Exhibitable photos - are you good enough?

[wendy_cain]

Hi all, Im new here, and looking around for some opinions. Now this may seem a

dumb question, however I would appreciate your views. I am a semi pro

photographer, so have a lot too learn.

 

My question is, how do you know if one of your photos is exhibitable? Is it

something from within? How do you know if its "good enough". I have the

opportunity of signing up to participate in one in Auckland, I have to pay $200

toward it. Thats ok, but I dont know if any of my work is of that standard or

not? I mix with the pros and they are in a league of their own, its

intimidating!

 

I can always send in some for critique I guess. Any thoughts on this?

Thanks

Wendy

Auckland, NZ

www.wendycainphotography.com

[art_haykin]

The short and simple answer is that no one can know with ANY certainty. How would you know if you'd even qualify for, say, a beauty contest or an art exhibit at a fair?

No one can attach any objective standards to something like a photograph: a prize goat, perhaps, but not art. Besides, 200 bucks sounds high unless it's a VERY pretigious and respected exhibitor. Just think of the prices the pictures would have to fetch if offered for sale. And just what do you mean by "semi pro photographer?" Do you also have a job or other income, and can you easily afford the 200? What do you feel you could gain or lose by entering? Are you merely seeking praise for your ego, or do you feel the recognition is important for your career? If it's just a straight exhibition, that's one thing, but if it's a contest, it's another. But either way, if you do commercial work, I don't think it would help much, but I could be wrong. Ask yourself,

"How long and hard do I have to work to earn 200 bucks clear?"

[art_haykin]

I just visited your site and can say that your work is quite solid, and a cross between creative art and commercial. What do your artistic shots go for, and what is your basic fee structure for commercial gigs? Do you plan to ever go full time as a pro?

[Spearhead]

I'm not sure I would ever pay to be exhibited, and I'm not sure I understand the deal. It sounds like it's $200 to exhibit one photo, and I would say that's a bit of a lousy deal. I've never paid for showing my work, either solo or group.

 

Almost anything can be exhibited, but you have to look at where it is being shown and who the audience is. I'd say your work looks solid in a commercial sense, but you don't show a lot of personal approach in your web portfolio, which is what can make it more desirable for exhibiting. Your photos of baches probably come closest to what might be interesting as a collection that could be exhibited, and you should consider building a portfolio around that subject and showing them around. There's an odd post-modern look to them.

 

Doing an exhibition is a lot of work and can be pretty costly, and if you are going to pursue it, I would recommend learning to do your own framing, even learn to cut glass. You have to decide if you are trying to just show your stuff or make some money at it also.

[nolan_ross]

I think your images are very good. If you want to move forward then you need to just get going with it. Showing your images in a gallery is a great thing and you will learn from the process. I think it's a good idea. I would assess the overall cost before committing to the process. Framing and preparing your images can be quite expensive. Make sure you understand from the gallery what is expected in that regard.

[Brian]

<P>Where I come from, the commercial galleries charge artists who exhibit. There is a joint exhibition coming up at one of our local galleries where 14 photographers are paying 35GBP each (about $70). I have no problem with what is effectively paying rental on the space but obviously it's a business decision whether the outlay is going to be worthwhile either in sales or intangible benefits like "exposure".</P><P>As regards photos being exhibitable, I would say presentation (matting, framing etc) is paramount. If the presentation is slick, the punters tend to accept the photo as a pro job (if it's up in a gallery, it must be good...).</P>

[focus mankind]

Exposure is important.

Just be carefull when being charged for an exhibition.

There are many galleries (or book printers) which charge high prices but you don't get a real value. Some make their living not with the sales but just with the exhibition charges. So take care and try to find out what you get for the 200$ (e.g. where is the gallery, to they advertise, what is the commission for sales on top of the charge, etc. etc.).

I receive dozens of offers but hardly serious ones.

[dbcooper]

If your artist friends or fellow photographers regularly ask to purchase prints you show them, they're good enough to exhibit. Forget what your relatives, close friends, and non-photogaphers say...generally, they're being polite and supportive.

[Spearhead]

<i>Forget what your relatives, close friends, and non-photogaphers say.</i><p>

 

I sell mostly to non-photographers. There are a whole lot more of them than there are photographers. Consequently, I pay far more attention to them than I do to photographers. If I targeted photographers as my audience, my sales would be pathetic.

[jacob_brown]

Many art co-ops charge for art to be displayed to defray costs, but commercial galleries generally only take a percentage of sales, not charge the artists.

[wendy_cain]

Thanks everyone for your advice, its great and I appreciate it. What I should have said that this is a prestigious exhibit of a group of pro photographers in Auckland belonging to a high profile association of which I am a member (an emerging member). I am a graphic designer and part time photographer, I sell some images to a NZ Stock company, not royalty free.

 

As a member of the association I get to pay a lower fee (NZ$200) because I am an emerging photographer rather then a pro. Exhibiting is voluntary but its good for exposure and the "being involved" thing.

 

I didnt think of the framing and presentation so thanks, thats a big extra cost. I may bow out this year and work towards another time.

 

Jeff, I am currently looking at redesigning my website, you say " but you don't show a lot of personal approach in your web portfolio, " Can you clarify that to help give me a better idea, I value your opinion. I know what you mean about the baches but a web portfolio has to show a range of work and cant only concentrate on one theme.

 

Thanks, Wendy

[thomas_sullivan]

"...but a web portfolio has to show a range of work and cant only concentrate on one theme..."

 

well, that would depend on your ultimate goal...and in this case the purpose of the associations exhibit. If it is a commercial endeavor, where you have to show a wide variety of work to attract a diversity of customers, showing that you can handle almost any photography assignment.............yeah, a range of work is ideal.

 

However, if this is more towards an artistic.....artist gallery....edeavor, then themes are where you want to be. They want to see time spent, pursueing, refining, and developing your vision of the concept. doesn't mean over the years you can't have different themes, but the gallery or exhibit wants to see, and only see, the most current theme/concept you are working on.

 

You don't really say what this group is trying to accomplish, other than showing ones work.