The philosophy of choosing jury photos

Jewelry Discussion
61

Beth,

That change from the slate to the gradient, making a second layer -
May I ask how you replaced the slate with the gradient without
painstakingly drawing all the way around the bracelets? I have Adobe
Illustrator, not Photoshop, but I have still heard the legend that
it can be done.

Since I do not have the resources to take a class on it at this
time, and all my googled tutorials fell short, I never did it. If
you know how or where to find out how, I would be very grateful if
you could share with me either on or off list.

This would also be useful in replacing backgrounds with
transparency, which I can do but only if they’re white (by saving
for web, etc).

I also have Adobe Image Ready but rarely use it…

Connie L.

62 
Those are the givens. To make ones work stand out one does need
good photography. One has to make ones work stand out in the crowd

This thread is so big I thought I’d check it out. I personally have
no use for juried anything - we went for a couple of Lark books
because Jo-Ann wanted to (earrings, yes, pendants, waiting, diamonds

  • maybe not enough entries, I hear). Whenever a juror can show me
    their work of a calibre that’s interesting, I’ll listen, basically.
    However, there seems to be a non-debate going on. If you DO go into
    such a situation, at least have to courtesy to realize that jurors
    are jurors - chosen for the job (I guess there’s a cottage industry
    in jurying, though), maybe not really exactly qualified (likely),
    but they are the ones in the hotseat. It could be you, and you won’t
    be able to please everyone either. They are choosing what they like,
    just as we all would - they’re human, after all.
63 
Maybe, put your best, best foot forward in your jury shots

Is it possible to make your photos “too” good and get rejected
because the juror suspects you are buy/sell vendor trying to sneak
into a handmade only show? Has this happened to anyone?

I was in a show this year where they checked photo IDs at check in
to weed out artist’s reps. I’ve heard of some shows requiring photos
of the artisan actually doing the work to try and weed out buy/sell.
Of course those could be phonied too.

I know my photography of my jewelry can stand improvement and I plan
on working on that but in my not so humble opinion Photo Shopping
jury images is a slippery slope.

But, would you think may be I go to the director of the show and
complain? It's not going to get me anywhere...it's actually going
to get me nowhere, fast.

I’m with you on that Kim. First of all I’m still new to the show
circuit and don’t want to get the reputation of a trouble maker. The
last show I was in advertised 100 juried artists. More like they
filled 100 spaces. They had way too many beads and even had a kettle
corn vendor. About 50% of the artists where legitimate juried artists
judging by their work and professional setup.

Rick Copeland
Silversmith and Lapidary Artisan
Rocky Mountain Wonders
Colorado Springs, Colorado
http://rockymountainwonders.com

64 
First of all I'm still new to the show circuit and don't want to
get the reputation of a trouble maker.

I feel the same way. It’s ok to stick up for yourself, of course,
but, like a lot of people have stated already, I’m choosing to
participate in the show circuit. If I don’t like the way they run
things, I can opt for other venues to sell my work (I only get to
keep 50 or 60% of the retail price, but that’s the way it goes).

Coincidentally, I was looking at the actual jury shots for a major
show in my area and came across something else confusing. I read
somewhere ( I have a terrible memory, but it was somewhere) a quote
like “submit your best work, not necessarily your best-selling work”.
I can live with that, it makes sense, but here’s the thing. Some of
the shots I looked at for this show are showing me items that look
almost impossible to wear? Does the jury look at functionality? I’m
not in any way putting down anyone’s work. I wouldn’t do that. I’m
just wanting to know if it is “ok” to submit slides of your crazy,
dream pieces…or do you have to consider practicality? I have
“dream” pieces in my head to (we probably all do) but I hold back
because I just don’t know. Maybe it’s a “show by show” thing.

As far as your question, Rick, there is sometimes the disclaimer in
the guidelines that reads “work must show evidence of handmadeness”
(I definitely have that one covered:) )

My husband always says “keep at it” and “be a squeaky wheel” I have
a feeling, when I finally do get to a show, they’re going to say
something like “Oh, it’s you, I know you. You’re that squeaky wheel.
You just don’t give up”

Kim Starbard
http://www.kimstarbarddesigns.com

65

Kim, I believe that you read those words in the Professional
Guidelines document “Top Ten Tips For Getting Into A Juried…”. It
is on the third page and I’ve copied the paragraph below.

