Mike has had the pleasure of editing with these photographers and others, recently.

Picture Editor at Large

20 years of experience

Get the RSS Feed
About Mike Davis

Creating images that last beyond the day has been Mike’s mission in settings as diverse as National Geographic magazine, The White House, several books, various newspapers and even pdxcross.com…

Read More

Posts by Category
Coming Soon
« Does story telling lose in multimedia? | Main | 99 seats to watch POYi judging live, online »
Friday
Feb242012

How do you learn from photojournalism contests?

Early in my career, I remember looking at what photographs won in contests and I’d think, “Oh, that’s what makes a good photograph, I should do that.” Well, I was sort of right, but mostly wrong. One type of photograph would win in one contest and other types would win in other contests. So the takeaway of what is a good photograph was not so simple.

And learning from contests is not so simple as trying to mimic what wins, anyway.

Over time, I’ve seen that responding to what a set of judges chooses falls into several camps. Judges, like photographers, fall anywhere in the photographic spectrum.

Judges can tend to choose the simpler, one-plane, center-based, crop-to-the-edge-of-what’s-happening type of photography that typifies newspapers, or they can lean toward a more dimensional approach to making pictures typified by photographers such as those who are members of Magnum and VII and Noor, Luceo and more successful art photographers.

They can choose stories that execute simple beginning/middle/end approaches or ones that have huge aesthetics or they can choose moment driven, complex imagery that connects deeply with a subject. Or some of all of the above.

How do you know which type of photography is being recognized by a given contest? The answer is the same one to the question of “Which contest do you most often agree with what wins? The answer will tell you as much about your approach to photography as it does about contests.

Who the judges are makes the difference, then. Of course. Former POYi Director Bill Kuykendall used to say that he determined who would win when he chose the judges.

How do you determine the level of judging? You have to do more than determine whether the judges agree with your opinions. Blasting, or praising, judges’ decisions just because you agree, or disagree, with them has no merit.

The ideal is that you can listen to the reasoning, hear the discussion. That was the great benefit of POYi live streaming its judging. What a gift. Does what the judges say jibe with the images they’re talking about. For instance, someone can herald an image as being complex and you look at the image as being very simple. Or a judge can hold up a set of photographs as literal story telling when to you the photographs may be lyrical.

Listen long enough and you get a sense of where that judge is coming from. We all prefer a certain range of photography. Figuring out what type of photography a judge prefers is the first step to learning from listening to them. Understanding how to talk about photography is a critical skill. And again, there’s a huge difference between simply disagreeing with what is said and learning from how it’s said.

You can get a sense of where judges were on the spectrum just from looking at results. Look at the POYi sports category, for instance. What was awarded in all but the recreational sports category (bravo, Rick Shaw, for creating that category) largely fell in the sideline photographer realm. Photos were mostly aesthetically edgy, graphically interesting, peak action but didn’t reach very far into the life of sports. They didn’t tell stories about athletes and sport so much as they were photographic impressions, generally made from the same perspective as a spectator - with the exception of two of the feature picture stories that got lesser awards.

So if you favor a moment-driven, deep into the life of athletes approach to sports photography, you were probably disappointed by that hierarchy. If you favor the more aesthetic-driven, peak action approach, then you were probably happy with the results.

World Press awarded some of the same stories in its sports stories category but the order, the hierarchy, was different. See for yourself.

Is there greater value in one type of approach to telling stories over the other? Both are valid, of course. But there’s definitely a difference. Contests offer the opportunity to understand the difference, to learn which perspective is being put forth and to grasp the language of photography more deeply.

And if your work wins, then the judges must be divinely guided.

Reader Comments (4)

I enjoyed reading this article and I agree with you, a photo that wins in one contest probably would not win in another because it all depends on judges and what they see as an excellent photo. But that's not the case only in photo contests, any art contest is like that. It is difficult to judge art.

February 24, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterMira Crisp

"So if you favor a moment-driven, deep into the life of athletes approach to sports photography, you were probably disappointed by that hierarchy."

I was.

February 25, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterThomas Boyd

It was sure interesting being "in the room" for POYi. Looks like they are doing Multimedia today - you should head on over ;-)

February 25, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterLibby

I tend to think that the best contest to win is when a mag sends a payment for publication. My impression of contests/festivals is that they have become commercial enterprises though some are inspiring.

February 27, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterRoger garwood

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>