• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Discussion or critique?

Gary Jean

New member
Since we're all new here (although many names I recognize from other forums), I would like to hear a few words from the moderator about his vision for this forum.

I see already a number of image posts that simply say something like "critiques welcome." This is what prompted my subject: is this a discussion forum or a critique forum? If discussion includes critique of images, what are the guidelines for critique?

I often tend to be blunt, but never intend to be mean-spirited. That said, I think posting an image and saying "critiques welcome" while offering nothing else, requires no effort by the original poster and often significant effort by responders. It seems a bit unfair to me.

Personally, if I am asked to critique an image, I would first want to know what caused the photographer to press the shutter release. I want to know what caught the photographer's eye, what the vision was, what the lighting was like, and so on. What led the photographer to that composition, what weighed in the choice of lens, the aperture selection, the shutter speed. What image processing was done to achieve the vision.

In sum, I'd like to hear what the photographer wants the rest of us to see in the image.

To me, this is part of what promotes a true discussion.
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
Unbiased Impressions

While what you say makes sense, sometimes knowing too much about the image may bias ones opinion, for example knowing that the image is a crop of a larger image leaves one wondering what is missing and if they would like it better with some of the missing components, however the photographer may have never intended the information to be part of the image but due to lens restrictions shot it knowing he would crop it away. Knowing the image was artificially lit by several sources may cause someone to question a choice of placement for the lighting. While knowing much of this may better help critique technique it may cause one to lose the ability to give an unbiased first impression. If you have your image in a gallery the patrons do not know all of that information, their impression is based on the image alone. I think that is what some are looking for when they ask for critique or comments, they are essentially saying, "What is your immediate impression?", So as to additional information it may be a matter of what type of critiquing or advise they seek, those looking for technical assistance may want to give more information, those seeking an impromptu emotional critique may want to give as little information as possible. Just my opinion, for what it's worth,

Kyle
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Gary said:
......... I would like to hear a few words from the moderator about his vision for this forum..........If discussion includes critique of images, what are the guidelines for critique?

I often tend to be blunt, but never intend to be mean-spirited. That said, I think posting an image and saying "critiques welcome" while offering nothing else, requires no effort by the original poster and often significant effort by responders. It seems a bit unfair to me..........

That's true. I like to see posts that are needed by the photographer to help refine his/her vision, approach, technic and so forth to yield an impressive final image. I have little patience, as I expect most of us have of "me-to" pictures of one's cat or kids at the beach, unless there is a serious commitment to a superb print. If you wouldn't ever even dream of getting up in the night to ever look at it again or think of buying this if someone else shows it, or want to learn from it, then why bother.

Otherwise, this would be like many other fora. Posting is encouraged for demonstrating esthetics or technic too. But for whatever the reason, it should be a thoughtful choice, because, as you rightfully point out, the labor to respond fairly is far greater than the effort to post.

This is a place strictly to share, not to teach. Sure we all learn in the process. However, the reason for posting should be to go from A to B, ie from the initial picture to the print with whatever intentions the photographer has as a guide for the final application. Demonstrations, improvements, etc are also welcome, but again, not trivial.

Thanks for asking about this important subject. We should only respond with what in our opinion might lead to a succesful print or what can we understand better from this unique picture. But it has to be, just that. At least that's out goal.

Harsh, yes, but we have set a goal for excellence.

Asher

 

Alain Briot

pro member
I personally find it extremely difficult to respond to queries such as "comments welcome" as discussed here. The reason is that I have no idea what the poster is looking for in terms of "comments." Comments on what aspect of the image? Comments on which aspect of photography? Comments on the approach of the photographer? On his intent, desire, goals, ideas, personal style? Comments on something I ignore, haven't thought of or do not personally consider important or relevant?

In short I am left guessing what the poster wants without any help on his part. Sorry, it doesn't work for me. If I had followed this approach, ie ask for "comments welcome" or similar, I wouldn't be where I am photographically. To get where I am I had to work out issues and find solutions to them. And the first thing to do when you are looking for a solution is define the problem.

In other words I welcome posts that refer to a specific problem and ask for a solution to this problem. Otherwise there are 1000 aspects of photography I can comment on, and there is no way for me to tell which aspect the poster is interested to hear comments about.

I also need to mention this, because it may not be self evident: the path that takes someone from a mediocre to a great image isn't covered in one day or in one answer. Rather, this path is to be travelled over years of efforts and reflection. It also has to be covered one step at a time, with each step consisting of working on one single aspect of the image, refining one's understanding and mastery of that aspect, then moving on to implementing it. Brief comments made without knowing what aspect of this process the poster is working on, are of little or no use in this regard. Progress is made by dedicated study under the guidance of a teacher.

