Gomma Grant

What you will actually pay

Entry costs, explained.

€25 for 8–24 images until 15 October 2026; €35 at the final 5 November deadline.

Additional images are advertised at an extra fee without a publicly verified amount. Keep to the standard allocation unless the checkout cost is acceptable. A second project requires another submission. [2]

An award for a body of work

The brief is deliberately broad, admitting documentary, conceptual, landscape and portrait projects, in analogue or digital form. Finished work is not mandatory. An unresolved project can be eligible, but an unresolved edit is unlikely to make a convincing statement: our advice is to identify what holds the photographs together before using every available image slot. [2]

The 2017 winner, Marco Marzocchi's Oyster, combined contemporary and archive photographs with handwritten material. That historical example helps explain the award's openness to a personal and unconventional sequence. It should be a prompt to examine the range of work recognised, not a style to imitate. [4]

A documented record, without a promised audience

The grant began in 2014; Gomma's publishing activity dates to 2004. Those are different histories. British Journal of Photography publisher 1854 covered the 2017 winners, including substantial examples of their work. Its own editor was on that year's panel, so this is evidence of publication with an industry connection, not a wholly detached endorsement. [4][1]

We would value this as specialist recognition. A previous winner's later career does not establish that the award caused it, and no verified readership or likelihood of commissions is available here. The lack of a clearly named 2026 jury also makes it harder to judge whose attention an entrant is buying. [1][4]

Small cash awards and conditional opportunities

The main cash awards shown are €1,000, €200 and €100 for first, second and third. First prize also includes a potential publishing arrangement. Promotion through Gomma and proposals to galleries are described, but a proposal is not a confirmed exhibition and potential publication is not a funded book contract. [1]

Our advice is to decide whether the project deserves this particular audience even if none of the optional opportunities follows. Do not build a production budget around the headline package or spend on multiple entries expecting to recover the fees. [1]

Broad access and no recent-image requirement

The 2026 entry platform welcomes all nationalities and experience levels. Older, ongoing work and joint submissions are accepted; separate submissions must contain different bodies of work. AI-generated images are excluded. This is the Photography Grant, distinct from Gomma's separate black-and-white competition. [2]

Copyright stays with you; the licence continues

The 2026 submission form explicitly links to a rights page labelled 2025. That adopted text retains your copyright, limits use to Gomma contest promotion and the photographers' work, and grants a non-exclusive, irrevocable licence for two years after the winner announcement, followed by archival use. [2][3]

The first usage clause mentions winning and runner-up photographs, while the next grants the licence in each entry. We therefore do not describe unsuccessful submissions as exempt. The stated purposes remain restricted; there is no promise that entering lets you withdraw published material whenever you wish. Only submit work you are authorised to license, including jointly created material. [3]

Prepare a sequence and check the live stage

Submit through the linked Submittable form. Supply 8–24 JPEGs, at least 1,500 pixels on the long edge, with a short description; a statement and biography are optional. The platform uses Hawaii time, UTC−10, for deadlines. Its current result estimate is spring 2027, while the homepage says February. We use the broader estimate and would not plan around a fixed announcement day. [2][1]

Give the sequence a beginning, development and ending appropriate to your subject. Remove photographs that merely repeat an earlier point. The editing effort is useful even without selection; it is a better investment than expanding a weak project with extra paid images. [2]