Sorry for the pun. I’m excited to report another strong showing on 20×200. Due to some wavering back and forth of the remaining print numbers on the site (at one point it looked like I had sold out all editions 15 minutes in!), I’m not sure how long things really took to sell out, but by the time the dust cleared yesterday afternoon, the small and medium sizes were gone. Thanks to everyone who supported the edition! Hope there aren’t too many blog readers out there who wanted one but missed out.

I’m finally getting caught up from my trip- thank you notes, emails, etc. I didn’t leave Santa Fe with any shows, gallery representation, publications, etc. Yet, it felt like a far more productive experience than ones where I have walked away with those things.

In terms of portfolio reviews, the only other one I have been to is The Meeting Place (and I’ve been there multiple times), so that is my only point of comparison. Review Santa Fe was a very different experience. The Meeting Place feels like something of a clearing house, dealing in large quantity. Review Santa Fe by comparison is very small and intimate- many times fewer photographers and reviewers. The organizers do a really good job creating not just a set of portfolio reviews, but an entire experience. This meant at night the photographers were hanging out at sponsored social events with the same reviewers they had met with during the day (as well as all those they didn’t). The mix of both formal and informal interaction with reviewers was fantastic, and created (I think) deeper relationships than the Meeting Place interaction, which sometimes seems to border on an us-against-them mentality, as the reviewers are carefully sequestered (and with good reason given its size).

There are advantages to Meeting Place. For one, people do tend to come ready to “wheel and deal,” so you do hear of people walking away with half a dozen shows (though this doesn’t happen as often as people like to believe). In addition, due to the size of Meeting Place, people tend to band together into small groups (a survival mechanism??), and as a result, some very intense relationships develop. I developed some very close bonds with other photographers at the last Meeting Place I attended, and did walk away with at least one “on the spot” show. I really didn’t hear of anything like that going on at Review Santa Fe.

I personally greatly preferred the climate at Review Santa Fe, but for those who are looking to wheel and deal, Fotofest is the place, and $1000+ dollars (with travel) for Review Santa Fe might to some seem like a ridiculous amount of money to pay for what could cynically be referred to as an overpriced “Meet and Greet.” (I am sticking to my belief that over the next few years it will prove to have been much more than that, but maybe it’s just because I don’t have my cynical hat on right now).

On to the reviews themselves. For starters, I was very happy to find that at least 4 or 5 of the reviewers I met with were already familiar with my work through Critical Mass, 20×200, or various other means. This is the first time that has happened for me, and makes me feel like I am at least doing something right. Here are a few memorable reviews for me (in chronological order):

• Karen Irvine (Museum of Contemporary Photography). Really perceptive comments about the content of my work. She was excited by the technical, formal, and stylistic aspects of the work, but saw something of a disconnect between my ideas and the work itself. She has set me to thinking very carefully about what the work is really about for me, and whether I might consider re-examining that idea, altering the direction of the work itself, or a little of both. She also encouraged me to send work again in the next year, something I will certainly do.
• Michael Mazzeo (Peer Gallery). Was very excited by the work (though as a disclaimer I should say that my initial perception of him is that he is easily excitable). However, he felt I had “killed”‘ the work by deciding to do it in black and white instead of color. He made it out to seem like the work would be hugely successful if it were in color. It would be easy for me to dismiss this as just a reflection of a) one reviewers prejudices, and/or b) the fact that color is “in” and black and white is “out.” However, he re-opened what for me has been a Pandora’s box since the beginning of the project. I LOVE color, and it was very hard for me to give that up in this project. In fact most of the work from the project was shot on C-41 and converted to black and white in Photoshop for total control over the way the colors mapped to tones in the images. I actually have the beginnings of a post that has been sitting in my draft box for months about color and “Somewhere in Middle America.” Maybe I’ll get around to finishing it now.
• Leslie Martin (Aperture). Leslie has seen and supported my work in the past, so it was very nice to meet her in person. She had some very specific suggestions for how to expand the project, as well as some good perspective on getting the work published down the road. She also indicated that my project had been in the final round for the Portfolio Prize last year, something that was very nice to hear.
• Rboert Koch and Ada Takahashi (Koch Gallery). Seemed to really like the work, and asked that I continue to send them new pieces over the next year or so. The review was dying down when they asked me if I had sold work in the past. I mentioned 20×200, and this led to a 15 minute debate over the merits and shortcomings of 20×200 (I was trying to convince them of the merits of the project for someone in my position, they were trying to convince me that it was a bad idea). I don’t think anyone won the debate or changed their viewpoint, but it was an interesting conversation nonetheless.