One last thing: Implementation is very important in this process because without it comments are made in a vacuum, without any evidence that the teacher's efforts at helping and explaining what to do were taken seriously. The student needs to show evidence that the comments were A-useful, B-incorporated in future work and C-not dismissed. If the comments are not useful, or if further explanation is needed, then this needs to be said as well. This is not a one way street in which someone asks and someone else answers. It is a situation in which one accepts not to know and takes the position of student and someone else agrees that they know and takes the position of teacher.

I see no alternative, unless we agree that we have equal amounts of knowledge on the subject in which case questions such as "comments welcome" are pointless. In a situation where we all have equal knowledge of the subject, questions such as "How would you approach this subject" or "what would be your take on this" become far more relevant and expected.

Alain
 
Last edited:
D

Doug Kerr

Guest
Hi, Gary,

Gary said:
That said, I think posting an image and saying "critiques welcome" while offering nothing else, requires no effort by the original poster and often significant effort by responders. It seems a bit unfair to me.
If I see somebody post such a request, and it "seems unfair to me", I just move on. No cost to me.

There are many things in life of which it can be said, "what you get out of it is proportional to what you put into it." Certainly, the thoughtful phtographer, seeking a meaningful critique on a body of work, would provide the context against which the critique should perhaps be done. If they don't they may get a less-meaningful response, or perhaps no response. No reader can get an unfair deal unless he chooses to respond (and you recognized this when you referred to "responders").

With all due respect to the moderators, I doubt if any expression of "vision" for this part of the forum will change that reality.
 

Alain Briot

pro member
"With all due respect to the moderators, I doubt if any expression of "vision" for this part of the forum will change that reality."

It may not, but the goal (at least my goal for my post) is to express my personal approach to study and to teaching. I think that if one is interested to learn how to create better photographs, and wants my help, understanding how I learn and teach is important.

Alain
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
Good to know!

I think that if one is interested to learn how to create better photographs, and wants my help, understanding how I learn and teach is important.

Yes, and that is important to know, and I am glad you explained your perspective regarding learning and teaching relating to these types of posts, because if I and others do want to learn from you personally (which I do), knowing your perspective as a teacher in this matter is very important. Thanks,

Kyle
 

Alain Briot

pro member
Kyle,

Your signature seems to go in the direction that I favor:
"Advice is what we ask for when we already know the answer but wish we didn't."

Alain
 

Alain Briot

pro member
One thing I forgot to mention is that eventually there is only so far one can go over the web in regards to teaching. Eventually, there comes a time where personal contact is needed. For example, we cannot look at actual prints on the web, only at screen images, and we all know that these are poor representation of the originals. Also, field work is not possible, only discussion of pre or post field work. Finally, there is no substitute for watching and working with a master, and in this regard only video can act as a substitute, taking out any possibility of direct interaction and of personal question, answer and contact. Eventually there is nothing quite like the age old approach of working with a master and learning directly from them.

Alain
 
Sorry I've been a little scarce around here for the past week - some personal matters have consumed a lot of time and energy.

Interesting discussion here. I think posts would be more beneficial if there is a specific purpose(s), identified in the post. That could be in the form of an image illustrating how a particular challenge was met (or not met, as the case may be). Or an image for critique, again with specific questions in mind, whether this pertains to composition, exposure, post-processing, etc.

I have participated in a number of other forums , where people post some often spectcular images, but it is more of a "mutual admiration society" with little learning resulting. Posts are primarily "great shot" "wish it were mine" etc. Now everybody can use a little ego boost once in a while, but I would rather see this forum be a place for constructive critique, learning, etc.

And I have also been involved in a number of forums with various "snapshot" images (cat, dog, baby, etc.) dominating the posts. Now there's obviously nothing wrong with this type of shot, but there are plenty of other forums for people to show off their family, pets, etc.

And posts at other forums often have quite a large number of very high pixel resolution images in a single post, and these also serve little purpose in the context of a forum like this. People can post links to their websites, etc. if desired, so others can have a look at collections like that.

So I would be inclined to have a single image presented for critique, or illustration, or other specific purpose in any given thread. There can obviously be some flexibility (for example showing the original uncropped image, or alternative crops, etc.), but in general discussion can be more productive if limited to a single image.

And I would further think that the pixel resolution of a posted image should be limited to somewhere in the vicinity of 600-700 pixels in the longest dimension, to facilitate easier viewing of the image as a whole. If it's relevant to the discussion, a small 100% crop could also be posted.

