On judging photographs
By
Kipp Baker
Have you ever felt our judging lacked
something? Could it be that “my pride and joy” didn’t make it? Or
was it, the judge that “didn’t get it”? It seems that there are
always those comments and jokes about a judge, but why? This
explores that dynamic, seeks insight and salves not only my own
wounds, but perhaps other’s, whose work I respect. Issues like this
always seem to surround art, but for me, that’s part of the
attraction. Finally, this is a plea for more of our members to
contribute to show work (in competitions?) to learn more from our
submissions and about ourselves. What we learn from seeing “that
which otherwise would not have been seen” is the essence of art’s
meaningfulness.
In a recent conversation I was reminded that
the arts are ultimately about language, and any language has
elements - a vocabulary. That vocabulary has a usage, or its
grammar. We do not comprehend, or judge, a poem the same way we do a
news article, a novel or a food order from a menu to our waiter. In
each of these, the use of language has elements that are quite
different one from the other.
The vocabulary of visual art includes concrete
elements of line, shape and form. The grammar includes principles of
design that refer to pattern, rhythm, balance, texture and value
(lights or darks) and color. Expanded discussion of these structures
of language (and art) is beyond this scope. However, the
demonstration by an artist or photographer using this language goes
a long way in determining the value inherent in the poetic phrasing
of his work. We see it almost immediately.
Articulation about any values we perceive
differs altogether. Too often we slough off the tough debate about
how art affects us with the misdirection of “Oh, it’s so
subjective”. Comments like this say, with a verbal slight of hand,
“Quick! Look over there!,” and when we do, we lose insight to
further the discussion To grow and learn, we must learn how to
articulate about the visual. So must our judges.
What makes a good image? Criteria may differ
by name, but how we perceive each of these values (listed next,)
determine how we – and a judge - assesses quality. The following
percentages of valuation are debatable criteria that help determine
ultimate worth to the viewer:
- Craft or Execution (12%) - most
often touted or rebuked in qualifying a photograph, and yet
it is the least important of all the criteria. “It’s soooo
sharp!” (or not), “it’s incredibly detailed”, (or not) or
“there’s wonderful tonality!” (or not) are the most common
expressions of attention to – or lack of - craft. The lesser
talented debate endlessly about what equipment yields the best
photographs. They blithely ignore some of the most compelling
photographs ever made used no lenses whatsoever; had
deliberately increased grain or a very limited tonal scale or
have used no traditional camera at all (pinhole cameras,
photograms and scans.)
More to the point, pure craft, is no guarantee of a great
photograph, but without it, you reduce the chances tremendously
that another will view the work with respect. By the same token,
when a judge makes no mention of, or misses the craft in
execution, it is a certain tip-off to their (lack of)
qualifications, no matter what is resume’ said.
- Production Values – (13%) These are
the most difficult for an untrained, inexperienced, or
non-photographer person to recognize, but they are the bedrock
foundation of the best photographs. Often, they are completely
ignored, because – unless you were present at the making of the
photograph, they are difficult to understand. Production values
are everything that brings the photograph to one’s eyes. It
conceivably includes all the other criteria, but in this
context, it is much more liberal in its consideration of craft,
execution, subject matter, and composition due to its inclusion
of creative context.
Knowing how to see the production values inherent in a
photograph is arguably the single most important factor in
judging a photograph. How was the shot made? What effort was put
into making the photo? Is it apparent what film and camera
combinations were used? Where was the photographer positioned?
Where does the light come from? What is the quality of light and
how did it get that way? What skill (or deficiency) is revealed
by these values and observations? Is it obvious that it was
Photoshopped, perhaps to compensate for a shortcoming somewhere
else?
The shot of an underbelly of a shark revealing its deathly grin,
no matter how otherwise poorly crafted, will certainly get our
attention because the production values of execution are so
high. Few of us could ever hope to get under the sea and so well
equipped as to successfully generate that shot. In this case,
the production values are are obvious, but other times,
production values may be just as gut-wrenching or just as
difficult to assemble, but not so obviously dramatic as the full
submersion aqueous environment of denizens of the deep. We
appreciate that and value the photo for it.
- Subject Matter / Content (11%) This
is the most obvious, most basic, most historical and most
overrated of all the elements of photography. A
documentary-style photograph of a beautiful woman, reasonably
rendered, will win out over other just as exquisitely executed
photographs 9 times out of 10. This is especially true where a
male judge is in the position. Primal urges are hard to ignore.
