Advice for those considering entry into the Hey Hot Shot competition at the Jen Bekman Gallery

Jen Bekman has been nice enough to include me on the judging panel for the last few rounds of her Hey Hot Shot competition. Having been through the review process three times, I have some ideas for potential future entrants. These are my own views, and I don’t speak for Jen or any of the other panelists.

Generally desirable qualities

Coherence - Does it look like the same photographer took all three photos? In the context of the competition, it’s more important to show coherence than range.
Conciousness - Do you have an idea of what you are trying to say with your photography, and in your statement, do you describe how the work you submitted addresses that?
Bravery - Does your work reflect the effort you’ve put in to take exactly the photographs you wanted?
Brevity - Are your statement and bio both complete and brief? (Short paragraphs are easier to read.)
Availability - Do you have a website where the panel could efficiently see a little more of your work?
Format - We review the submissions in a web browser, so you should submit high quality JPEGs (not TIFF). There’s no need for them to be more than 900 pixels on their longer dimension. That means your file sizes should be no more than about 500KB.

Subject matter

Obviously what you choose to photograph is personal and subjective, and all kinds of subject matter is fair game for the competition. But there are certain genres and subjects which I think place a greater burden on the photographer in terms of originality. They’re submitted often.

Diptychs or other multiple presentations where the photos do not have a direct relationship to one another. Steer clear of juxtaposition for its own sake.
Parking lots, lonely shopping carts, gas stations
Floral still-lives
Suburban emptiness
Eerie night photography
Beds: empty, unmade, and so on
Moody (nude) self-portraiture
Meditations on illness or death of a family member
Shoes and feet
Loosely edited street photography
Exuberant Photoshop experiments (Just Say No)
Rigorously documentary travel photography

Again, this is not to say that any of these things cannot be done, but that they are more difficult to photograph in a way that makes an impression. If this is your terrain - actually, whatever your terrain - it is incumbent on you to be aware of genre cliche and to avoid/subvert/surpass it.

The competition is a great way to get some exposure, and, if you think about these guidelines, to focus your mind on your work and your approach as you gather your submission. I encourage you to enter.

: You are currently reading “Advice for those considering entry into the Hey Hot Shot competition at the Jen Bekman Gallery,” an entry on slower.net weblog

Published in photography at: 2pm, 2.23.06

Previous post:: Lisette Model, of Arbus

Next post:: A place to discuss changes that may or may not be happening at slower.net in the indeterminate future

: Add this to del.icio.us

Bill 3.1.06 / 1pm

Regarding artist “statements,” have you seen this?

http://www.jmcolberg.com/weblog/archives/002007.html

eshepard 3.1.06 / 1pm

I have. It doesn’t really fly. Does Colberg think Alec Soth (for example) just wandered around Niagara like a tipsy photoblogger, and happened to end up with a focused project about “true love, sexuality and the promise of ‘happily ever after’”?

There are some horrible, pretentious statements out there - but mostly for horrible, pretentious photography.

Bill 3.2.06 / 12pm

Hah, point taken.

However, what would you say to a photographer who did say something like “I liked the way those rubble piles looked” (to use the example from that post)? What if the photog doesn’t have an actual statement?

Todd Walker 3.2.06 / 4pm

I’m coming to the understanding that there are two kinds of approaches to photography.

One is highly structured and purposeful. I’ve got a vision in my head and I go out and construct a picture of it with my camera. Alec Soth falls in this category. Edward Burtynsky, too.

The other group is serepedipidous. Their personality and long term interests are naturally expressed through their choice of subjects, but there’s little planning to their shooting “schedule”, if you can call it such a thing. Winogrand, Shore, Christenberry all fall in this camp.

Much of the work I admire comes out of the first group. Much of what I shoot falls in the second. This has, until recently, caused me to feel - unnecesarily - like there was some failing in my work approach. There’s probably a happy medium in the middle, too, but recognizing these two approaches can both result in great work has made me a little (only a little) happier with my own output.

By the way, I really hated having to write a statement for the original Hey Hot Shot. So hard to avoid making it sound contrived.

eshepard 3.3.06 / 3pm

Photography on the basis of aesthetic appeal is ok — but if “because it was pretty” is the only thing you can say about your stuff, that’s pretty thin. I don’t think you’re working hard enough in that case, and I think there’s a good chance you’re going to run out of ideas someday. What you may want to do is figure out the nature of that appeal, and say something about the patterns you’ve noticed in your own photography.

