It's so rare that artists get feedback as to why their work was rejected, or even accepted, into a juried art show. While the opinion of every juror is different, I strongly appreciate that you took the time to elegantly explain your perspectives about art and what you were looking for.

Thank you for taking the time to write this and share it.

I hope you don't mind, I referenced this article from FetLife so other erotic artists, especially photographers, could read it:

https://fetlife.com/groups/110/group_pos…

Respectufully, one of the artists you accepted.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on submissions this year.

This was our first year submitting art to SEAF, and we were conceptualizing based only on our own ideas, and the limited number of times we have attended.

While our team is very creative, we had never attempted erotic art worthy of such a venue.

After reading your article, our team is even more excited that we were accepted

To: "an artist who has no interest in submitting to SEAF"

Please understand that juried art festivals are where a group of individuals applies THEIR subjective ideals of what is or isn't art to what is being submitted to the show. So in this case it's not about what the artist thought, it's about what the jury thought.

This is why applying to a juried art shot is a crap-shoot. Ever the most established artists don't know if they will get in, and often they don't.

Also, an artist who only makes art for themselves won't be insulted by the opinion of someone else. If they are, perhaps the other person's opinion does have merit. Why else would someone be insulted by another person's opinion of art?

Not only was this a great article, but it was great to have writing from the Mistress in the Stranger again.

I enjoyed your article but found it ironic that the art chosen to accompany the article as one of the "knockouts" was a photograph of a woman tied up. You dissed photography and photographers in your article essentially claiming there was no skill or thought put into it as the technology has evolved to such an intense level. You also said that rope bondage had been done to death and basically gave the advice to not bother with it. Why use a photo of rope bondage as the featured piece for this story then?

@10 Admittedly, the image above is, to me, a bit too stagey if I were a judge. But, it isn't your usual close up of robe biting into skin, or model in bondage for bondage's sake. The above image, to me, reminds me more of the cover of a smutty novel. It almost reminds me of the poster of Black Snake Moan. And the over saturation and dramatic post-processing vignetting and posterization + the hairdo all harkens back to that. It tells a story and recalls other eras.

The fact that I can write all of that about that one picture is telling of how much more ART the picture is than a regular picture of Mapplethorpe-esque quality of a dude or chick in bondage against a blank backdrop. Yes, it may be good rope work, good processing or lighting, but it doesn't have as much to say as the above photo.

I think that's what Mistress Matisse is trying to say. SEAF should be art first. And, what's more, everybody's turn ons are different. What's a good horny arty photo to somebody may be a complete turn off to another.

However, where I disagree with her is that I still like seeing well-executed well-posed bondage pictures with exceptional rope work (where most male bondage photos fail). And some people probably want to see a bunch of framed asses. I wonder if somebody out there just has a wall of asses. Maybe it is like a trophy wall. Just ass ass ass ass ass. For my bondage photos, though, would I claim that its Art. Probably not. Just a photo I really like that turns me on.

@11 An abundance of asses, a la Yoko Ono with her film Four

Thank you for this. SEAF was my first juried submission and, predictably, my first rejection, but I will be submitting again next year. I will be one of those kids relying heavily on post to create what I do, because that's what I love.

As an artist, there's a fine line, and one I love learning to walk. I submit to shows. I go on photosig, I listen to any critique I can get. At the same point, when I get the criticism, I have to listen to it, and see how much of it applies to my technique, how much of it can be used to refine and hone my vision, and how much of it is another persons opinion which doesn't actually correspond with my own vision, and hence, which I must discard.

I learned to shoot on film. I still shoot 35mm regularly, although, admittedly, I don't shoot medium or large format or anything especially interesting, but my primary shooting, and my primary love, is digital creation, where the photo capture is only the beginning of the process.

I greatly appreciate your feedback. Your comments on model engagement, on the cerebral as well as erotic nature of the work, on the need to produce work that is actually new all speak to me incredibly. Thank you. Each of these are lessons I will bear in mind as I continue my work.

I would like to ask, however, that before dismissing anything that comes from a ccd as a hack digitally smearing out acne scars on some low class starlet, to actually look at the work, and let the finished art speak for itself. If it doesn’t move you, hey it doesn’t, but please give digital art a chance.

Thank you.

Respectfully,

-- James

I didn't get the impression that Mistress Matisse was dissing digital photography or photography at all.

I think she was very clear in saying that artists can be photographers, but she is also saying that non-artists can use a camera, too. This is actually true of most media, but right now the hot thing to have is Photo equipment.

Her point is that art should say something, it should speak to you, it should alter your perspective or linger in your mind. Snapshots don't always do that. Carefully selected captures are the kind of art that sticks in your soul.
Pretty snapshots are like looking at someone else's vacation pictures.