Portfolio Reviews

[Julian Boulter]

Hi all,

I have never attended a portfolio review but I have read up quite a bit about them on this forum and other sources.

One thing I want to know which I have not really seen explained yet is (and I guess this depends on what the photographer wants out of the reveiw and on the particular review event) do photographers present their portfolio as one might present an exhibition or a book, i.e. a themed project of a particular subject matter containing a series of prints as opposed to random prints of the same subject (e.g. a portfolio of landscapes) or random prints of different subjects?

I guess the former approach is usually the case as a collection of prints presenting a cohesive theme / story may have more impact but exhibitions and books are usually accompanied by texts complementing the concept of the series which can add to the experience of viewing the work so in the case of a portfolio review how do people approach this? do they include text with the prints? do they present the portfolio in book form, or perhaps talk through the concept at the review?

Just interested to hear how others approach this.

Cheers

Julian

[Sean Galbraith]

I think it would depend on what you're looking to get out of it. Are you looking for to find out if you have skills as a photographer in general, and how you could improve? Or are you looking for an opinion on a specific project you're working on, and how it could be improved? Proceed accordingly.

[Ed Richards]

Your work is really nice, but very traditional. (Not a criticism on this forum.) My personal experience, bolstered by looking at the photographers selected as the best from various reviews, is that most portfolio reviewers are looking for new and trendy, not for traditional work, no matter how good - or maybe especially not if it is very good. So before you sign up for one, make sure there is some fit with your work.

[Richard M. Coda]

I agree with Ed. If you're not trying to make a political or social statement you will not be happy with the result. Save your money and put it into your photography (travel, supplies, maybe a workshop) instead. And, yes, your work is very nice.

[Tori Nelson]

Julian, your work is lovely. I really love the Hoar Frost.

[Frank Petronio]

Paid Portfolio Reviews are great -- for the reviewers!

But you would probably get more valuable advice if you asked the members of this forum for free feedback. You might not like all of it but looking at the diverse opinions will be good too.

[Merg Ross]

You have your way of seeing, very good results.

As to reviews, you simply have two questions to ask and answer:

1) Whom do I admire to the extent that I would seek their evaluation of my work?

2) What are my expectations from such a review.

It is your work. Show what you consider your best, in the manner you prefer. Do not anticipate what the reviewer may prefer. Good reviewers also have much to learn, and your work may open their eyes.

Unfortunately, I have witnessed good, young talent destroyed by portfolio reviews. Back to my first point, be very selective of the reviewer.

[David Karp]

You might find this helpful: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=51256

[John Powers]

Julian,

Through workshops, APUG convention and college courses in my retirement I have had the pleasure of portfolio reviews from the following artists. My work for each portfolio was related to a theme. In each case the reviewer found it important to have a brief and concise Artist’s Statement. Their comments considered the value of the theme and how the work, usually twenty or more pieces, related to the objectives of the statement.

Lois Conner `04; Andrea Modica & Chip Forelli `05; Les McLean, Paula Chamlee, Michael Smith `06; Thomas Roma, William E. Williams `07; Martin Parr, Abelardo Morell `08; Toby Jurovics, Joel Sternfeld `09

Go for it. I felt I have learned much from each experience.

John

[Thom Bennett]

Check out what Mary Virginia Swanson has to say on the subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5JUIUGMnzA

Also, check out the latest New Orleans Photo Alliance blog entry:

http://neworleansphotoalliance.blogspot.com/2009_12_01_archive.html

There you will see this year's Reviewer's Choice Awards, the bodies of work that the reviewers chose as their top three out of about 60 photographers and scroll to the bottom of the blog entry for an interview with Mary Virginia Swanson that includes some tips on attending a portfolio review.

Personally, I found that each reviewer was a little different; some liked for you to talk about your work even before you showed it, some liked to look in silence and then ask you questions and some just liked to have a conversation as they looked through. Overall, I liked the experience although I would say that to get the most out of it you should have specific goals of what you want. Do you want gallery representation? Do you want to get into museums? Do you want to get published? Also, the experience really shows you where you do fit in (or not, in my case) with the current trends in photography. The best part of the experience was actually in the waiting room hanging out with all the other photographers and getting to see a vast range of work as well as get impromptu "reviews" from the other participants.

