An analysis of judging - photography judging - part 1

PSA Journal, July, 1995 by E.R. Sethna

Part One

Introduction

The importance of judging, or what some would call selecting, cannot be denied. Where would club photography and the RPS be without competitions, exhibitions and the granting of distinctions? And yet, judges are almost invariably the object of criticism and denigration and rarely of praise. The subject never fails to arouse great passion and controversy. Knocking of judges by lecturers and writers has become endemic but few have tried to study the subject and improve it.

Talks and articles on judging usually amount to individuals stating how they judge, and then seeking to justify their method as the best, without making any effort to compare their own techniques with those of others and without trying to evolve, from observations, credible principles of judging.

When I took up photography seriously some years ago, the subject of judging fascinated me, as it bore great resemblance to some aspects of my professional work as a psychiatrist in which I dealt with abstract subjects which are difficult to measure or quantify. You cannot, for instance, measure the severity of depression by an instrument as you can with blood pressure. In psychiatry, we have developed sophisticated ways of dealing with such abstract subjects by use of "scales" and statistics, and I wondered whether I could apply my training in psychiatry to the study of judging in photography.

I knew from the outset that as so little established literature existed on the subject, anything other than systematic observations on judging would be inappropriate. I, therefore, set about making my own observations on judging at all levels from club competitions to international exhibitions and salons. I did this intensively over a period of two to three years and have continued making these observations less rigorously ever since. With my training in observing people and how they function and analyzing the underlying reasons and motives for their behavior, it proved to be an interesting and rewarding exercise.

I did not publicize my project, so the judging sessions I attended were in no way affected by my presence. Whenever I got the opportunity, I talked to the judges without giving them any indication of my study. I can categorically say that we have some excellent judges and I am greatly indebted to them for providing me with the opportunity to analyze their methods, thus helping me to conceptualize better methods of judging.

Those not particularly interested in the subject of judging need not be put off from continuing to read this article, as it could equally be regarded as one on photography as an art form.

I have tried to categorize my observations into those which might be described as negative aspects and those which are positive, and these are considered in turn.

A - Negative Aspects of Judging

I have observed many negative approaches adopted within the judging process but will restrict my comments to four of the most significant ones, which are:

i) "Overvalued ideas"

ii) Failure to see the picture as a whole

iii) Critical rather than constructive approach

iv) Consideration given to effort put into getting or making the picture.

i) "Overvalued Idea"

This term, borrowed from psychiatry, describes well a common failing which arises as a consequence of a judge having an idea which he currently wishes to promote as being very important in picture-making. Invariably the idea is valid, but when held with great fervor, the judge becomes so preoccupied with it that he neglects all other aspects of the picture.

The best way to illustrate this failing is to state actual examples observed during the study.

1. A judge was of the opinion that obliques in composition are preferable to verticals and horizontals. He spent most of his time looking for obliques to make his point instead of getting on with the task of judging. This conclusion was justified by the fact that he used the term "oblique" over seventy times in the session.

2. Importance of background was stressed by another judge who then set about spending most of the time judging the background rather than the subject matter.

3. Importance of a full range of tones from pure black to white in monochrome prints was stressed by a judge. Some prints, which conveyed a great deal of mood or which reflected a misty atmosphere, were rejected for not displaying a full tonal range, even though their feeling would have been destroyed if they had fulfilled this criteria.

4. It was the belief of another judge that most pictures should be light at the top and dark at the bottom, as that is what normally occurs in natural lighting. Any picture bright at the base was marked down, including a stunning picture of a street scene where "contrajour" lighting was reflected by the footpath.

5. More than one judge expressed the view that monochrome is more creative than color as the world is in color and it would require some creativity to translate it into black and white. This implied that color pictures only depict reality and lack creativity. This is obviously not true, as colors can be, and have been, manipulated for creativity. The judges who have held this view were, in fact, those who favored monochrome to color prints, and that showed in their marking and giving of awards.