Just some thoughts. I like the philosophy of keeping these forums "Open" but having some guidelines for more productive posts should make the forum better, and not restrictive.
 

Ray West

New member
I think there has to be a purpose for posting an image, other than being a member of a 'mutual admiration society' The few images I've seen on this forum have had interesting responses, on the whole. I do not appreciate the sort of folk who post an image, ask for c&c and then give no feedback on their thoughts on folk's comments. I guess I'm hoping this will be a discussion forum.

I also believe, that once you've said something, or shown an image, then you have lost some ownership, it is no longer your baby. If folk want to apply ps, crop whatever your image, repost it, then that has to be OK. (not talking copyright here). Sometimes, due to culteral/educational differances, the way in which some things are done can appear offensive, although that may not be the intention. Always be aware that it is not just you, in your 'li'lle ole us of a' that is here.
 

Alain Briot

pro member
"Being a member of a 'mutual admiration society'"

It feels good to be a member of such a "society", and if your goal is to build confidence, this is the correct approach. If your goal is to learn and reach the next step with your work, a true print review is necessary. My personal take on such a review is that it can be quite superficial or "nasty" when conducted in a forum or over email. For this reason I only conduct print reviews in person. There is a much higher level of accountabilty when people are face to face, and a tendency to be far less serious and committed when we are relating over a forum or email. Furthermore, and this is where things get really difficult, how do we conduct a print review when there are no prints? Web images are often unreliable when it comes to contrast and color...
 

Dierk Haasis

pro member
Over the years I found out a few things - one of the beneficial side effects of getting older is expereience. For one, while beauty is definitely not in the eye of the beholder, appeal is. The problem remains that all the rules of aesthetics can only be guidelines to get something out of a photographic (or musical or any other artistic affair) instead of nothing. Even breaking the rules to be more interesting is not a sure way to get something lasting or interesting - only novelty.

Anybody posting an image here or elsewhere (with perhaps a link in this forum) does it because he [or she] thinks it worthwhile to others. This is another thing I learned and got confirmed this week: The appeal of an artifact is not foreseeable. From a few handful of theatre shots I did two customers chose different photos, not the ones I would have chosen. Rest assured that we are not talking actors just wanting their own face.

Criticism in the technical sense of the word is a profession one has to learn, just like photography, film making or musical composition iare crafts to be learned and studied. A good photographer, even a good connoisseur, is not necessarily a good critic and vice versa.

Where does that leave us with "comments welcome"? Well, it's an invitation to any kind of comment triggered by the photo, be it on technique, social import, or emotional evocation. He who ask for comments needs to be thick-skinned, he invested time, money, thought and feeling but viewwers may be highly negative in their assessment of a picture. We learn from such comments but eventually we have to fulfill our own vision, not someone else's.

I agree with Alain, a really worthwhile critique is a dialogue, actually more than one - it's between the critic and the work of art, the critic and the artist, and the critic with the reader. It's an exchange of opinions to to get to learn what others see and we may overlook.

Obviously this does not work as well with purely utilitarian photography like advertising, fashion, event etc. If ones photos don't appeal we lose out on the money.
 

Alain Briot

pro member
Dierk Haasis said:
Criticism in the technical sense of the word is a profession one has to learn, just like photography, film making or musical composition iare crafts to be learned and studied. A good photographer, even a good connoisseur, is not necessarily a good critic and vice versa.

I agree with Alain, a really worthwhile critique is a dialogue, actually more than one - it's between the critic and the work of art, the critic and the artist, and the critic with the reader. It's an exchange of opinions to to get to learn what others see and we may overlook.

Being an artist and being a critic are two different professions. See my post in the art as abstraction thread for a discussion of artist as profession. When you read it you will see that some people find it "pretentious" (their term) to call oneself an artist. I suppose the same people also find it pretentious to call oneself an engineer, or any qualification for that matter ;-).

Often, the same people believe that being an artist automatically means you are also a critic. If you put these two comments together --i.e. that 1-calling oneself an artist is pretentious and that 2-being an artist and a critic happen at the same time-- you can see that there are serious flows in logic in that position, at best, or that it is completely bogus, at worst.

This subject needs to be understod for what it is: two different endeavors and professions, each requiring training, practice, experience and talent (yes, there are talented critics out there, though I do recognize they are few). I recommend reading my essay titled "Being an Artist" as a place to start. Here is the link to that essay on Luminous-landscape.com. This is a rarely-discussed subject, hence the need to not assume we already know more than we need about it. Fact is, most people don't know much at all about it:

http://luminous-landscape.com/columns/aesthetics10.shtml

Doing a critique of your own work is similar to doing surgery on your own body. While it is possible it is also dangerous. And while you may be successful, the risks far outweighs the benefits. In short, both are best done by professionals trained to do so, be it critique or surgery. Regarding surgery, I wouldn't dream of performing it on myself! Doing so would either kill or main me. Critiquing my own work would have a similar effect.

