Judge complaint, model not looking at Camera

Tabitha Boydell offensive? Really?

Roger M said

Tabitha Boydell offensive? Really?

Ehh. Just so it's clear I'm OK with a response that strident, I think other people should be, and I do recognise the feeling behind it :-) I wasn't exactly sitting on the fence. 

I go to a camera club. I enter competitions and yes I am pleased when I do well and give it a "So Be It" shrug when I don't. It's like FPIs, just one or two people liking an image. It is not the end of the world. What is important is that you are pleased with the image. Of the image, even if both models have eye contact it needs more impact. Go in closer and use the strength in the faces. 

Unfocussed Mike

"Camera club judges mark people down because someone has to be marked down and because they are the judge and they can do it. That's it. Someone has to lose. It's useless for the business of creating meaning or art."

"Yup!" :)

To win a race you have to cross the finish line first, to win an archery contest you have to shoot more arrows into the bullseye than the rest. I've now learned that to win a photo competition the model(s) need to look directly into the lens. Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach...

There are a gazillion photography competitions. Each has their own aesthetic.

What your judge dislikes may be another’s innovative genius.

Pictorial effect in photography : being hints on composition and chiaroscuro for photographersNeil7 said

To win a race you have to cross the finish line first, to win an archery contest you have to shoot more arrows into the bullseye than the rest. I've now learned that to win a photo competition the model(s) need to look directly into the lens. Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach...

'Twas ever thus.

I exhibited as early as May ’65. I sent some photographs to Scotland – a head of Henry Taylor, with the light illuminating the countenance in a way that cannot be described; a Raphaelesque Madonna, called ‘La Madonna Aspettante.’ These photographs still exist, and I think they cannot be surpassed. They did not receive the prize. The picture that did receive the prize, called Brenda, clearly proved to me that detail of table-cover, chair and crinoline skirt were essential to the judges of the art, which was then in its infancy. Since that miserable specimen, the author of Brenda has so greatly improved that I am content to compete with him and content that those who value fidelity and manipulation should find me still behind him.

Julia Margaret Cameron, being it must be admitted a bit of a mischievous knob, in her 1874 autobiography, and parodying the backhanded compliment Henry Peach-Robinson, photographer of Brenda, had paid her in his book Pictorial effect in photography.

Being honest, they probably just didn't like the image and threw the eye contact thing in as an attempt to justify their opinion.

If you need to explain an image (to anyone), it doesn't work. Move on and create new work.

ShakerMaker said

If you need to explain an image (to anyone), it doesn't work. 

Do you mean "if it isn't self-explanatory", or do you mean "if literally nobody gets it", or "if you feel the need to explain it"?

Because I think many of the greatest photographs survive without being self-explanatory.

Camera club judging is silly. Some of the best photos in history the model is not looking at the camera. You're wasting your time at these clubs if you want your photography to improve through feedback from those places.

You've got two lovely models there, where is the energy!

It’s a hard one to judge.  The model on the right, her right eye looks like she’s looking into the lens, but her left eye is just that slightly off to give the impression she’s not looking into the lens.

I’ve just taken the plunge and entered the 2025 SWPA.  They lifted the restrictions about having release forms for practically everything in your images.  I was going to submit entries into the Portrait category, but they stipulate that your subject has to look directly into the camera, so they can see the relationship between subject and photographer in their expression.  It’s the same for the Taylor Wessing competition.  So I submitted my entries into the Lifestyle category instead.  Portraits don’t have to have that hard stare just to classified as portraits, but for some reason it’s the trend now.

This post has been filtered based on your content filter settings because it is NSFW. View reply

Well I liked your photograph and showed the love.

With regards to the post, initially I thought she was looking at the camera, then maybe not which then left me wondering whether there was a distraction or was that the intention? For me personally I would have liked you to post the photo so others with far more experience of photography and modelling than me could provide their feedback, rather than already having the judges critique and scrutinising their decision, right or wrong.

Photography can be objective and subjective to both the artist and viewer and being judged in my opinion could potentially stifle creativity and lead the artist to take a lighting, posing and composition direction that suited others and not the artist. Criticism can often be demotivating if you let it, but take the positivity out of this one because at least you now know what that judge is looking for to advance in the competition next time.

The image looks like one taken perhaps for a local paper accompanying a story about local entrants to a national competition. It probably isn 't but that's the sort of vibe it conveys, at least to me.

In such an image the subjects do need to be looking at the camera I think. Imagine a new season football team photo.......and all the players looking in different directions!

There's nothing wrong with models not looking at the camera. I think the issue here is that one model is looking at the camera while the other appears to be looking away. Either on their own would be better, and if together, both appearing to be looking in the same direction would help...... just my $0.02