[Brian Ellis]

Every workshop I've attended has included a review of the participants' work by the instructing photographer - in my case John Sexton (4 reviews from him), Bruce Barnbaum, Tillman Crane, Ruth Bernhard, Michael Smith/Paula Chamlee, and a bunch of others. Personally I'd rather get the benefits of both the workshop and the review rather than just paying someone for a review alone. But if you have a specific goal in mind or if you want to show more photographs than the workshop reviewer permits (usually 10 - 15 in my experience) a review alone might be the way to go. And either way, obviously if you're a traditional landscape photographer for example you don't want to select a street photographer or an architectural photographer or an "ultra-modernist" to review your work.

[Frank Petronio]

I don't know, having a landscape photographer review landscape photography is sort of a insular closed little loop isn't it? I mean the guy is going to be critical of a few things and give you some bon-bons and be overall encouraging... or he won't be doing many more reviews, lol.

Practice hearing, "Nice", 'Interesting", and "Not bad..."

[Merg Ross]

Practice hearing, "Nice", 'Interesting", and "Not bad..."

Or, in the case of Edward Weston, who would shuffle through a group of prints separating them into two piles. All of this was in silence. At the conclusion, he would point to one pile and utter, "these I like". Invariably, the meager pile got the praise. Certainly not a critical review, but not ego shattering either.

[Jim collum]

Of the review's i've been to, the Photo Lucida review in Portland was the most instructive. They had a large number of reviewers, from different areas of the industry (mostly 'fine-art' oriented). Gallery owners, museum curators, book publishers... but no photographers.

If your goal is to sell your images, figure out the target audience. Rarely do photographers buy photography.. the above type of review would be more geared for you. Even if those reviewing your work don't find it applicable to their venue.. they have a good idea of where it might sell. For that review, they suggested bringing samples of 2 projects/bodies of work.. about a dozen images in each. It was also very helpful to talk to the other photographers there.. not for advise about the work.. but about their experiences and feedback. From that, you get an even broader sense of what that 'market' is looking for. The most common thing looked for was a unique vision. Something new.. either a new way of looking at things, a new aesthetic... something that sets the work apart from the hundreds/thousands of portfolios they see each year. If the work reminded them of someone else's.. then they weren't interested. But they'd tell you that..there is *no* false praise at this type of review... so it's easy to see how this type of review could halt the progress of someone in the early stages of their career.

If your goal is the improvement of your vision/craft, then look for the photographers who's style and technique offers something to your own. These seem to be the most helpful type while developing your own view of the world photographically.

Before venturing into the first type of review.. consider a one-on-one session with Mary Virginia Swanson ( http://www.mvswanson.com/ ). She is an excellent resource for figuring out a goal for your work.

[Richard M. Coda]

We recently took our 15 year old daughter to the National Portfolio Review Days... basically a troupe of art college people that travel across the country and review potential students' work. Her art teacher thought her (painting and drawing) portfolio was strong enough to go as a sophomore. He was right. She was told if she had been a senior she would have been offered a scholarship from two different schools on the spot. Anyway, I accompanied her on her critiques while my wife waited in line for the next school.

Some of the schools had graduate programs as well. Most had photography. From what I saw of the photography being shown it was mediocre at best (IMHO), typical stuff you see coming out of the schools today. I heard one reviewer ask this kid if he had ever used a view camera before... he didn't even know what one was and had never been in a darkroom. The reviewer went on to tell this kid that he would have to take those classes if he wished to study photography at any college.

So, getting to my point... next year I'm going to bring my portfolio, too. These are free and I will just say that I'm thinking of pursuing a MFA... might be a good way to get some free critiques from people not familiar with your work.

[Greg Miller]

Portfolio Reviews are best when you have a body of work, you have a specific objective in mind for that work (book, exhibit, ...), and the reviewers are people whose positions would be able to get you closer to your objective, either by telling you where you need to improve, or by getting you access to the venue(s) that you desire.

