Entry Fee's for Photography Contests?

[TheEagleSpirit]

Originally Posted by barrettfb

I actually don't think this is a bad idea Sime. Maybe have a limit of 5 photos submitted. They can submit, then pay via paypal (or some other service).

I think there'd be a lot on the forum who would/could enter that kind of competition.

I entered a free contest and got recognition plus displayed in a hospital addition open house. I paid a small fee at the county fair which the fees went to the 4H organization and all I received was great comments on my work and inspiration to keep entering more of my work. This led me to improve my work even more even tho my work was better than some professionals that won nothing also.

[Biomech]

In my experience there are alot of competition models out there:

Free.
Paid
Free 1st round, Paid second round
Paid limited shots
Free limited shots, paid extra shots.

I tend to only go in for the free competitions but will pay for something big - like extra photos at the WPO Awards.

Public vote competitions aren't photography comps - they're popularity contests. We have a local "Baby of the Year" contest in our city; what the kid looks like makes no difference, the winners are the people who have the biggest, most inbred, chavish families and can get 2,000 votes. It's a complete farce.

Judges judged photo comps are definately better, but you do get those with alterior motives. Those judges who have no clue about photography and judge purely based on what they like, like a cat lover chosing a cat on fence. And of course those whose choice is influenced by who they know and feel they owe. Some make ridiculous choices - I entered one where the winner was a picture of a river...... taken through a thick bush. It wasn't just technically a bad photo, it wasn't visually good at all!

I have no problems being beaten by a good photo, but some winners are just a joke: I entered one about volunteers and people helping people. There were some great shots! Mine was a volunteer helping MS patients in a decompression tank. The winner was a man standing next to a horse?!?!?!!


I find the best comps are:
Free to enter with paid extras and judged by people with a bit of a clue.

Nobody wants to pay $25 per entry for a comp with 4,000 shots. Even if yours is great, you still potentially have a 4000:1 chance.

Some of my wins (all free to enter)

[digirebelva]

Originally Posted by PotatoEYE

the paid ones are usually filled with pro and semi-pro photographers with outstanding photos, my guess is they are drawn to the prizes, which are top gear related mostly.

And those are the ones I enter, it forces me to get better so I can compete, which in turn makes me a better photographer all around...and it means I look at my images with a much more critical eye than I might have otherwise...

[Indigo November]

Originally Posted by Biomech

Public vote competitions aren't photography comps - they're popularity contests.

+1000, no what am I saying?? +∞

Truest statement in this thread. I know this all too well...

[terricaryan1]

Originally Posted by jdepould

It's not uncommon, but personally I'd never pay to enter a contest. Just make sure they're not out to scam your credit card, and that you read the terms and conditions very closely before submitting (don't give away your copyrights).

I've seen a lot of contests where, if you read the fine print, don't offer the prize until they've reached a certain number of entries - i.e. enough paid entries to pay for the prize and give them some profit. It's interesting, but there's not a lot wrong with it.