I
didn't win, no surprise there. I've been doing this for forty years,
during which I certainly haven't been allowed to obtain or nurture an
exaggerated view of myself or my work. I know my place as a very small
fish in a very big pond... but to say that not one of my photos was
worthy of being displayed in your selected 176- That's one major crock
of shit piled high.*
Yours truly,
Stan B.
I've been posting on my competition rejections for some time- so why quit now? The above is my most recent response to my most recent exercise in self debasement and humiliation, this time at the hands of the street photography competition sponsored by
Lens Culture. Now they usually show some pretty good stuff there, so I knew the competition would be stiff. But I thought I had ten really strong images (see below), you can fault them for not following a strict narrative, granted- but isn't the street itself the perfect tableau for all things incongruent and unpredictable? So I figured
if I got lucky I just might make it to the finals (and then be rejected outright for lack of cohesion- fair enough), but I figured I would at least garner some kind of minimal recognition... like being selected for one of the 176 images used during the campaign to promote the competition itself.
The work within those 176 images range from some of the actual (and very deserving) winners to... work that amounts to well exposed snapshots- and I certainly don't mean of the William Eggleston variety. Now I understand competitions are mostly just a matter of taste, current convention, etc, etc at best (and that's when they're run on the up and up- and I'm certainly not saying that this wasn't) and that those chosen 176 don't necessarily amount to a hill of beans- but if people are paying $65 for the privilege of being judged, they at least deserve to be judged fairly and evenly- throughout the competition.
Disappointed? Of course. Sour grapes? I just think that respectable competitions should strive to be just that- from start to finish, particularly when you're paying more than a nominal fee. I have, in fact, previously written (as constructively as possible) on how various competitions have succeeded (or failed) to do just that (see
here and
here). Stan, did you ever think that some of your "street" photography may qualify more as "environmental portraiture?" The thought did occur, but one of the actual finalists in this competition submitted an essay on life in an isolated Indian hamlet- it's definitely
documentary, as to "street" photography.... go figure!
Anyway, congrats to the winners, running a competition is not easy (even in my limited experience co-editing
ExNo)
and very much to their credit, Lens Culture does, in fact offer a concise "review" of individual submissions for those who paid $65- something quite valuable for those starting out. As for me, well, that $65 will go nicely toward a new photo book come next year- could even be one of my own, for which I am currently editing.
* It should be noted that Lens Culture was gracious enough to reply recently, stating that the contest was subjective, etc, etc...Not the greatest response, and certainly lacking the all out creative ingenuity
of this one- but still appreciated.
And now for the much anticipated 10 ways to lose:
 |
| Times Square Photo: © Stan Banos |
 |
| Bay Bridge Photo: © Stan Banos |
 |
| Brooklyn Photo: © Stan Banos |
 |
| Folsom Fair Photo: © Stan Banos |
 |
| Comic Con Photo: © Stan Banos |
 |
| LIC Photo: © Stan Banos |
 |
| Williamsburg bridge Photo: © Stan Banos |
 |
| Golden Gate Bridge Photo: © Stan Banos |
 |
| Brooklyn Bridge Photo: © Stan Banos |
 |
| SFPD Photo: © Stan Banos |
