- Portfolio presentation documents need to be fluid – i.e. reviewers/organized portfolio reviews have different criteria in how they want your work presented to them.
- Use format which best suits the images.
- Need to hone elevator pitch to 1 minutes – reviewers get side-tracked easily and start talking about their own work.
- Even though work is often sent/uploaded in advance reviewers don’t always look at it and come unprepared to work. The difference when a reviewer has looked at the work beforehand is enormous and feedback is very particular and extremely relevant.
- Fine to have reviewer scroll through the work, but very difficult to understand what they are commenting on if they don’t actually share the screen. This occurred during one of my reviews. My preference is they do the scrolling, as I’ve found talking and scrolling while trying to pace yourself properly is very daunting and requires a lot of coordination.
- Have some pertinent questions to ask reviewer. Give questions upfront so they can consider while viewing the work.
- Good opportunities for building relationships and networking.
Category Archives: SYP: A1
Reflection on Tutor Feedback: Assignment 1
Tutor feedback with my comments in italics
- Overall, a sound, comprehensive feedback strategy.
- Tendency to describe process of asking for feedback rather than presenting the findings.
- Keep submission tight and simple. 1 link only.
- Bullet point key findings.
- Use blog as repository for self.
- Simplify the CRS padlet. Upload PDF for feedback and provide link for blog. Done.
- Gist for detail.
- Make sure documents are file named correctly to avoid them getting lost if they are downloaded by assessors.
- Reflection on Canadian PIPEDA is very professional. Thank you.
- Edit down on unnecessary words.
- Difference between output and outcome: output – learning outcomes (materials we make). Outcome – what you gained/learnt and also how audiences were affected.
Main points to work on: bullet point findings and use KISS principle. Check on file names going forward.
Assignment One: Part 2
The brief:
Having taken your tutor’s comments on board, use your PDF document (or, if applicable, a hard copy portfolio) to get some feedback from a professional photographer or another professional from within the industry. This could be done via a portfolio review or by a contact you already have.
(Boothroyd and Alexander, 2020)
Unfortunately my tutor didn’t provide any comments on his written feedback re my PDF document. So I have revised my PDF document based on peer feedback. Comments included:
- Font was too light. I have changed the font family to Open Sans and I think this does read better.
- Painting should be removed as a front cover as this could cause confusion among photographers. I have moved the painting to the last page as I don’t want to loose it entirely because it does provide the overview of the lake.
- Also some comments about the format of the document being landscape instead of portrait. I have since done a bit of research and have found that landscape format is acceptable. It does showcase my images better than portrait so I’m going to stick with that.
- A comment was made regarding the number of pages in my document as being too many. My project is large – 43 images – so I think the number of pages in my portfolio preview document is quite acceptable. There are only 12 images in the document (not counting the front and back covers).
- A great suggestion was made to move all personal elements, i.e. bio, etc., to the back of the document, only leaving the introduction at the front.
- I have also hone down my CV, compacting some of the descriptions into the hyperlinks and have also removed some less important publications and mentions from it.
- I changed the heading ‘Bibliography’ to ‘Publications’ to better illustrate that section in my CV. It seems that ‘Bibliography’ is used quite frequently in North America. ‘Publications’ is a more generic term.
A portfolio review with Shutterhub has been scheduled.
Bibliography
Boothroyd, S. and Alexander, J. (2020) Sustaining Your Practice Course Manual. Barnsley, UK: Open College of the Arts.
Assignment One: Part 1
The brief:
Prepare a PDF document with the intention of showing it to an industry professional and asking them politely for a short piece of feedback. This should contain an edit of the work you produced for Body of Work. You may wish to include an overarching artist’s statement as well as the introduction you wrote in Body of Work. In the first instance, you’ll use this to introduce your work and your ideas to your tutor who will give you suggestions on the submission itself and how to enhance the PDF before sending it out. Please tell your tutor who the PDF is intended for and include some background information on how you’ll contact them. Make sure that you’ve researched the form your submission should take; some organisations still ask for a CD/DVD, for example, which you should prepare in advance.
(Boothroyd and Alexander, 2020)
Because my PDF for my Body of Work book is rather large – about 53 pages, I decided it would definitely be a good idea to have a very pared down version of my Body of Work which would act as a preview document and hopefully entice the viewer/reviewer to look at the full version. I have tried to provide a sampling of the different types of photomontages, collages, newspaper clippings as well as some landscape images to give an overview, as well as incorporating a brief intro, bio and CV into the document. Not sure if that is overkill, or not …
To date I have had three portfolio reviews:
- BredaPhoto Festival with Marc Prüst. Quite intense (it was at 1:30 am for me!). Main take away there that he wanted me to think about was what is my story, what is my point of view. He tends to lean towards a classical story structure of beginning, middle and end. My work doesn’t follow a linear narrative at all. It’s more like time-travel, jumping from one era to another. Yes, I could probably restructure it as a journey around the lake, but I’m not sure I want to go down that route. I need more time to think and digest his thoughts.
- LensCulture Critics Choice Awards 2022 – I presented a mix of my photomontages and landscape images for this review (10 images). Reviewer found the layering of the water/ice images a bit unspecific. Recommended to show more of the periphery life around the lake. My bad on the editing here I think. Overall a compelling and important project.
- LensCulture Art Photography Awards 2022 – I only presented my photomontages for this review (10 images). Highlights were: interesting dialogue between past/present and personal and collective memory. Good sense of unity and visual harmony. Overall a very positive review.
I have provided my tutor with a list of possible reviewers and their background, how the work should be submitted. I will probably have to rely on Zoom reviews as there are no face-to-face reviews anywhere close to where I live.
Bibliography
Boothroyd, S. and Alexander, J. (2020) Sustaining Your Practice Course Manual. Barnsley, UK: Open College of the Arts.
Peer Feedback – 1st Draft of Portfolio Review Document
I asked one of my peer groups for feedback and all agreed that I should remove the painting from the cover as it could cause some confusion. A suggestion was made to place it after the cover. Another issue that was raised was the text font that I was using (IBM Plex Sans Condensed Thin) was too difficult to read, which I agree would be if not viewed at full size. I wonder if this was the issue, because it looks fine on my screen? Other suggestions that the green cover didn’t work and a more neutral colour was suggested. I had colour matched a green that featured in the painting.
They also felt that the layout on pages 3 and 4 was too spacey. Also, one of the links in my CV wasn’t working. I suspect that particular website has deleted that page as it has undergone a revamp since my work was submitted 2014/2015. So I will just alter the mention to exclude the URL.
A comment was also made that we should keep the number of pages as low as possible – 6 to 12. I honestly don’t think that 6 pages could represent my large body of work adequately, especially if including CV, Bio and Artist Statement. Someone questioned my choice of laying the document out in landscape format and suggested a portrait orientation. I personally don’t see what the problem is with a landscape layout, as the document will probably be viewed digitally. Landscape does allow the images to display a little more to their advantage. However, have not actually seen any of these documents or read any guidance about them in the course manual, I will defer to my tutor on this.
A good point was raised that I should consider how this document will be reviewed. If I’m submitting purely for a response on the images, then I should consider removing the painting and the collage with the newspaper clipping. If doing face-to-face then it is easier to talk about those pages as part of the presentation.
Unfortunately my peers were a little slow in getting back to me and I have already submitted to my tutor. I’ll await his feedback but will bring up the points they raised in my tutorial.
Lynda Kuit Photography Level 3 