DSLRUsers.com

Not a bad read...

http://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/09/are-photography-contests-worthwhile-or-worthless/

Are photography contests worthless? Like most arguments, there are two sides:

Yes, photography contests, on the whole, are generally worthless – they are a time and money suck, and the organizers are looking to make money or disguise them as a rights grab.

No, they provide value, in that it forces photographers to curate their best work and ultimately push themselves to compete with “the best”. Plus, reading that so-and-so won this-and-that photo contest is kind of like being named Best Smile in the yearbook – many of us tend to pay attention to those awards, even if we’re not sure why.

Interesting read.

I think the "right" competition is worthwhile, and "right", in my mind, typically means that you are not giving up perpetual, royalty free, blah blah rights and licences to the organisers. That is, I will not enter competitions that are stock photo grabs by the promotors.

Alternatively, paying $30 or so to enter a competition from which I retain my rights to the image(s) for a chance to win $50k+ (Moran), or a decent camera (Head-On, B+W Mag, etc) is not a problem at all. If I have the time to spend, then there are the benefits of pushing to me to produce excellence, as defined by my ability. Practically, that is why I have been pushing the tulip photos on this forum to seek feedback from people I respect as I will be entering them into a competion.

If you happen to win any of the "right" competitions, despite the small scale circulation, it still provides some bragging rights that you can then expose via your own channels. That no-one has heard of XXX competition/magazine/museum/whatever doesn't mean you can't promote the fact that you won it.

I was a "finalist" in the Moran prize a few years ago and I was chuffed. Couldn't bank the 'chuffness', but it felt good.

I'll be able to answer that question for you on Saturday.