From the FAQ. Regular exhibitors know that there is no such thing as a guaranteed acceptance and that a medal winner at one event can be rejected from the next.

We use "exhibition standard" as the level at which we assess DPAGB but this is only a rough guide. There are no objective criteria to describe what exhibition standard is. Our judges have a great deal of experience and are specifically briefed plus they have the advantage of seeing a panel of pictures which are right on the standard before they begin. Despite this there are bound to be variations from one set of judges to another.

 

 

Entering exhibitions is a very good guide but getting into an exhibition doesn't necessarily mean that a picture will be considered by the APM judges to be of "exhibition standard". If you enter a picture in a sufficiently large number of exhibitions it will eventually be accepted somewhere. Judging at exhibitions is generally against a standard but the pass mark ultimately depends on the quality of the total entry and sometimes judges will hit high scores for pictures that are not up to the standard but which they think will add variety to the exhibition. The "We have not accepted much landscape (say) so far" criteria.

Different criteria and fashions also apply in different countries so some pictures accepted frequently abroad may not necessarily strike UK judges as being of "exhibition standard". This is not to denigrate overseas exhibitions but the PAGB APM obviously reflects a UK viewpoint.

One exhibition can have completely different objectives and criteria from another. They may prefer a certain style and content of photography which the next exhibition does not favour.

Many exhibitions are assessed by judges who are not yet considered sufficiently skilled or experienced to be added to the PAGB list - of course there are very many excellent judges who are missing from our list. (If they are not nominated we may never know about them). In any case we have no idea of the standard required to gain an acceptance into any particular exhibition. Just as Good Club Photography varies from Club to Club so "Open Exhibition Standard" varies from exhibition to exhibition.

I was approached at a recent adjudication by someone who said that two pictures which had scored very poorly had been accepted into many exhibitions and I took the opportunity to look at them. They had been accepted many times but neither the judges nor I thought they matched our understanding of "exhibition standard". This illustrates perfectly the difficulty in valuing an image for your entry. (The good news was that the entrant concerned fell into the review range and we were able to find sufficient points - just a few - to justify the award of DPAGB).

Another entrant has quite understandably expressed disappointment that a picture which had been accepted in 10 out of 17 exhibitions had only scored only 14. To score 4 at DPAGB the picture has to be thought capable of a high rate of acceptance and 10 acceptances out of 17 is not bad although 7 exhibitions didn't think it was good enough. Were they wrong? Although it is hard to explain the score without looking at the image, especially as it also had obtained a "major award", we have no way of assessing the quality of the exhibitions concerned. At the end of the day most exhibitions accept 20% or more of the pictures submitted even if the general standard is lower than the organisers hoped for.

By the way, to get a 5 at DPAGB it has to be good enough to get a 4 at MPAGB - a high probability of being accepted most of the time and to achieve occasional awards. So, if you are assessing previous pictures for use in an MPAGB submission, only pictures scoring 25 or more have been considered by even one of the judges to be good enough at M level.

 Produced by Rod Wheelans

MPAGB FRPS MFIAP FIPF HonPAGB

APM Chairman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Even judges are human and 6 acting together cannot be as precise as one alone. This variation is seen at club level when pictures are entered in different competitions and becomes even more noticeable if the picture is entered to several exhibitions. Over the longer term these fluctuations should even out. Sometimes photographs will score higher in a subsequent adjudication. Where you have a high score and a low score for the same picture it is probably borderline and the Adjudicators shaded their marks up or down to your benefit or disadvantage. You probably need to improve your entry. However, the fact that the same people have conducted the Review for many years ensures that these observed fluctuations in scores are taken into account.

 

You may be surprised to know that a 6 point swing occurs very often. We do not consider this to be inconsistency. From our point of view such a swing is quite understandable.

To illustrate, let us say that you require a "100%" picture to get a 4. If your picture is (say) a "95%" image - one that is very close to the standard required but still debatable - then all 6 judges will be on the cusp of hitting 3 or 4. If they all shade up it gets 24 and if they all shade down it gets 18. Someone may see something that others don't and may hit a 2 or a 5 so the score could be 17 or 25 from one panel to another.

A swing up is as likely as a swing down but we don't often get complaints for the former. I attend every adjudication and I try to see every score by every judge. It is my job to ensure a degree of consistency from one panel to another and I have the power to increase the points given to low scoring pictures. Obviously, I do not have the power to reduce the points for high scoring pictures even if I have a different opinion. With the checks and procedures we have in place, I still feel justified in claiming that no-one has failed who should have passed but I cannot claim that no-one has passed who should have failed.

I realise this makes it very difficult to formulate the next submission but, although we do everything we can to iron out the scoring, judging is not a science and there is inevitably a small element of luck involved. If a picture is scoring on either side of the average you require it is probable that it is not quite good enough and you need a better image to ensure success. Most successful panels contain pictures that are potentially good enough for the next level and so obtain a sprinkling of 5s. Scores above 20 compensate for lesser scores.

EXHIBITION ACCEPTANCES WHICH SCORE POORLY AT DPAGB
 
Websites for Photographers by Click-IT