I’m going to Review Santa Fe! In a two-fer of good fortune I was pulled in off the waiting list, and managed to get travel money from the university as well to offset the cost. I’m looking forward to the trip, and now have lots of work to do in the next three weeks.

My biggest fear about going is not a complete lack of interest in my work on the part of the reviewers (though this is always a possibility as well), but that being back in New Mexico will make me painfully aware of how much I miss it there. I haven’t been back since finishing grad school 7 years ago.

If anyone else out there is going to Review Santa Fe, let me know.

Several weeks ago I got a copy of the comments left for me by Critical Mass reviewers- the organizers compile these comments and pass them on to the participants. I was skeptical about the whole Critical Mass process when I first began it, mostly in terms of the cost compared to what was given in return, but I must say that the organizers make every effort to make the process as meaningful and useful as possible. Whether it will help me or not in the long run I can’t say, but I certainly didn’t feel it a waste of money as I initially feared.

With the exception of very useful and extensive comments from Lisa Hunter, most of the comments I got were very brief- one or two sentences. One very familiar issue that came up in my comments is people’s ongoing love/hate relationship with my titles. Most people seem to have very strong feelings one way or the other. They’re either a great addition to the work or a pretentious bit of junk that ruins the effect of the photograph itself. I certainly don’t mean them to be pretentious- they’re something I add to amuse myself with word play and the underlying narrative elements of the work. Most are inspired by events leading up to the actual making of the photograph. Every time I get negative comments about the titles I question my inclusion of them anew, but I still feel they’re an important component of the series, so so far I’ve kept them in.

On a related note, I was excited to see Joni Sternbach get the hard cover book award. I’ve admired his series about surfers for some time now, and will be very excited to get a copy of the book.

I’m happy to report that “Somewhere in Middle America” made the top 50 in this year’s Critical Mass. I am in good company, joined by  fellow photographer and blogger Susanna Raab and grad school colleague Ian Van Coller. I look forward to going through the work of the other winners.

Beth Dow also made the top six, who are eligible for one of the book awards. I’ve admired her field work series for some time.

Which is worse, ego surfing, or neurotically watching the remaining prints go down on your 20×200 edition? I never really took to googling myself, but with Wednesday afternoon being work time for me when I’m usually glued to my computer, I’ve found myself guilty of the latter. Thanks for everyone’s support!

I’m going to get away from my computer now and enjoy what’s left of the day- it’s supposed to be cold again tomorrow with snow forecast for later in the week.

 I have an edition with 20×200 launching today. Very cool. I’ve admired the program since its inception, and am the proud owner of 6 or 7 prints. I really believe it’s a great thing both for artists and art in general. Having now seen things partly from the inside, I am all the more impressed. Jen and company really have their act together in terms of the logistics needed to make something like this run, and getting ready for the edition was a really enjoyable experience.

Now, about the edition…

 Most of you familiar with “Somewhere in Middle America” know this image well. It has become something of a centerpiece for the project. “The Seeming Impenetrability of the Space Between” is a perfect image for the edition, as it looks great even in the 8.5×11″ size (really sharp!), but has a presence in the larger sizes (especially 30×40) that can’t be matched. Eric Recktenwald, the printer for the edition, uses the exact same printer and paper I do for my own prints, so the edition matches exactly the prints I make myself. My thanks to Eric- the print quality is fantastic. Check it out! I’m surprised and excited by the rate that the prints are moving (62 had sold before I even had a chance to see the launch), so don’t delay!

