Review/Exhibit Fees and the New Depression

[G Benaim]

Hi all,

I'm just wondering how many of you out there are sending out work to portfolio reviews, juried exhibits, contests, etc. and are flinching at the fees these places charge to look at and show work, especially considering the state of the world economy. To what extent are you deciding where to send work relative to how much you have to pay? I'm putting together a petition signed by photographers (and anybody else who cares) to ask these places to lower their fees for the duration of the "downturn". I posted a similar thread on APUG and on my blog, so we can get more people interested and involved. Please do the same if you agree. All the best,

GB

[Walter Calahan]

Juried shows that charge a fee are about making money off the photographers. My opinion.

[G Benaim]

I agree, Walter, and that's what I'd like to change. Portfolio Reviews have become an obligatory stage in a photographer's life, and I think it's wrong that they're trying to profit off of us. I think they should cover their expenses, and make their money off of commissions or other arrangements w photographers who are succesful as a result of their participation. The traditional relationship between art patrons and artists is precisely opposite the one now in place at these shows/reviews, where the patron sustained the artists until he/she could make it on their own. The patron benefitted when he picked the right horse, so to speak, and the pieces he bought early rose in value. This is still of course how galleries operate, except now we have to pay a steep entrance fee before we can even get to the gallery stage. Moreover, the economics of it make nos sense, as you're creating barriers to entry based on wealth, not artistic ability, so you're basically excluding anyone with talent and without money. What one wants is easy access to exhibition venues for the best talents, regardless of economic status, and that's the opposite of what the current model does.

[claudiocambon]

I agree and not.

The portfolio reviews don't make money for the organizers. The reviewers' travel and lodging expenses are many, as you can imagine; remember also that they volunteer their time to do this, even though it is in their interest to see emerging work.

That doesn't necessarily justify the cost to us, though, which makes it feel as if we are being taken advantage of. Unless you come away with something in hand - the prospect of a show, a possible sale - it's tempting to feel that it's not worth it.

With juried shows, I feel comfortable drawing a line between ones that charge a modest fee for multiple images, and the larger ones that charge you exorbitantly per image. Some are in fact businesses making money of a large number of entries, and others are genuine outfits trying to cover basic costs.

All in all, though, I think that the petition is a good idea, Gabriel, and would encourage you to post a link to it here as well.

[Toyon]

As with everything, you need to investigate who is charging a fee to make money, and which organizations appear to be using the money to offset the expected costs of the exhibition. I definitely mistrust for-profit galleries that charge a fee. But then I think the gallery/museum/critic system is essentially corrupt and ripe for overturning.

[darr]

Juried shows that charge a fee are about making money off the photographers. My opinion.

I agree.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

I agree, Walter, and that's what I'd like to change. Portfolio Reviews have become an obligatory stage in a photographer's life, and I think it's wrong that they're trying to profit off of us.

Should camera companies also stop trying to profit off of you as well? Sorry, but it's exactly BECAUSE of our economy that galleries, curators and what not have to think of more ways on how to make money. If a photographer is willing spend several thousand dollars on a new camera, they are also willing to pay $25 or $35 to enter a contest. Some of these people have spent a great deal of their lives learning on what makes a successful photograph or not and their advice is valuable - why should they give it to you for free? Where can you go to in this world and receive an expert's opinion for FREE? You can't! If someone is an expert in a field, they deserve to be paid for their advice.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

Juried shows that charge a fee are about making money off the photographers. My opinion.

And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

[sgelb]

I entered a few this year and frankly I have an undecided feel. on one hand, being an emerging photographer is rough. 60 into thin air is kind of a lot of dough. certain contests and reviews are more valuable in my opinion. one which comes to mind is PDN and communication arts. At least if you are selected or win, you are sure to have your work in front of A LOT of art directors and photo editors.

I try and help out other people I meet trying to get into the biz or learning how to shoot work. Ive experienced a lot of creatives who ACTIVELY buy work for advertising and print publications and they have never charged me a cent. I think this is just an example of capitalism in photography.

I was kind of upset to see hey hot shot have a 60$ fee this year. I like the idea of critical mass, but I cant afford dropping 275$ on a contest. I could drop that into paper, ink and have a sweet portfolio to go and see people with.


I'd rather invest in myself and then show up at something like PDN and network the hell out of it.

just a few thoughts.

[Merg Ross]

If you are really good and, more importantly, dedicated, you will not go undiscovered. You do not need a jury, they need you. Do it the old fashioned way, if you truly believe you have something unique to offer; go knock on doors. Who are these self-appointed experts sitting in judgement of your work for a fee? The people that matter, charge nothing. Take your work to the museum curators and directors if you feel your work is worthy of their time. I did it, and sat with Steichen at MOMA when I was eighteen. However, in my opinion, sending CD's and money is not the way to establish or enhance a career in photography.

[G Benaim]

I'm the original poster, and thought I'd summarize what I've learned since I started talking to people about this subject. I've been getting lots of different responses to my posts/email, ranging from total dismissal of reviews/juried shows to total support of what they do. I guess my conclusion from what I've learned so far is that these places (for the most part) aren't making a buck off photographers, and that they couldn't do what they do if they didn't charge enough for it (I read for instance Laura Moya's detailed description of how critical mass works over at "a photo editor"). Moreover, if one were actually to try and get meetings w all the people who see one's work in these venues, one would probably end up paying quite a bit more, if it were even possible.

