Sunday
Nov132016

Results of the Exhibition Questionnaire 2016

OMMA EXHIBITION QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS, 2016

 

 

 

Eighteen people responded to the questionnaire. Most expressed appreciation to the Committee for the work they do.

 

 

REASONS WHY I HAVE NOT ENTERED A SHOW LATELY (OR AT ALL) - Five People responded.

The gallery or venue did not appeal – eg; The Green Door – fabric art could pick up kitchen smells: Gig- did not like it – would not show there again. Other dislikes were based on geographic location rather than the venue itself eg; parking in the city, distance, outside of city.

Difficulty dropping off and picking up paintings for jurying – eg; it takes the whole day.

One person suggested submitting photos of art work on line.

Suggested locations for shows were Cafés in the Glebe or out-of town galleries –eg: tourist areas, such as Merrickville and Westport, Shenkman Centre, Centrepointe.

 

 

PROBLEMS WITH THEMES –Ten criticized themes:

The themes were difficult to understand – eg; it was cryptic, it didn’t inspire me, it was intimidating/restrictive/too specific.

One person noted that with a limited production, do I leave the creative stream I am trying to work through to create an entry based on a theme not related to my body of work,”

One person noted our work tends to be abstract and intuitive and doesn’t lend itself very well to concrete categories.

 

Two people liked themes:

Suggestions were to make themes as broad as possible – or to have members suggest some themes. Suggestions were things like “small”, “square”, a particular colour combination, “Same But Different”, “Mixes”. A title reflecting that the art is mixed media rather than specifying actual content.

One person felt they made shows more cohesive and another liked the challenge of working to a theme.

 

 

CRITERIATen people felt the criteria were too restrictive:

Many felt the canvas size and depth were restrictive and suggested a maximum and minimum size only. Several people did not like the cost involved in buying larger canvases or ending up with canvases too big to hang elsewhere. A few comments were made about gallery depth canvases because of the cost, and they doubted that all galleries require this depth. Someone understood that the edges had to be painted black or white and felt this was not always compatible with the work. Someone said you could express a theme as easily in a 6 X6 inch canvas as in a 30 x 30” one. There were two comments re materials, one person believing encaustic would not be accepted, and another wishing for more opportunity to show three dimensional works.

 

 

NOT ENOUGH NOTICE Three people felt there was not enough notice (especially in the summer) Too busy

Ten people said they would enter the proposed City show but most wanted more information about it.

 

 

JURY PROCESS ITSELFTwo people commented on the Juror critiques:

One person felt feedback was contradictory and confusing, since jurors don’t agree. One person felt the criticism was not constructive enough.

One person felt the jurors should be “more open to contemporary compositions. In some sense, the organization seems stuck in the rules of the 70’s”

 

 

SUGGESTIONS BY RESPONDENTS – fewer shows, city show every second year only. More non-juried shows, and Small Wonders shows brought most responses.