You have been warned ;-) This being said, you are free to operate on yourself or critique your own work if you so desire. It is a free country.
 
Last edited:

Dierk Haasis

pro member
Alain, we agree on many things, especially the philosophical grounding, only the point about criticising ones own work, a mere detail, we see different.

Usually I do not try too hard telling what I've learned, what I am a scholar of and what I've been doing all my life professionally. Let's just say, I am a professional by education (English Language, Literature and culture, incl. US American), sociology, philosophy and biology were and are part of my background, too. As is advertising.

The best critics always saw criticism as an art form and produced the finest work of art, i.e. H.L. Mencken.
 

Alain Briot

pro member
Dierk Haasis said:
... but you are a good critic; your essays on aesthetics show it.

Thank you. I don't know if I see myself as a critic. Maybe, but not a critic of my own work. That is my point here. In my view, being a critic of your own work is counter productive. Its inhibitive, makes you self conscious and results in a loss of creativity. At least that is the case for me, which is why I stay away from it!

Whether I am a critic or not is an interesting point. I couldn't really answer yes or no as I never thought about it that way. What I do, is do what I love. I love creating photographs, and I love writing about photography. I don't see myself as a critic. I see myself as a student of photography reporting on what I learned.
 
Last edited:

Jon P. Ferguson

New member
Tough to answer

I seldom post images unless it has exceptional meaning to me or is unique in some way.

I have always considered the customer to be the best judge of my work. Comments like 'shift your white balance', 'crop out that distracting weed' are almost as useless as the meaningless 'nice shot', 'great photo' etc.

If the image is accompanied with a short explanation/narrative about its intent or salient point - then I'll comment.

As I mentioned above, if the customer hauls out his wallet or checkbook, then my friend, you have taken/printed one helluva shot.
 

Nill Toulme

New member
But Jon, that only tells you when you got it "right," so to speak. Without criticism and feedback in other forms, how do you know why the other seven customers *didn't* pull out their wallets, and what you might have done differently to encourage them to do so?

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 

Nill Toulme

New member
"Art MUST represent the intent and concept of the artist, not the recipient, who either does or does not get it."

Asher I think I see where you're coming from when you say that, but I have any number of quarrels with the statement. In essence, it virtually renders the viewer irrelevant. It also dismisses subliminal — or perhaps we might say instinctive — "intentions" on the part of the artist. Surely you don't mean to say that anything that you see in my work that I myself didn't see, or didn't intend, is without value or legitimacy?

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Nill Toulme said:
"Art MUST represent the intent and concept of the artist, not the recipient, who either does or does not get it."

Asher I think I see where you're coming from when you say that, but I have any number of quarrels with the statement. In essence, it virtually renders the viewer irrelevant. It also dismisses subliminal — or perhaps we might say instinctive — "intentions" on the part of the artist. Surely you don't mean to say that anything that you see in my work that I myself didn't see, or didn't intend, is without value or legitimacy?

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Nil,

Thanks for reading "The Eye of The Lens". I appreciate being held to task.

It is a struggle for the viewer of any art. He is always limited in qualification to some extent.

He can only react based on his body chemistry, upbringing and experience that brought him to that point in front of the artists work.

The art itself's value, cannot therefore be totally dependant on this viewer's (at least partially haphazard) personal view of life. The artist's intentions need, therefore, to be protected in the execution of art from damage by well intentioned but destructive opinions and demands by the viewer.

Still, for commerce, the recipient must to some degree appreciate the artist's concept, or else, no communication outside the artist's realm would have taken place, and the viewer moves on.

However, if this occurs, the art is no less art. Who knows, the next ten people might have experience and dispositions such that they do respond well, (and perhaps or perhaps not, this is) as the artist had intended.

The full arc of art is complex. In very abreviated simple terms as I see it:

1. concept, "The Vision: An implementation in Art is Desired"
2. creation, "Desire is put into a form"
3. observation, "Form is examined"
4. evokes feelings and thought that matches concept "Art Has Been Achieved"

5. delivery,

6. observation by others,

7. reception and feedback to the Artist "Risk to everyone"

8. interest and desire to see again. "Art works in public too"


At my happenstance step 7, is when the risk is great. The artist shouldn't let the feedback damage his initial concept that he visualized which at that time make him feel and think a particular way.