Generally that means you will want a body of work that is cohesive and comprehensive (as opposed to a random set of prints of a similar subject).

But first you should identify what you want to achieve from the portfolio review and if the reviewers are a good fit for that.

[DavidFisk]

FWIW, think it was Sibelius who said, "Nobody ever raised a monument to a critic."

[Toyon]

It really depends how you take praise and criticism from presumed authorities in the field. They are only going to take the briefest look at your work. Depending on its particular qualities that could be a bad thing or a good thing. Keep in mind, that most critics are from a part of the art world that values most the illusion that art always has a singular and identifiable leading edge that acts as the "engine of culture". Like brokers and analysts trying to divine the best performing financial assets, these critics want to find the work that is driving the direction of other "important" artists. A correct pick will help elevate them from the humdrum work of running a gallery/museum/workshops into ennoblement as true mandarins of the field. Mary Virginia Swanson is just a kind of agent promoting this system. Don't waste your time, unless your ultimate goal is to essentially "card count' the art world and game your way to insider "important" status.

[Julian Boulter]

thanks to everyone for the replies, makes an interesting and informative read and also thanks for the nice comments on my landscape work although my post was not related to the work on my website.

I am currently working on several cohesive projects some of which are shot around London (close to where I live) and mostly on 8x10 colour negative. I guess what Im hoping to get out of it is guidance and direction and possibly help with publishing and/or gallery representation.

Having never attended one of these before I am interested in hearing how people have approached presenting a cohesive series whithout the luxury of the literature which normally accompanies an exhibition or a book.

From what I have read here talking about the concept at some point during the review seems to be an option but I guess it depends on the actual review. Is it worth printing out a summary sheet such as a gallery hand out? I was also wondering if I should present more than one project at a given review, or just concentrate on the one? Again I guess I need to research the review session before hand and try to establish the guidelines.

Julian

[Heroique]

[…] I guess I need to research the review session before hand and try to establish the guidelines.

Yes, this is where one might begin – I often do.

Makes it easier to coordinate your “statement of objectives” + your photos + the session’s own aims.

Less chance of an unnecessary mismatch between the three.

I would only add – as others have noted – that your selection of reviewer deserves just as much attention.

I try to avoid those who may be talented judges, but who might tell me only what I want to hear.

[Greg Miller]

From what I have read here talking about the concept at some point during the review seems to be an option but I guess it depends on the actual review. Is it worth printing out a summary sheet such as a gallery hand out? I was also wondering if I should present more than one project at a given review, or just concentrate on the one? Again I guess I need to research the review session before hand and try to establish the guidelines.

Julian

It can be a long day for the reviewers, who are usually seeing many portfolios and can be pretty tired towards the end of the day. You should have a 30 second intro where you describe your work and your objectives. Then let your work speak for itself, and listen to the feedback. Expect to get a variety of responses, everything from praise, to zero interest, to suggestions for improvement. What can be difficult is deciding what to take to heart and what to ignore. You never know what a reviewer is tired of seeing or if they just had a fight with their spouse or had a bad trip to the review site.

You should definitely bring "leave behinds" so that if there is some interest the reviewer will have something to remember you by - a small sample of your work, like a postcard, is good. I have had cases where I didn't get great vibes during the time with a specific reviewer but then got contacted later by them. I would not expect a reviewer to read a summary during the actual review time.

It is possible to show 2 bodies of work, but that cuts the time for feedback in half for each portfolio. One strategy is to show samples of both quickly at the beginning and ask the reviewer if they prefer to focus on one or the other. Then you can focus the time spent with that reviewer with the portfolio that they connected with the most.

[John Voss]

... most portfolio reviewers are looking for new and trendy, not for traditional work, no matter how good - or maybe especially not if it is very good. So before you sign up for one, make sure there is some fit with your work.