Submit your best work and your best slides, not your best seller.
Your best seller may be an irrelevant issue to the jury regardless of
whether you are submitting work for an exhibition or a
wholesale/retail show. Keep in mind that your best seller may sell
because it has a good price point, appeals t= o a wide audience or
reflects fashion trends in the marketplace. It may even sell well
because shoppers consider it to be a good “gift item”. While all this
is fine for sales, it may have little to do with what makes your
work powerful in the eyes of a jury. There may be a huge difference
between what the jury will consider your best work and what the
public buys.

I agree, as you do, that the premise makes sense (I helped write and
edit it, to be fair). The point being, of course, that the quirks of
the marketplace and the idiosyncratic psychology of sales venues may
have nothing at all to do with what is really good work-in your eyes
and in the varying eyes of each juror.

Wearability can be the same thing. This topic has been hashed to
death here and elsewhere. (It is an issue that I wrestle with daily.
I’ll go out and deal with it in a few minutes.) I’m not sure how or
if this should have a bearing on the slides and show that you are
talking about, though. Shouldn’t it be a function of the nature of
the show, the work submitted, the description in the call-for-entries
and the opinion of the jury? There is a strange relationship between
all of the above and your interpretive spin of the submission
guidelines and the consequential decisions that you make in choosing
work to submit. As I wrote in my posted essay of several days ago it
may be wise to consider the venue and select slides that are tailored
to it: If the goal is to get in the show, etc. An argument could be
made to include really edgy-- but quality-- stuff to even a
conservative venue: maybe it will stick in someone’s memory. Maybe
they’ll remember it and search you out at a later time. Stranger
things have happened. I’ll still try to hedge my bets, though.

Once again, I urge anyone interested to check out the Professional
Guidelines at the SNAG website, under publications. It’s all free.
There is also a doc. On Juried shows- the responsibilities of the
hosts and sponsors and of those submitting.

Take care, Andy Cooperman

66

Hi Andy

Wearability can be the same thing. This topic has been hashed to
death here and elsewhere.

Thanks for posting. I will check out the SNAG site as the jury
process is something that makes me lie awake at night this time of
year :slight_smile:

I know the issue of wearability has been discussed already (I read
it) and it got pretty ugly. Tearing apart someone’s work is not what
I’m about though. The point I have in mind is this: I think, in order
for a show to be successful, it has to garner sales (not sales of
items, sales of admission tickets) From the organizers’ point of
view, the money comes from 2 places…booth fees and admission
tickets. The more people come (year after year) the more the show
makes for the organizer. The makers of the items have to then take
themselves out of the equation. There are 2 ways to view the success
of a show, from the perspective of the artists and from the
perspective of the organizers. It seems very logical to me, then,
that the organizer would look at things like wearability.
Functionality opens the artists up to a wider base of potential
buyers. It’s not that I am trying to put anyone’s work down, not at
all. I just always seem to be “the odd guy out”…when I make
something, I consider the following 1. profit 2. wearability 3.
sale-ability In the great dichotomy that is “making things”, I can
make what I want and it may or may not work out or I can make what
the customer wants. It becomes very difficult, at this time of year,
to choose for the jury because sales have been good all year. In
other words, the customer wants it. At the risk of going out of favor
(if I haven’t already done that), there are many
contradictions…how can the jury be blind if the same things appear
year after year?..how can no assemblage be allowed when there are
already people in the show doing assemblage?..how can it be that we
have to keep in mind that the juror must be able to see and know
readily what it is they are looking at, when I cannot figure it out
after a lot more than a minute of looking at the slide?..Keep in
mind that these questions are not coming from someone who is
disgruntled in any way. I’m doing fine and I expect to be doing even
better next year. Incidentally, I don’t consider my self to be
assemblage, but that’s a whole other thing. These aren’t complaints.
They are observations. Most (if not all) of my interest lies in
building a business from nothing, from trying to get into the “show
circuit” and succeeding…if it were not difficult to do, I probably
wouldn’t want to do it. :slight_smile:

Thanks again
Kim

67 
It seems very logical to me, then, that the organizer would look
at things like wearability. Functionality opens the artists up to a
wider base of potential buyers.