And again, there’s nothing worse than reading a bunch of definitively stated pap about what something means. This is not a call to write a statement describing how your photos of a trash dump in Staten Island are about the struggle of Peruvian goat herders vis a vis Derrida and the ozone layer. It’s better to be speculative and open-ended, but thoughtful.

Winogrand is not really a good example of a non-introspective photographer. He was cranky and reticent, but he also applied for and received at least two Guggenheim fellowships. This is a quote you’ve probably seen before from the proposal that became the 1964 book:

I look at the pictures I have done up to now, and they make me feel that who we are and how we feel and what is to become of us just doesn’t matter. Our aspirations and successes have been cheap and petty. I read the newspapers, the columnists, some books, I look at some magazines [our press]. They all deal in illusions and fantasies. I can only conclude that we have lost ourselves, and that the bomb may finish the job permanently, and it just doesn’t matter, we have not loved life. I cannot accept my conclusions, and so I must continue this photographic investigation and deeper. This is my project.

Stephen Shore even less so. Shore did both snapshot (American Surfaces) and very deliberate landscape (Uncommon Places) work, and he had a lot to say about both. In an interview in the back of the latter book, he talks about the influences and processes he thinks about (Warholian conceptualism, Platonic truth, “concious casualness”, finding meaning in blankness, etc.). He also wrote an entire book (The Nature of Photographs) in which he densely examines and describes his philosophy as a maker and viewer of photographs.

As a photographer and a fan of photography, I’m all about serendipity, from-lifeness, and not getting weighted down by a bunch of conceptual bullshit when you’re trying to make things. But I also believe in thinking about what you’re doing and why you’re doing it — because I think it will make you better.

D. Muise 3.7.06 / 10am

Seems like a rather rigorous set of submission recommendations for a photo competition with such a preposterous name. “Hot Shot” seems to embody all of the genre cliches that you advise us to avoid. Nonetheless, some great ideas here.

Todd Walker 3.7.06 / 1pm

Eliot, I agree 100% with your last paragraph. I didn’t mean to say that Winogrand et al were just “winging it”. Certanily they had conscious and deliberate takes on how and what to photograph. Working without a plan doesn’t mean the work is not introspective and that certainly wasnt my intent. I only mean to say that introspection can be after the fact, as well.

whatever 3.7.06 / 6pm

Jörg Colberg is the most annoying ‘authority’ on photography ive ever seen. his photos are boring, and so is his supposed critique on photographers and their use of ’statements’ or language in art.

Mark 3.8.06 / 6am

Alec Soth has stated that he “drove around with post-it notes attached to his steering wheel with ideas of what he’d like to catch” on a given day. The procces is different for each artist. A statement is just an explanation. The better your art is the less you really have to state. And I think it should fit on a post-it note.

Joe 3.8.06 / 2pm

Do you have an artist statement posted anywhere, Eliot? I noticed your info at the Jen Bekman website does not include one.

eshepard 3.8.06 / 2pm

I was waiting for someone to point that out.

http://weblog.slower.net/archives/37

JM Colberg 3.8.06 / 6pm

Oh, it does fly, eshepard, because what I’m saying is not that Alec Soth had no idea what he was after (which is what you’re basically claiming I said) but rather that lots of photographers have no such preconceptions. Many others do, and I’ll include myself (or actually most of the projects I’m interested in right now) in there, since the photo projects I do start out with a very precise idea of what t shoot and then doing the shooting.

The vast range of conceptions of statements and the protographic process that I’ve come across as a result of my provocation is quite interesting.

I do wish, though, that people were more honest and just say “I wanted to do beautiful photography” instead of coming up with pretentious gibberish. But I would completely disagree with your assessment that horrible, pretentious statements come with equally horrible photography. I’ve seen beautiful photography with horrible statements.

PS: “Photography on the basis of aesthetic appeal is ok — but if ‘because it was pretty’ is the only thing you can say about your stuff, that’s pretty thin. I don’t think you’re working hard enough in that case, and I think there’s a good chance you’re going to run out of ideas someday.” That’s one of the worst misconceptions of photography that I’ve ever run across.

nick 3.8.06 / 7pm

Colberg:

‘One of the worst misconceptions of photography that I’ve ever come across’

???

