Bob, I'm interested in your comment about nursing artists through the procedure. As it was my first time submitting, I was quite nervous about doing it right and what I might be doing wrong - perhaps you could write about the questions that arose so that we can all learn more? I had doubts about the quality of my scan (it never looks like the original - do judges take this into account? -but is it allowed, for instance, to enhance it if it actually looks closer to the original?, the amount of info required (bio and description) and whether asking too many questions would affect the outcome - in particular, I didn't want to look as if I was actually being pushy, trying to influence the process or just being stupid! Hunting for info at Scribbletalk was fruitless as most artists seemed to be veterans and therefore there was no discussion about the nitty gritty. Any chance of a 'submitting for dummies' post or perhaps something similar put into the files at the Yahoo group site?
This comes up every year, and we try to have an article in "Talking Point" prior to submission about how best to do this. Just checking back, we seem to have missed that this year, so I will try to make sure something is included for next time.
To answer your questions immediately - judges can only judge the scan they are given, and cannot compare it with the original. They can't see the original. It is acceptable to make the scan look more like the original, by adjusting contrast, levels, colour cast in e.g. Photoshop, but is not acceptable to "improve" it beyond the original. The original may be rejected if it is found that the scan gave an unfair impression of it to the jury. All judging for prizes has so far been done by viewing the originals as they are hung in the gallery, but of course if your scan/photo is not good, it might not get that far.
The jury will never know what questions you have asked, how many phone calls you made to Pat, or how much you stressed over the entry. They will just judge what is put in front of them. One reason why we have three members of the jury is that this gives a fairer result - if a judge has a particular interest in portraits for example, he/she may look more favourably on these - or judge them more harshly! With three jurors, this is balanced out, we hope.
Where Pat did have some problems were with some artists who had sent poor photos - poorly lit, out of focus or at angles that distorted the picture - and with some artists who sent printouts of scans that had been folded or had become crumpled in the post. Each entry has to be copied three times to be sent to the jury members who are often on opposite sides of the globe. If the entry has creases across it, this is bound to be picked up and duplicated in the scanning process. Hence the comment about Pat ironing some entries before scanning them for the judges. By far the safest and most accurate and easiest way to submit, as far as Pat is concerned, is to send in a scan on a disc. Pat just needs then to print three copies of this at the size that she chooses, to fit on an A4 sheet. As long as the artist is happy with their scan, this should give the best result, as any other submission has to be re-scanned before being printed, and more errors are bound to creep in.
I am not surprised that there was no much discussion of this on Scribbletalk as that site is msotly populated by US artists and their submission process - see below - was very different to ours. There are many ways of judging whether pictures get into an exhibition. The most common is that you have to physically take the framed picture along to a panel of judges and let them see it there and then. By far the fairest method - but also a heck of a lot of work, often for just a disappointment. And not very green!
While we are on this - what do members think of the submission process chosen by the CPSA this year? Every entrant had to upload their entries onto a secure website, and the judge viewed them all on a monitor. To me this is very fair, and quite simple. And it certainly is a LOT less work for Pat, and a LOT cheaper. But is our membership computer literate enough for us to go that route?
Hope this answers your questions Felicity, and I am sure that Pat would be happy to give more details any time - except she is on a well deserved holiday at present!