But what does "wearability " mean, Kim? Who decides what wearability
is, what is wearable and how often something must be able to be worn?
Consider a pair of post earrings at the heavy end of the “normal”
range, let’s say 4 pennyweights per side. Most young people could
wear them, if they liked them, for an evening or even a day. But
older, mature people would have a problem since the cartilage of the
ear is less firm and the hole itself looser due to years of wear. Who
determines wearability in this case.

Consider, also, the recent thread on gold rings and chlorine. Surely
gold rings in most cases would be considered wearable. The material
has a long and proven history, the high intrinsic value most often
limits size and scope of rings fabricated in gold. As the thread
demonstrated, there can be real problems with even this material if
you are a regular swimmer.

The argument goes on and on and keeps coming back to a matter of
degree and, in the end, a matter of opinion-- just like the jury
system, itself.

how can the jury be blind if the same things appear year after
year?...

Another facet to that: How about a maker with an established visual
voice, sensibility or look? I know form experience–on both sides of
the fence-- that people’s work can be instantly recognizable. In many
ways, this is what gives our work its value and collectability. So,
often, juries aren’t blind at all.

And as far as revenue streams go for the show organizer, there is
also a third source. Some shows take a percentage of sales. This cuts
both ways on the “what is juried in” argument. On the one hand it is
best to have work that is saleable or marketable to the widest
possible audience. On the other hand, you want work that is truly the
best, perhaps edgier work, perhaps even some outlandish work that
will bring in the curious.

Lets also not forget that the shows I am discussing here are more
craft fair, art fair direct sales venues. The jury discussion, of
course, is much wider than that including exhibitions in museums and
galleries and opportunities for publication.

I hope that this thread does not turn into another “what is art” “my
kid could make that” “500” bashing bitter fest.

Take care, Andy

68 
Who decides what wearability is

The jury I guess…but I think I used the wrong word here when I
said wearability…some of the items pictured on the shows website, I
couldn’t really tell what they were. All I’m saying is that I can
empathize with those (including myself) who are trying to break into
the highly competitive art fair scene. Not even complaining. Like I
said, I like the challenge.

I know form experience--on both sides of the fence-- that people's
work can be instantly recognizable. In many ways, this is what
gives our work its value and collectability. So, often, juries
aren't blind at all.

Thank you for saying this. It’s an honest answer to an honest
inquiry.

And as far as revenue streams go for the show organizer, there is
also a third source. Some shows take a percentage of sales. This
cuts both ways on the "what is juried in" argument.

This, I think, might be the best. When I have applied to shows, I
have appreciated the fact that they were juried by the show
organizers themselves. Since the promoter of the show was actually
doing the deciding, I assumed he/she had a vested interest in wanting
work in the show that was highly marketable (salable)

I hope that this thread does not turn into another "what is art"
"my kid could make that" "500" bashing bitter fest.

It doesn’t have to. I think we can have an honest, up-front
discussion of the intricacies of getting on the show circuit without
hurting each other.

I recently received an email about a mentor program available
through CraftBoston. I have no idea how I missed it before, but,
apparently, you can be given guidance by seasoned artists on
everything from booth set-up, work prep, inventory stuff etc etc even
a studio visit. It’s like the heavens opened up and sang when I read
it. What a great opportunity.

Kim Starbard
http://www.kimstarbarddesigns.com

69

to all- this thread originally was a request for assistance to view
and give opinions on a set of photographs of very nice work. i
attempted to make specific points questioning what exactly makes a
photo that is worthy of a jury. I have been able to gather certain
statements about the jury system

#1 juries seem to want stylish creative photographs from excellent
photographers.

