the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / PhotoLucida 2009: why go?

PhotoLucida 2009: why go?

April 3, 2009 JimK Leave a Comment

Sometime last fall, I decided to give PhotoLucida another try. During the last six years, it has become quite popular, with first-come-first-served signups that fill quickly. I waited until the first signup day, accessed the web site, and got in.

PhotoLucida is held every two years. I let the 2005 and 2007 ones go by. Why go now?

I’m coming to, if not the end, at least a pause in the Nighthawks series, and I’d like to get some critical feedback to help me decide where to take the series. I’ve already had one Nighthawks show, but I’d be happy to get one or two more. I’ve also got some new (read half-baked) work, the Light and Motion and PhotoCalligraphy series, that hardly anyone has seen and I want to know what the cognoscenti think of it. (You can see all this work at www.kasson.org).

I also have a better sense of how portfolio reviews work, and hope to be able to get more out of this one than the one six years ago. I have a better sense of what I’m trying to say with my photography, and I’m willing to make more of a commitment to follow up. I also want to talk to a new class of reviewers: intermediaries who advise photographers on how to market their work. Some even make their living this way; you might think that their advice would be colored by the desire to maximize their fees, but they seem to be hugely oversubscribed, which would both indicate and motivate otherwise.

I’ve laid the groundwork for some follow up already. I discussed the new website last month. I’m also having three brochures printed: one each for Nighthawks, PhotoCalligraphy, and This Green Growing Land. Last time I passed out CDs with pdf files on them, to no discernable effect. Maybe the effort of sticking the discs into a computer and firing up Acrobat meant most of them just gathered dust. Or maybe the work wasn’t very good. Who knows? Anyway, I’m trying something else this time.

One of the problems that you need to solve before going to a portfolio review is what work to show, and how to show it. The reviewers want to see the actual work; they don’t want to thumb through books or look at images on a computer screen. You get twenty minutes with each reviewer, which, by the time you’ve introduced yourself and talked a little about what you’re trying to say, is only long enough to show 15 to 20 prints. They should all be selected from one body of work; no reviewer wants to see a “greatest hits” presentation.

I have four different series that I considered bringing to the review. This Green Growing Land is finished. My objective for it is finding walls and eyeballs. Nighthawks may or may not be done. I’d like comments on it and exhibition possibilities for it. PhotoCalligraphy is just getting started, and is nowhere near ready for a show, but I want some feedback. Light and Motion isn’t really a cohesive series at all, just a bunch of images bound together by a common place and photographic style. I think there are at least two series in Light and Motion. I’d like some insight into teasing out the threads.

I plan to concentrate my efforts on Nighthawks, putting together a 15 or 20 picture collection. I’ll have a few of the PhotoCalligraphy images and one or two from the Light and Motion series if people want to see work-in-progress or the night-in-the-city pictures just aren’t connecting. I’ll have the This Green Growing Land brochure in case anyone wants to delve deeper.

So that’s the plan. Over the next few weeks, I’ll post what I’m doing to get ready for the review, and when I get there, I’ll post about how it’s going.

The Last Word

← PhotoLucida 2003 PhotoLucida 2009: signing up for reviewers →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Jan    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Sony 135 STF on GFX-50R, sharpness
  • K on Sony 135 STF on GFX-50R, sharpness
  • Mal Paso on Christmas tree light bokeh with the XCD 38V on the X2D
  • Sebastian on More on tilted adapters
  • JimK on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • Kyle Krug on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • JimK on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time
  • Jake on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time
  • Piotr Chylarecki on Who am I?
  • JimK on Who am I?

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.