Exhibit jurors including their own photographs?

[russmarshall]

My friend and I have this ongoing disagreement about whether or not jurors of

photography exhibits should include their own work in the show. He thinks it's

OK. I say absolutely NO - not under any circumstances. I'm obviously looking

for support but I'm open to be convinced otherwise. My basic point of view

simply put is one of possible conflict of interest on the part of the juror

and perceptions of questionable impartiality in the minds of the people

entering photographs to be judged. I'm totally OK with jurors posting a sheet

on the wall in the exhibit detailing their credentials, bio, exhibit and

publication history. I have a problem when they include their own photograph(s)

even if part of the agreement with the gallery manager as compensation. In

addition to the points made above, the juror's photograph(s) rob wall space

that could have accommodated additional submitted prints. My friend says that

the incusion of juror prints will give the other photographers a better idea

of the jurors qualifications to judge their work. Even if the juror hangs a

print in an area construed as apart from the exhibit is still OK with him. And

I still say absolutely NO. I say the exhibit is not about massaging the jurors

ego by offering a space for their photographs as enticement. It's about the

photographs that were entered and made the cut.

 

Anybody agree or disagree for the same or different reasons? Russ

Sorry this is so long.

[ellis_vener_photography]

absolutely not. They shouldn't even be from the same town or worse club and social set.

[zoewiseman]

I agree with you. Jurors have no business displaying their own work along side those being

judged. But then, I thought you knew that jurored exhibits were always biased.. I thought

everyone knew that! I think if we were all to boycott jurored shows things might eventually

change. But, there's always someone desperate enough to enter their work into these things,

pay the astronomical fee to enter, then barely even receive a response about why their work

wasn't included. And the jurors and the gallery owners laugh all the way to the bank while

you sit at home and ponder whether or not it is wise to continue to be an artist.

 

pretty bogus, huh?

[samcisa]

...while you sit at home and ponder whether or not it is wise to continue to be an artist.

pretty bogus, huh?

:D :D :D

[randall ellis]

Certainly not. If organizations standards allow this type of activity then I would certainly avoid them. There are more than enough activities like this to choose from (perhaps too many!), so there is no reason to put up with this type of amateurish maneuver.

 

- Randy

[j_c38]

Not quite the same, but my camera club is part of nine that make up a council . When we have council competitions with the rest of the council the host club can NOT enter their own photographs. This is just for "bragging rights". There is nothing at stake in these.

 

With that said, with our inner club competitions you do end up having to score your own photo's from time to time. This is one of those cases where you don't have a choice.

 

At the end of the year our council judges all of the photo's for the year. When they do this, they find unbiased, qualified judges from outside of the council.

 

Jurors and friend and family should not enter items to be juried. Even if the one juror sits out, his pears would more then likely put it through. Its very difficult to be biased in these circumstances. Do you want to explain to your colleague why he didn't get in?

[William Kahn]

Absolutely not. I worked for three years as the fine arts superintendent of the county fair in Flagstaff, AZ (one year out of ignorance, the last two out of insanity). One of the basic rules was that jurors never entered their own work in competition, and they all understood the reasons without my having to explain them. We did, however, have a "Judges Wall", where each juror could hang a sample of his/her own work - kind of a "why I'm a juror, and you're not" display. We also recognized the bias inherent in any competition like this, and tried to rotate jurors in and out from year to year. This wasn't always successful. Flagstafff is arguably the cultural Mecca of northern Arizona (at least along I-40), but it's still not exactly overrun with pro-level artists in any medium who want to get involved in judging. And the county didn't pay the judges well enough to import someone from, say Phoenix, the cultural Mecca of........well, you get it.

[William Kahn]

One factor I forgot to mention: All the entries were anonymous until after the judging. Even so, every now and then a juror would recognize someone's work and have to recuse him/herself from judging that particular category.

[calebcondit]

ever.

I would say that no photograph is needed to prove a judges ability nor validity as a judge. Most judges are decent photographers, but what is more important is being able to have an unjaded perspective and an understanding of what makes a good photograph.

 

Now if there is an area clearly labelled "judges gallery" and the gallery wants to do that, that is their choice. But hanging right along with the rest of the show, no way. A more appropriate way to show the judges history as a photographer would be credits and a link to a website or an included mini cv in the program or invite...that would be way more professional.

 

Really what we think Should happen won't really affect what others decide to do with their businesses (galleries) and competitions. Any juror who states that they will only judge if they get to show probably shouldn't be judging as lack of maturity...but once again "it's just like your opinion, man" - the duder