#2 juries choose based on style and craftiness of a photo and do not
always look at the content of the photo

#3 entry fees are in fact a source of income to show promoters who
continue year after year to solicite for entry applications + fee
irregardless to whether or not a space in a certain category is
available or not.

#4 i am now aware that guidelines for jury photo’s from SNAG do in
fact exist but, specifics are left to interperetation of the jury.

my final observation on this point in this debate is this. The Jury
is in control and the current system benefits the jury because the
show belongs to them. However, sustainable practices are in the
best intrest of every one both jury and artist alike, at some point
those artists who have been applying to shows will begin to realize
what is in thier own best intrest and pursue those endeavors. lastly,
i do not participate in shows or in the jury process because it does
not please me to do so. I will however speak up if my observations
conclude that i should -

best regards goo

70 
And as far as revenue streams go for the show organizer, there is
also a third source. Some shows take a percentage of sales. This
cuts both ways on the "what is juried in" argument.

Well, it might be if what you make is low-end, mainstream work. And
if that’s all you want to see when you walk a show. Thank the Divine
(or whatever) not all shows do this-- I would have to pack it in
instantly. I am never going to be one of the top sellers at any
show. My work is simply not for everyone! Does that mean I should
not get the opportunity to offer it to those folks who appreciate
it?

Noel

71 
juries choose based on style and craftiness of a photo and do not
always look at the content of the photo

Seriously, Goo, it seems you are determined to think this even
though no one said anything of the sort on this forum, and it is
really not so. All that was said is that high-quality photos are
needed, to show work to best advantage. The transformation of the
shot of the two bracelets proves the truth of this beyond a shadow
of a doubt!

“The jury” is not a monlith, there is no conspiracy against
jewelers/artists. Jurors are typically unpaid, or paid a pittance,
and I believe they try to be fair and evenhanded within the
guidelines they are given. Why wouldn’t they? Other than giving high
marks to work they recognize as that of a friend (and who would not
do this?) I see no reason for them to be prejudiced, or have any axe
to grind.

And I say this in spite of the fact that I don’t seem to be able to
break into the shows I want to be in for love nor money.

Noel

72

Hi everyone

And I say this in spite of the fact that I don't seem to be able
to break into the shows I want to be in for love nor money.

I just wanted to say, don’t forget that the deadline for entry into
this year’s Saul Bell Award is this week. You still have time. The
prizes are big and the exposure, if you place, is huge. I have seen
at least one person go from being in “no shows” to just about all the
shows

I don’t mind saying that I will be sending out my entry for the
Swarovski category in the morning, so there you go. I will keep my
fingers crossed for everyone, especially me :slight_smile:

Best,
Kim Starbard
http://www.kimstarbarddesigns.com

73

noel if photographic style was not a factor then why did you pay
money to have your jury slides critiqed ? Noel, i would like find
some one on this list who can discuss three rather broad specific
questions

#1 color combinations for the jewelry and the background Example
would be a black pearl set in silver on a ______ background ?

#2 shadows no shadows direction of shadows ?

#3 if the photos are meant to determine quality Reality check here
is this there is no conspiracy… i do not believe you can find three
jurors who dont know each other to agree on how to compose a good
jewelry photo. think about this, if there is no agreement on,what
color combinations to use? or how to light and use or not use
shadows? textured background or not ? why spend lots of money ?
second, if a show has one space open why should the promoters not
disclose only one space is available before solicitation results in
say 850 entries at $45 a pop and no refunds ?

i have nothing to gain or lose in this debate i do not do shows
because it does not please me to do so, i also am dissapointed for
loss of the entire point of the ganoksin project ( elaine luther )
that those who i am attempting debate with murder the conversation by
trying make me out to be some sort ranting nut who cannot deal with
rejection rather than discuss specific questions. best regards -

goo

74 
But what does "wearability " mean, Kim? Who decides what
wearability is, what is wearable and how often something must be
able to be worn? Consider a pair of post earrings at the heavy end
of the "normal" range, let's say 4 pennyweights per side.