From my experience, Ed's statement is particularly true of reviewers who are gallerists. If the gallery they are associated with has an on-line presence, or is close enough to visit, do so. You'll be better able to assess the likelihood of a good fit that way. OTOH, I found reviewers who had an academic association to be more open to constructive observations about work without being as judgmental about its' place in the contemporary art scene. If, however, you are certain that your work is unique and original (as one photographer's was at the review I attended), you may find reviewers utterly unable to offer much at all. Too many of them follow the trends they think have been "accepted", and have no idea how to really appraise work they've not already seen some example of given positive critical reaction elsewhere.

[Mark Sawyer]

... most portfolio reviewers are looking for new and trendy, not for traditional work, no matter how good - or maybe especially not if it is very good.


...most critics are from a part of the art world that values most the illusion that art always has a singular and identifiable leading edge that acts as the "engine of culture"... Don't waste your time, unless your ultimate goal is to essentially "card count' the art world and game your way to insider "important" status.

I think this is true of many portfolio reviews, often given by gallery owners and university profesors, but that is as it should be, as many reviews are geared towards aspiring artists coming from university programs and hoping to make it in the fine-art gallery game.

Some have a practical stance, and want to make a living through making their art, which seems a scary proposition at best. Others seek that important status, wanting to achieve some sort of immortallity through their photography. (I'm with Woody Allen on this one, "I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying.")

The bright side of this sort of review is that if you have (in the eyes of the reviewers),
strong, cutting-edge work, you may be offered a show, publication, or gallery representation.

And there is another type of other review, generally given by accomplished photographers, that concentrate more on the "photographic" side of photography. Here you'll find real appreciation for the traditional photography so often pooh-poohed at the fine arts reviews. Probably the most helpful thing to come out of such reviews is to see your own work through the eyes of someone who's work you respect, and hear how they articulate what they see through your work.

It's fun to get reactions to your photography at either sort of review, and sometimes, maybe, perhaps, if you're lucky, you'll hear something informative, even a little bit helpful. But I've watched and been in a few reviews, and most comments for most participants are cut-and-pasted from the reviewers' templated comments. And in the end, when you go back to making your own images, all the weight is back on your own shoulders.

[Ed Richards]

One good thing that can come from a review is to stamp out any notions you might have about your working being of any interest to a gallery. Once you get past that, you can begin to think about why you are taking pictures. If it is to get into the art world, then you know you have to change dramatically - grab that Diana and some magic mushrooms and find a new vision. If you are gallery material - why are you hanging around here, you need to be on the trendy art forums.:-)

I have done one review and one workshop - the review was useful to adjust my expectations, but the workshop gave me real information that helped my photography. Not so much directly - the teaching part was too slmplistic since it turned out to be aimed at beginners - but seeing the workflow of the instructor and how he ran his studio was invaluable.

[paulr]

I've only been to one portfolio review event and I found the experience incredibly valuable. The tangible benefits all evaporated (shows, publications, etc.), but I learned a ton.

I completely agree that you need to know what you're looking for. And you may be looking for more than one thing (feedback, editing help, representation, show opportunities, etc. etc.). Being open to different benefits helps, because you may not get all your first choice reviewers. Some of the reviewers will only be in a position to offer you feedback, for example.

The most important thing I got it was just experience showing my work. I learned a lot about editing and making short presentations. Mostly I learned how completely and upredictably personal people's reactions are. I got every reaction imaginable, from glowing to scathing to barely comprehensible. And I think they were all honest.

Having these varied experiences, over and over, has completely cured me of any fears associated with showing my work. I now know going in that they may like it or they may hate it, and that's life, and it has nothing to to do with my self worth, and nothing to do with the chances of someone else liking it.

This revelation alone was worth the price of admission.

[paulr]

...most portfolio reviewers are looking for new and trendy, not for traditional work, no matter how good...

Maybe, but it really depends on the reviewer. There are a number of galleries, even in places like NYC, that specialize in traditional or even completely retro kinds of work.

It's important to do your homework ... figure out who the reviewers are, their specialties, etc. etc.. No different than if you're showing work to galleries. You don't want to waste everyone's time by showing your platinum prints to a gallery that's all about video installations, or that only represents famous dead people!

[artworksgallery]

You might find this helpful: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=51256

That was a good read...