On the other hand, there are certainly many photographers (some of whom wrote to tell me)who have either severely curtailed their participation in such events, or ended it completely primarily for financial reasons, so there are definitely people not being seen solely on the basis of money. Moreover, there's an overarching sense of the unfairness of the system (justified or not) on the part of most people I was in touch with, a perception that should at least be addressed openly by the people running these events.

What I'd conclude from all this is that there's definitely a need for a low-cost alternative to the current options, ideally funded by government or non-profit supporters of the arts, to cover the needs of those left out for financial reasons. Whether photographers alone, working in cooperatives or as a non-profit port. review can achieve this is something I'm unsure about. I can only say that general reaction to even the idea of a petition such as I described was lukewarm, at best.

To Merg's point re museum curators, I can only speak from my immediate surroundings, and say museum curators nowadays are usually not available to look at work cold off the street.

GB

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

I'm the original poster, and thought I'd summarize what I've learned since I started talking to people about this subject. I've been getting lots of different responses to my posts/email, ranging from total dismissal of reviews/juried shows to total support of what they do. I guess my conclusion from what I've learned so far is that these places (for the most part) aren't making a buck off photographers, and that they couldn't do what they do if they didn't charge enough for it (I read for instance Laura Moya's detailed description of how critical mass works over at "a photo editor"). Moreover, if one were actually to try and get meetings w all the people who see one's work in these venues, one would probably end up paying quite a bit more, if it were even possible.

On the other hand, there are certainly many photographers (some of whom wrote to tell me)who have either severely curtailed their participation in such events, or ended it completely primarily for financial reasons, so there are definitely people not being seen solely on the basis of money. Moreover, there's an overarching sense of the unfairness of the system (justified or not) on the part of most people I was in touch with, a perception that should at least be addressed openly by the people running these events.

What I'd conclude from all this is that there's definitely a need for a low-cost alternative to the current options, ideally funded by government or non-profit supporters of the arts, to cover the needs of those left out for financial reasons. Whether photographers alone, working in cooperatives or as a non-profit port. review can achieve this is something I'm unsure about. I can only say that general reaction to even the idea of a petition such as I described was lukewarm, at best.

To Merg's point re museum curators, I can only speak from my immediate surroundings, and say museum curators nowadays are usually not available to look at work cold off the street.

GB

Let me ask you a question GB:

If a university in a different state, called you up and said they need you to teach a photography class, would you do it for free? Would you give your expertise to other people for free? Where can you go to, in this country, or any other country for that matter and receive expert advice for free? I know I'd like to improve my cooking, can I go to Wolfgang Puck and get cooking lessons from him for free?

[G Benaim]

HI David,

From what I understand, reviewers don't actually get paid to go to these reviews, they just get their expenses paid for. So they are actually working for free. This is only one of the important facts I recently discovered that made me change my mind about reviews. My larger point isn't that people should be doing this work for free (though they apparently are), but rather that photographers shouldn't be expected to shoulder the majority of the burden for a process that ultimately everyone benefits from. As it turns out, others are certainly pitching in, as I mentioned, reviewers are basically doing pro bono work. I guess more important than the specific issue of money is that of perception, as many people have come to believe that the current system is unfair. I think it would be in everyone's interest if these questions were brought out in the open and addressed directly. In my brief exposure to this topic, I've certainly learned a lot of new, relevant facts, and have changed what I think about it. Others might too, and even if not, at least people will have a better idea of where they stand.

[Greg Miller]

It's a bargain if you win, and it's expensive if you don't. The hard part of not getting selected is receiving no feedback. It would nice if there was an easy way for the jury/juror to provide everyone who entered with at least a raw score. That would at least tell you if your entry was competetive or not.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

HI David,

From what I understand, reviewers don't actually get paid to go to these reviews, they just get their expenses paid for. So they are actually working for free. This is only one of the important facts I recently discovered that made me change my mind about reviews. My larger point isn't that people should be doing this work for free (though they apparently are), but rather that photographers shouldn't be expected to shoulder the majority of the burden for a process that ultimately everyone benefits from. As it turns out, others are certainly pitching in, as I mentioned, reviewers are basically doing pro bono work. I guess more important than the specific issue of money is that of perception, as many people have come to believe that the current system is unfair. I think it would be in everyone's interest if these questions were brought out in the open and addressed directly. In my brief exposure to this topic, I've certainly learned a lot of new, relevant facts, and have changed what I think about it. Others might too, and even if not, at least people will have a better idea of where they stand.

