What happened to the B&W portfolio contest?

[Richard Schlesinger]

It seems as if I stirred up something on the order of a -------- nest! I think paulr has got it about right. I had forgotten about the book thing - the offer to publish my wonderful images in a book at, as I remember, a greatly inflated price.

I made, and make, no claim to be knowledgable regarding more than one of these 'contests' some years ago, although some of the magazines like Art in America, again as I remember, had many ads requesting entries in similar contests.

B&W seems a reputable publication, and I certainly made and make no evaluation of whatever contests they are running. But I do think those of you interested in entering your work may benefit from being aware that there is a seamy side to this business (at least I so believe) and may want to look more closely. At the time I entered I did not. And felt an utter fool for being taken in.

I should add I am a bit puzzled by the reaction to my first post. It certainly was not an attack on B&W (re-reading confirms this) but it does seem to me an ox has been gored which, apparently, belongs to someone.

[Brian Ellis]

"So who is Grump and who is he to say this was a scam? How does he know there were not expenses related to putting this event on, etc., etc.? What event was it? He makes a general statement and does not give enough context to know if he is being accurate or fair.

There are people coming on to this and other forums pretending to have knowledge that I do not think they really have. They provide misleading information.

For example, a couple of weeks ago there was a question about a digitally created nergative the person wnated (sic) to enlarge but was having trouble with the high values. One responder suggested using Azo paper. Now, in my expereince Azo is not useable for making enlargements. This post was very misleading and I can not figure why anyone would come on and say such a thing. Now, in this case Grump comes on and makes a general statement that probably is not related to the original question. I have not heard of scams in the photo world that are similar to what may or may not be happening in other areas. Yet this over generalization is made and put out as knowledge. "

This is a public forum. Nobody has to pass an entrance exam to participate. We all know how to read, we all choose what we read and ignore what we don't, and we all can evaluate what we read based on upon our own standards, without your help. If all else fails there are moderators who can edit or delete anything that is inappropriate. Considering your frequent expressions of displeasure at what is posted here I'm surprised you continue to participate. And if you want to discuss people posting comments about subjects they know nothing about, I remember a recent thread in which you soundly criticized someone who talked about depth of focus when it was obvious you were confusing depth of focus with depth of field.

Even in this thread you criticize others for overgeneralizing, yet you justify contest entry fees by generalizations about judges being flown in, meals and lodging being paid for, return postage having to be paid etc. etc. (as an aside, I've never seen a public contest in which entries were returned at the postage expense of the contest sponsors). Sure, that kind of contest exists and when it does a sizable entry fee is justified. But that type of contest is often coupled with other things such as an exhibition, lectures, workshops, etc. Was the B&W contest that started this discussion that type of contest or was it (and others referred to here) simply a contest in which photographs were mailed in and judged by staff members or one or more local judges? I don't know and apparently neither do you. If generalizations bother you so much why don't you tell us about specific contests and why the fees charged for them are justified?

You say you can't figure out why someone would come on and say such a thing (referring to someone's apparent mention of Azo in the context of an enlarging paper). Well of course the reason should be obvious - just as you confused depth of focus with depth of field, the person who committed the sin of talking about Azo as an enlarging paper was confused. That's o.k, no harm done in either case. This is supposed to be a learning forum. We learn from our mistakes and the mistakes of others. Certainly the person who talked about Azo as an enlarging paper learned something and others who may have been thinking of it as an enlarging paper learned something too. That's one of the reasons why this forum exists.

You're a frequent critic of personal criticism, yet you ask "who is Grump" as though Grump's views are unworthy of expression because he hasn't achieved some known level of expertise or fame. Everyone who participates here has different degrees of knowledge and we all learn from each other. Since so much of what is posted here seems to bother you perhaps you'd be happier leaving here and joining up with a forum that only allows certified experts to post messages that meet your standards.

[Richard Schlesinger]

Brian, I couldn't have said it better except for one thing. I have too achieved a known level of expertise! But I'm not telling what on a scale of 1 to 2. And further, in answer to the question "Who is Grump?" well, my wife knows, so there!

[Oren Grad]

grump, the problem with your being grump is that you don't sound like David Vestal, who is the real Grump. Or was, anyway, until issue #100 of same. Maybe you need to be supergrump, or ultragrump, or son of grump, or...

[steve simmons]

I did not and have not confused depth of field with depth of focus.