What, wanting ones work to be a little more than abstract angles of a ceiling, or light-streaks, for example… - I mean, you can buy postcards like that if you want. Your argument for thought-less work is tiring. It’s an age-old argument that no one really cares for anymore, except amateurs trying to justify their work by forever claiming theory is baseless.

PS what the hell is beautiful photography exactly? Flowers? Tiles? Birds?

eshepard 3.9.06 / 2am

Jörg, I overstated your position re Soth for “comic effect”. I get the impression you were irritated by that, and if so I apologize. I’m curious however — have you edited your original post? I somehow recall the language as being a little more absolute and stentorian when I first read it. Could easily be wrong.

I agree with what you say — nobody wants to read shit that is just made up in order to fulfill a requirement or to sound smart. I’ve read those statements too, and of course they’re ridiculous. They diminish the work. An artist’s statement should be true.

But in order to be true, the work does not have to be preconceived to fit the statement. The insights can be emergent and speculative. When you look at your stuff, what do you see? As we know, photography is not a blank slate form of art like painting or poetry — the frame is filled by default, the art is in selection and editing. So why did you make the choices you did? Everyone who is entering a photography contest (per the original topic of the post) should be able to say something about that.

I’m not going to get into it with you about beauty. We both like it. There’s just a lot of it…

Joerg Colberg 3.9.06 / 12pm

Nick: I’m sorry, if you don’t know what beautiful photography is I can’t help you. You’ll have to look, maybe you can find some. Dismissing people who look for that without endless tehoretical arguments as “amateurs” is merely arrogant and not worth a discussion.

eshepard: No, I actually didn’t edit my post. I rarely - if ever - edit my posts (unless I have to update actual information). If I put my foot into my mouth it’s about to stay there. - As for the comic effect, stuff like that is hard to get on the internet, especially if people don’t know each other.

I agree with the statement that an artist’s statement should be true, and that’s really it: If you don’t know what to write why write anything? Or why not write “I was looking for beautiful photos”? I do know somebody who shot a whole, utterly beautiful series of photos (an actual project) solely because he liked the way the photos came out. He liked the texture of the different elements, he liked the contrast with the sky etc. And then he had to write a statement and he asked me what to write and when I told him how he could do it he said “I just liked the way those piles looked”. Unlike many other people I cannot dismiss that. I don’t want to dismiss that.

I think it’s unfair (and partly a bit arrogant) to bring up sunsets when talking about beautiful photography. But there’s much more to trying to capture beauty than sunsets or flowers or whatever else it is that people here are trying to make fun of. The world really isn’t that easy.

My best example - the one that I know the best - is the kind of architectural photography that I do. What are the insights of that? I mean I have a certain amount of insights - namely how insanely difficult it is to shoot those kinds of photos so that they look good and not just like some snapshot - but there’s nothing there for the critics or art crowd. Even the selecting is not very relevant - those who know how to tell a well-composed photo from another one will be bored (that crowd is actually quite small), and all the other ones will be baffled. I guess that will diminish the “value” of those photos immensely for the art-crowd people, but I honestly don’t care.

eshepard 3.9.06 / 2pm

In the future I will sprinkle my asides on tipsy photobloggers and sunset photography with smiley faces in order to bridge this chasm of humor and arrogance that divides us.

Good luck with your work, thank you for your time.

Mário 3.10.06 / 6am

I came here from a reference in http://37signals.com/svn/.

I think that a sometimes we forget that visual people with a talent for words are rare. That should not make us “second class photographers”.

Eliot Shepard 3.10.06 / 11am

Who are you quoting? Nobody said “second class photographers”.

The words you strung together in your brief comment indicate that you have more than enough ability to say something about your photography.

Mário 3.10.06 / 1pm

Sorry for the bad use of the quotation marks, should have used another sign. I just wanted to point the fact that althouh you can write a brief description about the work you are showing, that should not be the main focus of the jury/reviewers.

Eliot Shepard 3.10.06 / 1pm

It’s definitely not the main focus. It’s a point of interest. To use a really bad metaphor, the photos are the melody. If you like the melody you listen to see how the written words harmonize with it. That can be interesting a lot of ways.

And let me emphasize again that I’m speaking only of how I approach being on the panel — I’m sure the others do it differently.

Cob 3.11.06 / 6pm

Show me a photograph and let me feel it. Offer me a bunch of words about what you are trying to do as the artist and you’ve probably just ruined my experience.