Out of respect for you as a photographer, I'm not going to say anything else other than this is a free market society. Profit is NOT a bad thing. Every time you walk into a camera store or order supplies, those companies are making profit off of you. Every you buy clothes, furniture or food, those companies are making a profit off of you. I realize how this hits to the emotional center of a photographer - being successful and selling your work to collectors and one day having the honor of seeing it exhibited at the AIPAD Photography Show. But you can't get there, at least no photographer has ever gotten there, without investing in him or herself. If you believe in your work and you believe galleries will want to sell and collectors will want to buy, then a small investment now for the return you'll make later shouldn't be a problem. I know it's not that easy and not as black and white as I make it sound, but in reality if your work is marketable, people will want to buy it. People are still buying art, despite the bad economy. I've heard wonderful things from Scope and Armory this past weekend.

[Ron Marshall]

Where can you go to, in this country, or any other country for that matter and receive expert advice for free?

This website, for one.

[Jim Galli]

I once paid Al Weber $20 for a portfolio review. One of the better bargains of my lifetime. Doesn't seem that long ago either.

[nathanm]

Where can you go to in this world and receive an expert's opinion for FREE?

I could tell you, but it would cost you.

[claudiocambon]

Out of respect for you as a photographer, I'm not going to say anything else other than this is a free market society. Profit is NOT a bad thing. Every time you walk into a camera store or order supplies, those companies are making profit off of you. Every you buy clothes, furniture or food, those companies are making a profit off of you. I realize how this hits to the emotional center of a photographer - being successful and selling your work to collectors and one day having the honor of seeing it exhibited at the AIPAD Photography Show. But you can't get there, at least no photographer has ever gotten there, without investing in him or herself. If you believe in your work and you believe galleries will want to sell and collectors will want to buy, then a small investment now for the return you'll make later shouldn't be a problem. I know it's not that easy and not as black and white as I make it sound, but in reality if your work is marketable, people will want to buy it. People are still buying art, despite the bad economy. I've heard wonderful things from Scope and Armory this past weekend.

The issue isn't the profit principle per se, but whether or not the service or opportunity offered is a good and fair value. That of course depends on the situation, and each photographer has to evaluate for themselves what is worth pursuing and not, and what seems reasonable as opposed to what is exploitative.

[darr]

The issue isn't the profit principle per se, but whether or not the service or opportunity offered is a good and fair value. That of course depends on the situation, and each photographer has to evaluate for themselves what is worth pursuing and not, and what seems reasonable as opposed to what is exploitative.

The problem I have with paid submissions is if they regard themselves as "a professional service," why then does the photographer not receive a copy of the review from the judges?

Years ago when I submitted to the PPA for their Salons, we always received a personalized cassette recording with the judges making their comments about the work. This was a high volume judging event, and they were able to achieve this for the photographers because they understood the importance of it. After all, what good is a review if you do not get the incidentals about it. Granted we paid our yearly dues which were not much and an additional $15 per submission, but it was worth its weight in gold because it was a service that helped you achieve closer to your goals and not just a silent amount of money spent with nothing to show for it.

I will not pay for a professional service that does not give me back something in return.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

The issue isn't the profit principle per se, but whether or not the service or opportunity offered is a good and fair value. That of course depends on the situation, and each photographer has to evaluate for themselves what is worth pursuing and not, and what seems reasonable as opposed to what is exploitative.

I agree. Every photographer makes a choice in their life. Hell, I'd pay $500 to have my products reviewed by some of the top advertising and marketing executives in the world. It's critical to get as much feedback as possible from everyone - not just the experts. This is why a forum such as this will ALWAYS stay relevant.

[seawolf66]

[I will not pay for a professional service that does not give me back something in return.]
I agree with DARR on this point when you spend you money you should get something in return !

[claudiocambon]

[I will not pay for a professional service that does not give me back something in return.]
I agree with DARR on this point when you spend you money you should get something in return !

I am a big advocate of the portfolio reviews. I only went to two of them a number of years ago, but I got numerous shows, a gallery representation, and other connections from them as a result; it's a highly efficient way to get your work out there in front of various people who can help make the work more public in various ways. In talking to reviewers, you also learn a tremendous amount about what you really think about your own work, and how best to present it. It's really intense and fun in a head-hurting sort of way.

I would caution against being too literal about it. It's better to take a leap of faith than not on these things. The best opportunities at reviews can come from people whom you least think have something to offer you. If your work is at a good point, it is probable that you will come away with at least something, if not in hand, then a good lead to follow. Even meeting the other photographers is more beneficial than may initially appear.

That having been said, I think a healthy measure of skepticism about what constitutes a true opportunity, based both on where you are with your work and where a particular event is coming from, be it a review or a contest, and what instead is just a money harvesting opportunity for someone else, is always helpful.

As with most things, having reasonable expectations goes a long way.

[D. Bryant]

Hi all,

I'm just wondering how many of you out there are sending out work to portfolio reviews, juried exhibits, contests, etc. and are flinching at the fees these places charge to look at and show work, especially considering the state of the world economy. To what extent are you deciding where to send work relative to how much you have to pay? I'm putting together a petition signed by photographers (and anybody else who cares) to ask these places to lower their fees for the duration of the "downturn". I posted a similar thread on APUG and on my blog, so we can get more people interested and involved. Please do the same if you agree. All the best,

GB


Rather than talking in generalities can you cite some specific shows where you think the juried exhibits are charging unreasonable fees?

Don Bryant