Contests - What do judges look for?

[Jens Hofby]

There next cup of Coffie

 

[flea77]

A while back I had to judge a photo contest (evidently I was the most qualified they knew, LOL), anyway, what I looked for was an image that "spoke to me", something that made me want to look at it, something I found interesting. Technicals, sweetness, exposure, etc only entered into the equation so far as the image made me want to look at it. A cute girl by a waterfall can be boring, or it can be engaging, depends. What everyone says above is absolutely correct, it is what the judge find appealing, nothing else. If the judge was just bitten by a dog, any picture containing a dog would probably not win regardless of how well it is executed!

Allan

 

[Fleetwood271]

A while back I had to judge a photo contest (evidently I was the most qualified they knew, LOL), anyway, what I looked for was an image that "spoke to me", something that made me want to look at it, something I found interesting. Technicals, sweetness, exposure, etc only entered into the equation so far as the image made me want to look at it. A cute girl by a waterfall can be boring, or it can be engaging, depends. What everyone says above is absolutely correct, it is what the judge find appealing, nothing else. If the judge was just bitten by a dog, any picture containing a dog would probably not win regardless of how well it is executed!

Allan

Good Point!

 

[Fleetwood271]

And when you win, what does that actually say about your photography?

That you're an award winning photographer?

 

[Fleetwood271]

A while back I had to judge a photo contest (evidently I was the most qualified they knew, LOL), anyway, what I looked for was an image that "spoke to me", something that made me want to look at it, something I found interesting. Technicals, sweetness, exposure, etc only entered into the equation so far as the image made me want to look at it. A cute girl by a waterfall can be boring, or it can be engaging, depends. What everyone says above is absolutely correct, it is what the judge find appealing, nothing else. If the judge was just bitten by a dog, any picture containing a dog would probably not win regardless of how well it is executed!

Allan

Oh, I found it interesting that there were some shots there that took a lot of set-up, multiple flashes, various props, etc. And none of them placed. It was the "spur of the moment" images that someone just happened to capture, that the judge liked.

 

[The_Traveler]

Oh, I found it interesting that there were some shots there that took a lot of set-up, multiple flashes, various props, etc. And none of them placed. It was the "spur of the moment" images that someone just happened to capture, that the judge liked.

There are as many technique niches in photography as there are in any art.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

And when you win, what does that actually say about your photography?

That you're an award winning photographer?

And that's how it works. If you lose the judges sucked. If you win, it was well deserved, and you are awesome! Then someone else believes other photos were better, and your's wasn't worthy...

...and the world continues to spin on it's axis, with a slight wobble.

 

[KmH]

I just received a message from someone who talked to the judge and was told that she was looking for the "it" factor, which in her definition meant an image that was taken in an instant, by being in the right place at the right time.
Anything that was staged, set-up, or posed in any way did not have a chance.

So, it was a snapshot contest, not a fine art contest, and luck rather than overall skill was the criteria.

You don't mention what organization conducted the contest? A newspaper, a local art association, a high school, a professional photographers association?

 

[Derrel]

Oftentimes, kitschy, crappy,stereotypical and cliche pictures are selected as winners. Depends on the contest, and the judging. Think "LCD" most of the time--lowest common denominator. Seek out fiery sunsets, busty babes, cute kitties, charming children, luscious landscapes,and other similar cliche material...you'll probably make honorable mention, at least!

 

[bentcountershaft]

Oftentimes, kitschy, crappy,stereotypical and cliche pictures are selected as winners. Depends on the contest, and the judging. Think "LCD" most of the time--lowest common denominator. Seek out fiery sunsets, busty babes, cute kitties, charming children, luscious landscapes,and other similar cliche material...you'll probably make honorable mention, at least!

A busty babe watching charming children play with a cute kitten next to a mountain waterfall during an awe inspiring sunset will surely win.

 

[The_Traveler]

I just received a message from someone who talked to the judge and was told that she was looking for the "it" factor, which in her definition meant an image that was taken in an instant, by being in the right place at the right time.
Anything that was staged, set-up, or posed in any way did not have a chance.

So, it was a snapshot contest, not a fine art contest, and luck rather than overall skill was the criteria.

'Snapshots' are not necessarily bad, unskilled, unworthy.
Cartier-Bresson made snapshots, as does every street shooter.

(replaced defective original)

.

 

[spacefuzz]

Oftentimes, kitschy, crappy,stereotypical and cliche pictures are selected as winners. Depends on the contest, and the judging. Think "LCD" most of the time--lowest common denominator. Seek out fiery sunsets, busty babes, cute kitties, charming children, luscious landscapes,and other similar cliche material...you'll probably make honorable mention, at least!

Careful with the busty babes I once had an image score last place because one of the judges found it too "titilating" (see below). Of course Ive also had judges reject every sunset picture because he felt they were cliche.
Like everyone else has said its art and its all opinion of the judges. Ive had a lot of work rejected from compeitions, and then when I see the winners I can go oh, so thats what they were looking for. Its not that your pictures are bad, its just not what they were looking for.

 

[Fleetwood271]

I just received a message from someone who talked to the judge and was told that she was looking for the "it" factor, which in her definition meant an image that was taken in an instant, by being in the right place at the right time.
Anything that was staged, set-up, or posed in any way did not have a chance.

So, it was a snapshot contest, not a fine art contest, and luck rather than overall skill was the criteria.

You don't mention what organization conducted the contest? A newspaper, a local art association, a high school, a professional photographers association?

It was sponsored by the County Arts Council. The judge was a professor from a local community college. The brochure says she has exhibited at regional colleges and universities, and at museums, and various galleries.
Given all this, one would think she would be looking for composition, technical details, etc. Not snapshots.

However, as Bitter stated, the world continues to spin.

 

[Fleetwood271]

And when you win, what does that actually say about your photography?

That you're an award winning photographer?

And that's how it works. If you lose the judges sucked. If you win, it was well deserved, and you are awesome! Then someone else believes other photos were better, and your's wasn't worthy...

...and the world continues to spin on it's axis, with a slight wobble.

Well said...

 

[JWellman]

One of my friends said, "Jess...you ought to add some of your photos to contests!"
(It's always the 'snap-shooters' who say those things to me)

My reply, "I would, but losing and I really don't see eye to eye. :blushing: