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.

[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.

[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!

[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.

[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.in...ad.php?t=51256

[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.blogs...1_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.