When speaking of “wearability”, one might also consider that a very
large base of buyers considers these (to me, suicidal) shoes quite
wearable:

http://tinyurl.com/2whsmp

I’m posting the link for those of you who never watched Sex and the
City.

Lisa Orlando
Albion, CA, US

75

Hi

#1 color combinations for the jewelry and the background Example
would be a black pearl set in silver on a ______ background ? #2
shadows no shadows direction of shadows ?

I don’t think you’re a raving lunatic at all. I think you are very
passionate about the point you are trying to make. I did have a
thought on the above. If I (as a potential exhibitor) can manage to
compose a set of 4 or 5 images that accurately (and creatively)
exhibit the nature of the work I am intending to show, does that not
add to my credibility as an artist? In other words, is a person who
can put together great images that show their jewelry from the
absolute best perspective a better potential exhibitor than someone
who cannot? I think great images do lend a great deal to my “clout”
so to speak…Remember, these images that are submitted are
indicative of all images to be involved with the show…people
typically blow a couple up and hang them in their booth…some might
be used in publicity adds for the show itself. I still agree with a
lot of your points, but I have to say that if I were to run a show, I
would absolutely go with the best images as well.

second, if a show has one space open why should the promoters not
disclose only one space is available before solicitation results
in say 850 entries at $45 a pop and no refunds ?

yuck, no fair no fair no fair…I equate attempting to break into a
high quality show that only has one spot and 849 other people vying
for it to slamming my head repeatedly against a concrete structure,
pretty hard…but life is not fair, a lot of things are hard

who i am attempting debate with murder the conversation by trying
make me out to be some sort ranting nut who cannot deal with
rejection rather than discuss specific questions.

not a nut, but a lot of people are not going to speak on this for
fear they may be perceived as “difficult” in the eyes of show
promoters.

Kim Starbard
http://www.kimstarbarddesigns.com

76

I’ve stayed out of this discussion because it doesn’t impact me in
any way but I’d like to offer one word of advice: If you open your
own store you don’t have to worry about being juried in or out of
shows. The only people you have to please are your customers.
(Alright that was more like two sentences but it was as precise as I
could get it.)

Daniel R. Spirer, G.G.
Daniel R. Spirer Jewelers, LLC
1780 Massachusetts Ave.
Cambridge, MA 02140

77 
if photographic style was not a factor then why did you pay money
to have your jury slides critiqed ? Noel, i would like find some
one on this list who can discuss three rather broad specific
questions #1 color combinations for the jewelry and the background
Example would be a black pearl set in silver on a ______ background

Black, white, or medium gray all will work, each conveying a
different “mood”. What is critical is that the lighting must be
controlled so that the edges of the piece do not “merge” with the
background. Shiny objects reflect their surroundings, which is why
the background should usually be physically separated some distance
from the piece (piece on glass, some distance above or in front of
background) when being photographed. If using film (slides), what
you get is what you get, you’re done. If using digital, one can
replace the background quite easily, given the proper tools and
skill.

Of course, a slide can be scanned, converting it to digital, and the
needed or desired manipulations can then take lace. It is also
possible to make a slide from a digital image, but why?

What I glean from the conversations here is that jurors are looking
for quality and consistency in the photography as opposed to a
hodgepodge of colored backgrounds, shooting angles, high key vs low
key, etc. Making a subject “pop” from the background is probably
helpful, psychologically, and that is done through control of
lighting and choice of the proper hue, tone and saturation of the
background or gradient.

shadows no shadows direction of shadows ?

If backgrounds are added and shadows are desired, they will have to
be drop shadows, obviously. Size, color and intensity of drop
shadows is subjective, and does affect apparent “depth” of the
image. Direction is controlled by the lighting; the direction of
drop shadows should never conflict with the direction of the primary
(not fill) lighting. IMO, id perfectly flat lighting has been used,
shadows appear un-natural…to me. In that case a circular
gradient always seems more appropriate. Beware of the shadows that
result when shoting a piece directly on the final background. they
can blend with the image and kill that “pop” you MAY be looking for.
For tall objects, a backlight is used to separate the object from
its background. This gives a tiny rim of “highlight” and lets the
object jump forward. Barn doors and gobos are used to control spill
from the backlight, unless it is a tight spot light with a snoot.

if the photos are meant to determine quality Reality check here is
this there is no conspiracy... i do not believe you can find three
jurors who dont know each other to agree on how to compose a good
jewelry photo. think about this,, if there is no agreement
on,,what color combinations to use? or how to light and use or not
use shadows? textured background or not ? why spend lots of money ?
second, if a show has one space open why should the promoters not
disclose only one space is available before solicitation results
in say 850 entries at $45 a pop and no refunds ?

