| |
Community
Magazines
Book Clubs
Book Stores
|
|
 |
 |
| Your interactive artists' community |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Artists Network
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply.
|
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
Marian
Posts:183
 |
| 04/16/2007 4:44 PM |
 Alert
|
I may have mentioned this in one of my earlier posts, but due to a follow up email and subsequent letter and email conversations about a rejection from a (in my opinion) coveted juried show, I was invited to observe (and not submit work) for the next show. The following were my impressions of that ABSOLUTELY wonderful experience. (There were three jurors and the committee head... all jurors were professionals.. two painters and one gallery owner... and all of them made me feel welcome and comfortable.)
I found no surprises, but thoroughly enjoyed the day. It was interesting... Both seeing the variety of work submitted to the theme, the variety of "quality" and hearing the variety of responses of the three jurors. On some they all agreed. On others there was quite a bit of discussion. I found the discussion about what they liked or disliked about different work interesting…. Don’t know if it will change any of my own work… THAT, I think is a matter of continuing to practice and work at it.
They set up what they wanted to look for... all agreed that composition and drawing were foremost and that they didn't want the paintings to appear too labored. There were three passes through the slide entries. One to just get a feel for what was there. One that each was to give a 1 a 3 or a 5 to without sharing this opinion and the "last" pass was to share their "vote" and to discuss the whys of their choices. It turned out to be more than three passes as they looked at their fives and their (what ended up to be the "fours") again to jury in or jury out to get the agreed upon target number of entries.
Although I couldn't have articulated my whys as well, for the most part I would have voted the same as the group consensus came out. All in all it was a very worth-while opportunity for me.
Maybe I’m weird, but I don’t think I’m that unusual in wondering what goes on when a show is juried.
I also had a very interesting experience in the last few months that also helped me with what I experienced during this observation opportunity. As it happened there were three shows I submitted work to since December. One piece was juried in to a nationally juried show at the Palm Springs Art Museum. I submitted it to a local (Thousand Oaks) show after the museum show closed and it was juried out. I had submitted two other pieces to this latest show that WERE accepted. One had been juried in to a Valley show and the other had been juried out of the Valley show. Different jurors have different likes and dislikes. That was apparent during my observation of the jurying process as well for my pieces that I submitted.
I’ll keep working and enjoying my efforts. I hope all of you will too!!!
|
|
Sometimes we paint to see more clearly or to feel more deeply.
Marian
www.marianfortunati.com
www.fortunatifineart.com |
|
DaleZiegler
Posts:41
|
| 05/28/2007 2:12 PM |
Alert
|
Jane’s advice is sound. Some things I might add--
Don’t try to outguess the judge by sending something painted in his style, thinking that he will like it.
If the show allows two or three slides or entries. Try to send things of similar styles and subjects. Don’t try to prove you can do everything. (never send in one abstract and one realistic)
Send what you think is your best work, not what you think the juror will like.
Paint what you love and know best. (don’t paint the Grand Canal and Gondolas if you’ve never been to Venice.)
Start with the smaller regional show where competition isn’t so tough.
Send in your entries early-- the first entries seem to get the most attention.
I’ve been accepted and rejected in many national shows and the same paintings that have won awards in some have been rejected in others. So, just keep trying.
A well know painter once told me “If you can’t take rejection, get out of the game”
I guess he was right. |
|
|
|
Llarian
Posts:44
|
| 07/17/2007 7:04 PM |
Alert
|
I used to show horses in Dressage. Every rider rode a set pattern for their level, by themselves, and had the judge's undivided attention. The judge didn't even have to look away to write- a scribe did it for them. Every movement had a numerical score (think Olympics- dressage is an olympic sport), and the total average of all the 20, 30 or even 50 movements was the final score, minus any penalties. The averaged scores were all posted, but the scoresheets with individual movement scores were given to the rider, with comments to help him or her improve. The judges were all licensed and had real credentials, and the riders were also able to review the judges and file grievances if necessary to the respective federations if judges were picking their students, etc.
Conversely, I have shown and been juried into two national level art shows. The same two pieces were rejected at two local shows, and one got in, but no awards, at another local show. Go figure. The problem with art shows is that there is no standard of excellence that everyone can look to, no written or oral critique that artists who have paid their money and taken their chances can fall back on to improve. I would gladly pay double entry fees, or even triple, for a written critique so I could at least know what the judge was thinking. Then I could have the empowerment that information provides. Worst case scenario, I could agree to disagree with the judge's opinion. Why can't some form of standardized scoresheet be implemented by a prominent organization, and then shows who choose to use that system could advertise it in their show promo literature. i.e. "Blah Blah Blah Artists of America 2007 all media show to be judged by Joe Blow, using the So and So Standardized Score Sheet and Critique." There could be categories for design, use of color, mood, etc. and then an area for a written critique. Then I would at least be getting something for my $$ and would know that the judge at least saw the work, or if it was disqualified, I would know why. I would show in those types of shows exclusively, because they would be more fair and would help artists become better through good critiques. That little piece of paper would be worth a lot!
|
|
|
|
Niebrugge
Posts:17
|
| 07/23/2007 4:17 PM |
Alert
|
Submitting artwork to juried competitions is like fishing, you cast and cast and cast and suddenly you get a bite! Sometimes you cast all day without any action, other times you might get a nibble at every cast. You can't catch a fish without casting. You can't rack up acceptances in juried competitions without rejections. It is not personal, it is just the name of the game.
I used to keep a matrix so that I could see how many rejections I'd get for each acceptance. Through the years the odds for acceptance got better and better, I think experience helps.
So, forget the rejections and just keep plugging away. As acceptances rise, so will awards! But never take any of it too seriously, because as soon as you do you'll get shot down again.
I've been a juror and the job is not easy. Many times I've had to leave out paintings that I liked because the gallery space had a limit.
|
|
|
|
Jo
Posts:1
|
| 09/21/2007 9:04 PM |
Alert
|
I agree - rejection can be hard.
I discovered a website that I find interesting. An artist, Tamara Belland, posts a newly created piece of art each day. I've followed her daily for several months - she shares her "masterpieces" and other pieces that are so-so and she comments on her work and what whe is learning as she shares it all - the good and the bad. Anyway, it's worth a look. www.tamarabelland.com
I encourage you to continue to express yourself through your work. I find that it feels so wonderful just for the sake of creating!
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|
ActiveForums 3.6
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|