I have been wondering if it is morally right to post photos that I may enter for a contest for critique. It seems hazardous because one of the judges on this site might tell me exactly how to make the image better. It also seems logical to let people do what they want with THEIR photos as long as it does not break the rules of the competition. Letting anyone have their image critiqued would certainly also improve the quality of the images submitted. (Contests without good cover photos usually don't last too long).
Thanks,
-EV
Posted by Nate Chappell on March 13, 2010 at 10:46 PM
Hi Erik,
I don't see any moral hazard with having your photos critiqued here before you enter them in a photo contest and I've seen people enter contests and subsequently win contests after having incorporated adjustments to their images from the critiques they received here. Jose Suro's Red-shouldered Hawk impaling itself with a stick is one that comes to mind.
Posted by Greg Maklae on March 14, 2010 at 7:03 AM
As long as the rules do not state that your work cannot be critiqued prior to entry, I see nothing wrong with the idea. But from what I have observed in various contests, the more technically correct a work is, the less chance there is of winning. What the "public" sees as a good image, and what a photographer sees as a good image are not at all related, and photographers do not judge contests. For one contest I even wrote an editoral stating, "it must have been a poor month for entries, if this was the best".
I dont think their is a problem with having an image critiqued prior to entry.. Firstly, you need to have a good capture to begin with and perhaps with a little guidance you are able to decide on the best processing for your image - be it via a critique here, or even just getting general opinion from friends and family. Either way, your opinion on how best to submit your image might not suit the judges idea on the day, so really its pretty tricky to know!
Posted by Jim Bullard on March 14, 2010 at 10:24 AM
"It seems hazardous because one of the judges on this site might tell me exactly how to make the image better." Are you saying that a member of NP is one of the judges? If so the moral problem is with the judge. He or she should refrain from offering advice on work that they would later be judging. To that end you should be clear what contest(s) the photos will be entered in. Any critiques or advice from others is certainly fair game.
Posted by David Bostedo on March 14, 2010 at 1:58 PM
...the more technically correct a work is, the less chance there is of winning
I'm not sure if you stated that quite right and the way you meant to Greg, but I disagree with that. I do agree that technical perfection is by no means required to win contests. But if you had a winning - and imperfect technically - shot, and could somehow re-do it to be more technically correct, it would likely stand a better chance of winning contests. Having good techs is not a negative.
Posted by Greg Maklae on March 14, 2010 at 7:16 PM
David,
In the past couple of months, I have seen photos of poor subject matter, poor lighting, and just plain boring photos win out over technically superior, better composed photos. One example is Adirondacks life yearly contest. The 3rd place winner, was labelled as a waterfall scene, but the main subject of the image was someone foot, the waterfall was barely visible. There are hundreds of fantastic falls here in the Adirondacks, and that was the best they could do to depict one? A second example was "Photographic network" monthly contest. Several of the submitters stated that the choices were the poorest photos of those entered. I stick my my feeling that most contests are judged by those who have not even mastered a p/s camera, for an audience that thinks the only time to shoot is at noon time on a sunny day. Hence, I no longer do contests, unless the are judged by those who submitted the photographs.
Posted by David Bostedo on March 14, 2010 at 8:28 PM
Thanks for the info Greg....I guess maybe I'm arguing semantics now, but nothing you mentioned says that technical perfection in an image is actually a negative. The photo of the foot with the waterfall in the BG would still likely be a better image, and more likely to win contests, if it was technically perfect (whatever that would mean for that particular photo).
Recently I posted an image in PhotoArt. I specifically asked for ways to make it better because I wanted to enter it into a monthly contest at our local camera club. I got some very excellent advice, I incorporated some of these ideas into my image and won the contest. For me this is what it is all about - getting advice on ways to improve your photography. And if you win a contest along the way so much the better.
May
Discussion
8 repliesThanks,
-EV
I don't see any moral hazard with having your photos critiqued here before you enter them in a photo contest and I've seen people enter contests and subsequently win contests after having incorporated adjustments to their images from the critiques they received here. Jose Suro's Red-shouldered Hawk impaling itself with a stick is one that comes to mind.
I'm not sure if you stated that quite right and the way you meant to Greg, but I disagree with that. I do agree that technical perfection is by no means required to win contests. But if you had a winning - and imperfect technically - shot, and could somehow re-do it to be more technically correct, it would likely stand a better chance of winning contests. Having good techs is not a negative.
In the past couple of months, I have seen photos of poor subject matter, poor lighting, and just plain boring photos win out over technically superior, better composed photos. One example is Adirondacks life yearly contest. The 3rd place winner, was labelled as a waterfall scene, but the main subject of the image was someone foot, the waterfall was barely visible. There are hundreds of fantastic falls here in the Adirondacks, and that was the best they could do to depict one? A second example was "Photographic network" monthly contest. Several of the submitters stated that the choices were the poorest photos of those entered. I stick my my feeling that most contests are judged by those who have not even mastered a p/s camera, for an audience that thinks the only time to shoot is at noon time on a sunny day. Hence, I no longer do contests, unless the are judged by those who submitted the photographs.
Anyway...sorry to have dragged this off topic....
May