I did not justify anything. I simply added information that sometimes these contests cost a lot of money to put on. Since Grump was very vague in what contest he was criticizing I simply wanted people to know that what he was saying was not necessarily justified. There is frequently assumptions made and posts made that the cost of something is unjustified. Brian, you were critical of the cost of attending the Silver Conference and did so without knowing who the speakers were going to be. Why not wait until you have all the info before making a negative post. You were too quick to criticize and later you came back and admitted you did not know who the speakers would be. It is a little like a major publication printing an erroneous story and then putting a correction on the back page. You did not know what you were talking about when you made the post about the Silver Conference but that did not stop you from putting out your uninformed opinion as fact. This is what I am complaining about.

Since many people just listen in and do not actively participate I think we all should be more circumspect in our comments least we mis-inform these listeners.

steve simmons

[Richard Schlesinger]

Oren, I was not aware David Vestal had laid claim to the name Grump. It is one that has been applied to me for lo, these many years, not always with great fondness. However, as I seem to have infringed on possibly copyrighted territory I shall, forthwith, change. I certainly do not want the Forum Police after me anymore!

[Oren Grad]

Nah, he'd probably be cool about it. My hangup only, I'm sure, being both a Vestal fan and something of an apprentice grump myself...

[Paul Metcalf]

Since this is rapidly digressing, I'll give a little push.

paulr states "unheard of jurors, out in the middle of farm country somewhere" kind of in a negative context. I for one would like to see some "fresh" non-East/West coast- art school trained - tied to the big art houses - judges on a few of these contests, IMHO. Seems like we're getting a lot of the same ol' same ol' in winning selection pools. Besides, I like farmers.

[Marko]

Well, this very forum is more of a farmers' market by its nature than a country club. If there were any requirements to participation other than civility, I'd look elsewhere. I know how little I know about photography and I'm here to learn from my betters. In the process, I'll gladly offer advice about things I know well. We all know something and none of us knows everything, so it is always a profitable exchange.

If that component were to go away, what would be the benefit of participating here?

On the other note, speaking of grumps and grumpiness, I believe that grumpiness is so inherent to our average demographic group (that would be politically correct way of referring to "aging men", wouldn't it? , that no single person should claim any rights to the title.

If in doubt, just flip through this thread...

Regards,

[tim atherton]

There are several types of contests which are in effect scams - if not actually legal. Some run by quite reputable outfits.

Some magazines and organisations do indeed organise competitions which are much more of a profit centre, often charging a moderate sum for entry, with fairly minimal prizes (a bit of photo gear and/or publication). I've seen some of these from the inside and when you add it up, they are certainly making a nice profit - and when it's a magazine, they can basically fill a whole issue with the winners - who paid to get in there - nice cushy edition to put out that one....

Others run competitions to obtains tons of free images. These are often travel/location magazines tied to a particular area, or travel bureaus (government/city funded or otherwise). again there may be an entry fee (why not make a bit of profit), but the give away is the right to use the entries for [promotion of XYZ tourism or whatever. Even worse some claim all rights in perpetuity throughout the known universe (I've actually seen those terms) to all the entries - the photographer could actually find themselves subject to copyright restrictions on their own work. (these terms can also sometimes be found in case 1 above as well)

The organisation usually gets a whole file of very nice shots to use for free in any upcoming advertising and promotion.

One such major one here was jointly organised by Heritage Canada (Federal Government), Tourism Canada and Toyota and was tied into Expo in Japan. Yes, the winners got their work shown in the Canadian Pavilion at Expo, and in a book I think. There was even a Toyota for the grand prize winner. They had categories for Pros as well as amateurs, but the small print was EVERY entry became the property of the organisers - the theme being "My Canada" or some such. They probably ended up with thousands of usable images on their files.

One a number of photo lists you'll see regular warnings about such competitions - some are more art photo oriented, some your typical rocks, canyons and 1sec exposure waterfalls.

Yes, there are some legit competitions and reviews, and some are probably very much worth it but its getting harder to pick them out. In addition, many have increased their fees by 100 or 200% or more over the last three or four years. I doubt their costs have gone up that much. The whole "Portfolio Review" things is definately being seen to be quite a money maker, having evolved from being a bit more of a "public service". Thankfully a lot of photographers are realizing this and reacting accordingly - though no doubt there are plenty eagerly willing to fill their shoes