Opinions on Art

“When you begin to care too much about what everyone else says, your confidence shrinks and you start to feel like insignificant, little Jack in a strange land of intimidating giants. But when you come to realize that opinions are as diverse and plentiful as dried beans, you might reach the conclusion that your own is of the greatest worth. That’s when your confidence grows, and soon you find yourself striding like Gandalf the wondrous wizard among common hobbits in the shire. Respecting your own opinion is the magic that transforms both you and your world.” 
― Richelle E. Goodrich

I just got back from a much needed vacation which ended with an art show opening that included one of my photos. The next day, a complimentary portfolio review was offered for any photographer who had been accepted to the show. Portfolio reviews are generally conducted by people in the art world known to have informed opinions about what is good and bad about art and who may have the power to help propel your art career to the next level by granting you a solo show in their gallery or recommending you to another gallery more suitable to your style or just by giving you good constructive criticism on where your work is at that point in your career. In some cases portfolio reviews are minimum requirements to get into respected art schools. Whether a portfolio review is going to be essential or valuable to your work kind of depends on where you want to go with your art.

If all you want to do is sell your work and you have a good following of customers interested in purchasing the style of work you already do, a portfolio review may not be of much value to you. If on the other hand, you want to show your work in fine art galleries, a good constructive review might be the vehicle that helps you get there.

In the last 3 years, I’ve shown in over 100 juried shows nationwide and had 4 solo shows in regional venues. I have a dual show coming up in 2017 as well. And my work sells marginally well. I’d probably do even better getting my work into more retail galleries and having a better social media presence. With the help of friends, both of those areas are being addressed. But I would also like to pick up some more solo shows in galleries farther afield so I thought a portfolio review from the respected head of a known photography gallery might be the ticket to getting there.

For all the juried shows I enter, part of my strategy is to do research on the juror and then tailor my entries to both their likes and the overall theme of the exhibition. So far this has proven to be a good strategy with at least one juror commenting that I must have known what they had been doing research on all summer. So I thought I’d apply the same strategy to my upcoming portfolio review. In the case of my reviewer, there is quite a bit of information out there in the form of reactions from others she has reviewed and at least one interview she has given about her likes and dislikes. One of the things I read was that she doesn’t like traditional landscapes or traditional nudes. And here is where making assumptions about a statement you read can get you into trouble. I assumed she didn’t like those two very traditional genres because she doesn’t see many new ideas in them. So I made sure that three of the four nudes I included in my portfolio broke away from the traditional. The fourth was a pinup so I’ll take my lumps on that one.

Had I dug a little deeper, I might have discovered that the reason she doesn’t like nudes (not just traditional nudes) is because, in her opinion, they objectify women. It’s not a new opinion and it’s one I’ve heard before and generally taken with a grain of salt. I think some nude art is objectifying and some isn’t and I don’t generally set out to create art that is objectifying. I’m really just trying to show the human body in an artful way. But it should come as no surprise that she didn’t like any of my nudes. In one case when I asked about a particular piece, words like bound and subservient were used when explaining her viewpoint on the objectification of women in art.

Ouch #1

She also didn’t like the level of saturation I use in my printed work. She said it was too much and that it came down to a technical issue and that in a review, I really didn’t want someone noticing a technical issue because then it was hard to see past it to the overall intent of the work. 

Ouch #2

I don’t disagree with her on that but it surprised me because the comment I most often get is that people like how saturated my work is. I told her that it might come down to the way my eyes see the world. In that we are all different. What I see as leaf green might look teal to someone else. I can’t tell you how many times my father has called our farm truck red when I see it as brown. I see the world in varying degrees of very saturated colors though and tend to think there is something wrong with my eyesight or maybe there is a layer of smog or haze keeping me from seeing true colors if I can’t see them as saturated. So when I am photographing a scene and color is a primary factor, if the camera does not reproduce it the way I saw it, I tend to bump up the saturation and add a little contrast to get it there. If I take a photo of a flower, I want the viewer to be able to hold the photo up next to the flower and not be able to tell the difference. In that regard I don’t see my work as being oversaturated.

In the case of a couple of my portfolio images, saturation is the point as the scenes were illuminated with very colorful and diffused light sources.

Another criticism she had was that my portfolio lacked a unifying theme. That what I had were little groups of themes and in some cases images that just stood by themselves without any theme.

Ouch #3

I knew that one was coming and I told her from the outset that I had not had to put together a portfolio for review since I took photography classes in college 30 years ago. So my unifying theme across my portfolio was my exploration of the various qualities of light. I’m not sure she bought it. Maybe it’s a failing on my part but other than astrophotography and storm photography, I don’t really think in terms of a unified series of photos. Apparently many people who participated in that exhibition do think in terms of a series as was demonstrated with an open portfolio sharing event after the individual reviews. I was feeling a little too naked at that point to face possible criticism from my peers so I just watched and added a comment here and there.

She did like my rural ruin photos but cautioned me that I needed to constantly be looking to find the elements that made the images stand out from the sea of other images made by ruin photographers. Point taken.

And there were a couple of the portrait-type photos that she really liked for the quality of light or the form.

So there was at least a little bit of good constructive criticism in the process. “Ghostgirl” was accepted to the “Dreams” Exhibition there in November so maybe if I drive out for that one and ask for another portfolio review, I’ll be a little more prepared and take only portraits or only rural ruin photos and leave my nudes and highly saturated color photos at home.

It is interesting to note though that the day I drove up to that gallery for the Exhibition and review, I received a check from the gallery now representing me, for several hundred dollars as a result of sales of some of those same highly saturated images. And that every image in my portfolio has been accepted for exhibition in other well-respected galleries across the country. And each were chosen by jurors who were respected gallery owners or practicing artists. So whose opinions do I put more stock into? Again, it depends on my goals for my work. If nothing else, the experience taught me to do my homework a little better on the people who will be reviewing my work.

Peace,

Mark A.S. Dierker/Bear Dancer Studios.