://art.yale.edu/CurrentStudents">http://art.yale.edu/CurrentStudents</a></p>

<p>I just took a quick look at the upcoming MFA Photography graduating class, and with the exception of one student (Tiffani Hooper) each of them has a B.A. or B.F.A. degree, as evidenced in either a Google search for their names, or in the bio sections of their websites. Ms. Hooper may also have an art undergraduate degree but I haven't been able to verify it, so I'll just assume for this example that she doesn't. So we can say with absolute certainty that, in Yale University School of Art's MFA Photography entering class of 2008, <strong>at least 89% of the people accepted had an art degree</strong> . I suspect you'll find that this trend to be true for most or all of the schools on US News and World Report's top ten list.</p>

<p>Anyway, I don't know what so-called "schools" you applied to, Steve, but if it's indeed true that they are dumb enough to reject people only because they come from an art background (as opposed to the universally accepted criteria of portfolio, statement of intent, letters of recommendation and interview), may I respectfully suggest that you aim a little higher?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>and despite also being told by the interview committee "You have a very strong portfolio" - and then told "We prefer people with a broader background for our program."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>One more thing I'd like to point out is that it is inconsiderate and rude to the extreme on the part of the admissions committee to summon an applicant for an interview that they've already eliminated based on the initial application. If they already knew you wouldn't make the cut because you didn't have the "broad background" they were looking for (information available to them at the start from the college transcripts that you submit with your application) why did they waste your time (and money, if you had to travel) by summoning you to an interview?</p>

<p>Either something isn't quite right with your story, or the "programs" you applied to are staffed by idiots.</p>

<p>Hi Peter, your daughter has a good eye for photography. I think I would like to see more variety in her portfolio with maybe a portrait or two and some landscapes and still life work. It looks like she is stuck on the square format of the camera. I did some cropping and adding to some of the photos and they seem to work better for me, again this is just my opinion but once I cropped them I was impressed with what your daughter saw in the images. Also having lived in Northern Nevada I don't think UNR is considered a highly rated college and the Nevada education system is undergoing drastic cuts at this time. In general education in Nevada is not a high priority with high dropout rates and a very low percentage of students moving on to college from high school.</p><div></div>

<p>be very careful about what responses you are heeding here my friend. there aren't a lot of responses (barring one or two folks) that display a sound understanding of how things work in this world. suggesting that your daughter "diversify" is sweet and well intended i am sure but sadly WAY OFF BASE. <br /> as mentioned already, find a couple of grant writing programs before she's off to school. certainly it will help you with the grant process however it will also offer a clear understanding of how she is going to survive/make it after school. where the money is, how to get it and HOW TO START PRESENTING YOURSELF now. the art world is a very different place than the commercial. you can live and work if you understand where the money is and how to get it.<br /> as she goes to school she must also start accumulating those "lines" on the CV. explore a subject path, exhibit that work and carpet bomb the grant and award circuit. build those lines because no matter how good you are you NEED those "lines". having a degree from a respectable school is an important "line" indeed but she will need more.<br /> in my humble opinion "diversifying" would be a step in the wrong direction.</p>