Hard to comment on that, but I suspect there need be no
agreement…just consistency and good photography. Again, it seems
a little unfair to me to expect a craftsperson who has attained
demonstrable skill in one craft, to now gain skill in another…or
have to pay the heft costs of professional photography in order to
have a chance to sell their work. Again, it’s just my opinion, having
been there and done it, that it is much more profitable (isn’t that
the goal?) to find a good agent or work with retailers who are
willing to BUY your work. It takes work and effort to find them, but
this jury thing seems to be a world of work and someone is STILL
reaching into your pocket. And how does the skilled, but short-of-$$$
person get in?

Wayne

78 
if photographic style was not a factor then why did you pay money
to have your jury slides critiqed ?

I did not say photographic style is not a factor. Just as the
re-work of the shot of the two bracelets shows that quality of
photography is a factor, it shows that style of photography is a
factor. The two (style and quality) are difficult, if not impossible
to separate.

But there is, I still contend, a difference between high-quality
shots that make your work look as good as it can look, and judging
slides as though the quality of the photograph were all that
matters, without regard for the work in the photograph.

I paid money to have my slides critiqued because that is what the
jury sees, and I was hoping for useful insights I could use to
improve my acceptance rate. The critique, by the way, contained no
comments on the quality of the photography in my slides. It only
skewered the work itself (and my ego).

I think I would argue that the best jury slide photography is
“transparent”; if you notice the photography itself, it is
distracting from the work it depicts, which is bad.

I don’t think anyone has taken on your broad questions because the
answer is always going to be “It depends”. But, that said, the
standard these days is a black background that shades to white or
light gray (occasionally blue), ideally produced by the use of
lights rather than a graduated background or computer effects, and a
soft shadow directly below the piece or slightly to both sides.

The CraftBoston site, as someone kindly showed us, has all the
slides of all the accepted artists on it. A quick perusal shows that
all but 8 of the 61 jewelers follow the above description. The
others used either solid black (5) or solid white (3) background.
Doing images some other way might make the work stand out, but it
had better stand out in a big (and positive) way, or the gamble is
too great. Because a different style of photography runs the risk of
drawing attention to the photography, not the work, which is
generally not a formula for success,

Noel

79 
When speaking of "wearability", one might also consider that a
very large base of buyers considers these (to me, suicidal) shoes
quite wearable: http://tinyurl.com/2whsmp

I guess “wearability” is very subjective then, as the shoes in the
link seem fairly standard party footwear. Agony after a few hours on
one’s feet, yes - but suicidal, no.

Helen - who has to have a few drinks inside before I dance for the
last few hours of a party wearing such precarious shoes!
Preston, UK

80 
color combinations for the jewelry and the background Example would
be a black pearl set in silver on a ______ background ?

Gradient gray background, either an actual background or a created
drop shadow look. That’s the standard for jury slides.

shadows no shadows direction of shadows ?

It depends. Shadows shouldn’t be distracting, too big or pointless.
Sometimes they help you understand what is in the picture. That is
where a professional photographer is a big help, because we do what
we do best, and we pay them to do what they do best.

if the photos are meant to determine quality Reality check here is
this there is no conspiracy... i do not believe you can find three
jurors who dont know each other to agree on how to compose a good
jewelry photo. think about this,, if there is no agreement on,,what
color combinations to use? or how to light and use or not use
shadows? textured background or not ? why spend lots of money ?

There is agreement. The is available.

Elaine
http://www.CreativeTextureTools.com ™
Hard to Find Tools for Metal Clay