Photographs were invented because they could render – and hold -
an object or scene in perfect harmony with its dimension, scale
and proportion. This is something artists have desired since the
beginnings of cave paintings. All too often, perfection in
rendering was touted as art, when nothing was further from the
truth. Even today, competitions everywhere have photographs
rated higher than they should be, simply on the basis of their
subject alone. It’s true.
- Composition – (13%) Arguably the
single most important element of all the criteria, next to
production values, composition first tells the story the
photographer wants to convey. Composition both leads us in and
escorts the eye to its divine conclusion, or, it leaves us
waiting for a punch line, standing in blinded befuddlement -
hoping somehow to understand the joke. It’s no laughing matter
when the composition fails. The ancient Greeks knew this, that’s
why they invented “phi” – or the golden mean. It’s all math and
physics, guys. Matter, energy - and art – they are neither
created nor destroyed, they just change form (composition.)
- It “speaks to me” – (51%) Last but
not least, this is where the art of a photograph loses out or
wins you over. Science be damned. All other factors are moot,
hence the 51% rating. Like all art, it is, without exception,
entirely dependent upon the world experience, consequent visual
sophistication (how well do they understand the language?) and
tastes of the viewer – not necessarily the artistic
craftsmanship of the artist or photographer.
No matter the intent, the craft demonstrated, the production
values touted and displayed, nor the subject matter revealed by
superb composition – if it “doesn’t speak to you,” you don’t
hear, much less see, what the artist is trying to say. Too, if
one is unfamiliar with historic and cultural context, no
reference, however blatant in the title (mythological, ancient
or otherwise,) will improve the image in the eyes of the judge.
“Speaking to us” is usually an all-or-nothing proposition. This
is especially true as the photograph approaches non-standard or
non-traditional techniques. Rare is the photo of the avant-garde
that speaks to us all - or the judge-du-jour.
What must a good judge understand about
judging open photo competitions? From the NY Times website – the
Daily Lesson Plan, (9th –12th graders are
leaning these things) 8/6/2004, “The Decisive Moment” (http://www.nytimes.com/learning/teachers/lessons/20040806friday.html
)
I would suggest the following:
“A good judge -
·
Knows the language of the visual - what makes a
photograph interesting - considers foreground, background, subject
matter, lighting, framing, etc. (Not just what may be “distracting”)
·
Knows a range of subject matter, symbols, and
potential ideas in the visual arts.
·
Understands how visual, spatial, temporal, and
functional values of artworks are tempered by culture and history
·
Understands the visual arts in relation to history and
culture.
·
Understands relationships among works of art in terms
of history, aesthetics, and culture
·
Understands the characteristics and merits of one's
own artwork and the artwork of others.
·
Identifies intentions of those creating artworks;
·
Understands some of the implications of intention and
purpose in particular works of art;
·
Understands how various interpretations can be used to
understand and evaluate works of visual art”
Art is - at the very least - a reflection of
our culture, and it is many things in today’s global cultural
climate. History sorts out what has staying power or is significant
in its contribution to humanity or simply faddish fashion. Artists
inadvertently - or by design - become part of movements in the art
world. For painters we have a well-documented history. There are
recent movements of Impressionism, Fauvism, Expressionism, Art
Nouveau, Art Deco, Cubism, Surrealism, Abstract Art, Abstract
Expressionism, Pop Art, Dada School, Op Art – the list goes on. For
photographers, it is less well documented but the list includes all
of these and more – (“the New Topographers” is one that comes to
mind. Again – the movement is not so well defined - but it is out
there, nonetheless.)
In conclusion, if the judge shows a diminished
capacity in any of these areas of understanding – then their
critiques lose credibility. To render their critiques in a tactful
and helpful manner of humility – this boosts credibility
immeasurably. To offer vulgar or denegrating comments about our work
as a group (as one judge was recently rumored to say,) is the height
of arrogance, insecurity and mean-spiritedness. It completely
devalues that person’s worth as a judge and good-riddance to that
opinionated photo bigot.
We can try to find them, seek out these guides
- these knowledgeable judges, but at the end of the day we can only
hope that those we empower as judges are just as directed and
enlightened as we are. If they are not, then we must continue the
search, as best we can, on our own. We must continue to seek what
makes good photography interesting. Ultimately we realize the worth
of our search as photographers or artists in continuing our
explorations of the medium, blessed by judges or not. Good shooting
to you.
Kipp Baker
November 2004
|