I’m happy to report my my work was accepted into Critical Mass. There are many familiar names on the list, a lot of talent, and an impressive list of reviewers. Im not sure whether my work will really stand out, but at least it’s another opportunity to have it seen. There are also several names I was very surprised not to see on the list. For those who didn’t make it, the one consolation prize is not having to pay another $250. Yikes. I’ll look forward to getting the cd with all the entrants on it.

On a less positive note, I didn’t make the cut for the Aperture Award this year. 800+ applicants, 5 winners, no big surprise. I was however happy to see fellow Michigan photographer Cynthia Greig was one of the runner ups.

I’m working this week on getting my application together for another long shot- the Center’s Project Competition. I think this will be my 7th year applying.

I dropped off 6 peices at the River Gallery for inclusion in their summer group show. They have agreed to take me on for the next year or so to see how my work does.

The River Gallery is in Chelsea, MI, a tiny little town 25 minutes from Ann Arbor and about an hour from Detroit. Normally I wouldn’t spend much time pursuing such an out of the way gallery, but they’re doing something right out there. From all the information I can gather, they’ve got some very good connections, and are selling more work than anyone between them and Detroit. I figured it was more than worth the shot to see what happens.

The importance of connections in the art world can’t be over estimated. Some can be carefully cultivated, others are just blind luck. One of the moms from the preschool my daughter attends hangs all the shows for the River Gallery. She heard I was an art professor at Eastern, and offered to show my work to the gallery without ever having seen it herself. I immediately got her a CD, and several phone calls later I was in.

I put together a book to give to the gallery when I dropped off the work:

Most galleries represent a significant number of artists, so I figure anything I can do to make my work easier for them to show to people is time well spent. Many galleries already keep binders of their artists, but this way they will have a set of prints I have made to the highest standards I can. If they want to take them out and put them in one of ther own binders, no problem. The digital age makes it quite easy to do all this. Resizing images to print at a smaller size is a matter of creating a Photoshop action and letting it run. All in all, it probably took about 3 hours start to finish to create the book. Best of all, since the images are printed with the same printer on the same paper, they give a great indication of the look and feel of the final prints.

Total cost of preparing work for the exhibition: $750. If I sell two prints or more, I will cover my costs and then some. If I sell fewer than two prints, the cost gets written off as part of the annual cost I pay for the “privilege” of being an artist (I have plenty to say on this, but that’s a subject for another post).

View of the Jen Bekman Gallery during the Winter 2007 Hey, Hot Shot! exhibition:

The Spring Hey, Hot Shot! winners were just announced. Hey, Hot Shot is a quarterly competion hosted by the Jen Bekman Gallery in New York. After looking at the websites of all the winners, I have to say that it is another very impressive group.

This year has been a pretty good one for me, coming on the heels of two really bad ones (imagine sending out over a hundred applications for exhibitions, awards, etc without one single success). Yet by far the accomplishment I am most proud of is being included in the Winter 2007 Hot Shots.

A friend made me aware of the Hey Hot Shots competition several years ago. Since then, I have watched Jen do an amazing job making a name for her and her gallery. There is a great diversity to photographers chosen, and if you look at the resumes of the winners, you will quickly see that they are going on the quality of the images alone. As a result, she finds and showcases a lot of very fresh work.

There are two things about my experience with the competition that bear mentioning:

• I remember perfectly my feeling upon receiving the email that contained my acceptance. It came on what had otherwise been a very bad day. The subject was “You’re a HotShot.” That simple line of text changed my whole outlook on things for a little while. You’ve got to carefully hold onto each and every success, and let them carry you through all the failures.
• With several of the competitions, Jen publishes a list of “runner-ups.” I look at a lot of photography, and feel I am a pretty good judge of quality. However, looking at the websites of those who had made the list of runner-ups, I honestly had no idea why my work was chosen over theirs. I think it’s pretty easy to separate those who are making competent work from those who are making really good work. However, when it comes to determining who gets the big kudos, so many things beyond just the work itself come into play, including personal tastes, timing and luck. While it’s easy to write this side of things off as something you can’t control, luck is ultimately a matter of probably and statistics. The more you put yourself into a position to get lucky, the more likely it is that you will.