However, if you are trying draw more attention to yourself and your art and are asking for more of my attention and time by presenting your work in a gallery setting or in a book, then I will probably wish to know more about the “lens” through which you are shooting–I will be curious to know more about how you perceive your world. Do you have original or inspired ideas or are you a hack/fool. The “I photographed the trash pile because the trash pile is beautiful” statement tells me all I need to know, and I move on.

The artist’s statement doesn’t have to be honest or sincere; it can be clever (to wit: Winnogrand’s “I cannot accept my conclusions” bullshit).

If you are still at a loss for words, feel free to use this one:

“Boredom is just the reverse side of fascination: both depend on being outside rather than inside a situation, and one leads to the other. As a photographer, it’s fun being an outsider.”

miles 3.30.06 / 7pm

I know nothing about the art world and don’t pretend to be anywhere near to being a part of it, but as an observer and someone who ‘knows what they like’ I have to say that an artist’s statement about a single image is often overbearing, but an artist’s statement about their work as a whole is often very revealing and can give me new appreciation.

I’m just saying there is a big difference between looking at a single photograph and a body of work within the context of an artist’s statement.

Photojojo » The 7 Best Photo Contests to Enter Today: You’re a Star, Now Show the World 4.17.06 / 12am

[…] (Monday May 8, 2006 is the deadline, so you’ll have some time to consider judge Eliot Shepard’s advice before you submit.) […]

Hey, Hot Shot! » Blog Archive » Free Advice 5.6.06 / 10pm

[…] Panelist Eliot Shepard was less corny and more specific in his very thoughtful post on the slower.net weblog, Advice for those considering entry into the Hey Hot Shot competition at the Jen Bekman Gallery. His post caused quite a stir a while back - it got Kottke’d and then in turn inspired another post on the Signal vs. Noise blog entitled Art statements, Pitchfork, and fancypants analysis, which was a broader meditation on “fancypants, look-at-me analysis has nothing to do with good art or good rock ‘n roll.” It was all good stuff, and the discussion threads on both posts are interesting reads. Jen says: check it out. […]

Chris 5.29.06 / 1pm

Eliot

Thanks for this post. I’ve entered the hey hot shot twice, about a year or so ago, and unfortunately didnt win. Did learn quite a bit viewing the winning entries however. I feel my shots were better in some cases, but you know, i’m a bit biased.

For future contests - and i sent an email to Jen about this awhile ago - it would be great if members of the panel gave feedback to all entries, even those not chosen for the exhibition. It’s not everyday i get to show my work to a respectable panel of judges, and it would be just great to hear what they have to say. Would be worth the cost of submission

slower.net weblog » Blog Archive » Statement on work in “Meditations in an Emergency” 6.19.06 / 6pm

[…] In light of previous discussion on this website, here is the statement attached to the three photos (1, 2, 3) I have in the show. I don’t like Mr. O’Hara’s poem. Its flowery and ornate voice convinces me more of the author’s narcissism than of his loss. I’d probably dump him too. […]

Some Pictures I’ve Liked volume 31: The Cliche Edition at From a Farther Room 7.16.06 / 9pm

[…] Talking of Michelangelo, patterns on a screenSunday, 16th July 2006, Michael Hartford Recently, I noted the list of “cliches within photoblogging” in the Photoblogs.org Wiki; slower.net discusses this topic a bit as well. I’ve certainly been guilty of a few of these cliches myself, but so have some much better photographers. And, as expected of better photographers, they’ve transcended the cliches in some fabulous ways. Take a look at these: […]

» Blog Archive » Topics of Conversation Had This Week 2.20.07 / 4pm

[…] And, some links for the weekend: Ariel wrote a great article article about Oprah haters, so check that out all you book club lovers // the winners of the jen bekman winter Hot Shot contest were announced yesterday. I sat on the panel. It was fun. Opening, March 15th! // And, speaking of the contest, Eliot made some observations about the judging process. // And, furthermore with jen bekman, friend and gallery assistant Kate Chapman is in this week’s New York Magazine lookbook sporting some green linens and a red ski band. // And finally, because we like to embarass ourselves, a mockup photo of our DJ group courtesy of Jen. […]

slower.net weblog

Advice for those considering entry into the Hey Hot Shot competition at the Jen Bekman Gallery

Comments are closed

Recently

Monthly Archives

Categories

Pages