That is why I say, "they either get it or they don't".

If they don't, perhaps the title is not right or maybe a block of text is needed on the wall beforehand. All this is in the curating and presentation. Still, if the artist's vision is subverted by the viewer, then so is his art.

A long answer.

Asher

P.S. The ideas, impressions feelings induced in the viewer are not expected to be identical. Rather part of a family of meanings that are implicit in the work as viewed from that observer's experiental perspective. Something like the potential of a RAW image which then can be processed differently in 10 different RAW development programs to yield a family of related views of the capture image. So it is with an observer viewing an artists work. Each observer has his own translation of the Artist's message.
 
Last edited:

Allen Maestas

New member
"Being a member of a 'mutual admiration society'"

It feels good to be a member of such a "society", and if your goal is to build confidence, this is the correct approach. If your goal is to learn and reach the next step with your work, a true print review is necessary. My personal take on such a review is that it can be quite superficial or "nasty" when conducted in a forum or over email. For this reason I only conduct print reviews in person. There is a much higher level of accountabilty when people are face to face, and a tendency to be far less serious and committed when we are relating over a forum or email. Furthermore, and this is where things get really difficult, how do we conduct a print review when there are no prints? Web images are often unreliable when it comes to contrast and color...


Really like what you said here, I agree. Not that I want nothing but praise, but critiques can often do as much harm as good if done wrong. I do not think it is right to expect every person who comments to leave a critique. Nothing wrong, with saying you love a shot, and to give the reasons why. Every photograph can be nit picked to death from and by anyone regardless of their ability and/or experience.

I often will get a critique that is way off base, at least to me it is. So I will respond to this person letting them know why I do not agree with their assessment. This person then turns around and accuses me of not being able to take criticism, and that all I want is a slap on the back. Then you have others who are friends of this person who jump on the bandwagon. And pretty soon you have a forum, where it's always a one sided discussion. Where, people can give harsh critiques for other more dubious reason other than trying to help. If one gives a critique on an image, they must expect and respect that the creator of that image, may in turn disagree with them, and give the reasons why.

So many people use forums such as this as an excuse to blast other people in an attempt to bring them down, rather than up, or to bring themselves up by stepping on others. A fine line it is to critique an image, especially online. Much respect and careful wording must be used as not to offend and or demean. A serious critique does not have to demean or belittle the poster. When is the last time a teacher stood a student up in front of the class and told the student everything that was wrong with their work? Publicly demeaning is wrong, and unfortunately, many people in the photography field are so competitive that they will often stoop to low levels to keep others down.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is; if you are going to critique someones image, make sure you take into account the other persons feelings, have some class, and critique with a warm heart, point out the good, not just the bad. And most off all be aware, that others as well as the original poster may totally disagree with you, and just like they respected your opinion, you should respect theirs.

So much for not rocking the boat on my 1st post :)

Al
www.photosofnewmexico.com
 

Cem_Usakligil

Well-known member
....So many people use forums such as this as an excuse to blast other people in an attempt to bring them down, rather than up, or to bring themselves up by stepping on others. ......
...
So much for not rocking the boat on my 1st post :)..
Hi Al,

To my humble knowledge, there are almost no known cases of this happening (ie. intentionally blasting or bringing down others or stepping on them) here at OPF. Not in the area of C&Cing photographs anyway.

Keep on rocking <smile>

Kind regards,
 

Allen Maestas

New member
That is good news, but you are still very small. Only good moderators and a diligent Owner/operator can keep things going smoothly, that seems to be the case here.

Al
 

Shane Carter

New member
While I understand wanting to know what the photog had in mind before offering a critique, I dislike this approach. The problem is that it gives a bias to the person giving the critique. When in a photography class, we don't ask students to fully describe the photo first...we ask for other student appraisals first. Then the person explains what they were trying to do and the two perspectives meet and have something new to talk about...namely, was the photo successful, either by intent or accident. To me it is not lazy on the part of the poster to want a critique if they then later describe the intent. I've been giving advice and critiquing sports shots for some time in other places and I don't expect people to tell me the intent first...I don't need that to know if the photo works or not and to identify why it does or does not work. Also for example, if you take your portfolio to a seminar that offers critiques by photogs as part of the program (many do), you don't explain your shots first...those doing the review know instantly if a photo works or not and why, then they offer up the review.

I recently went to a two day NPPA seminar and was wowed by three Pulitzer Prize winners in one day! At the end, they had nationally known photos and editors reviewing portfolios, and the process is: show your stuff, they review it, tear it apart, tell you how to improve, and maybe, just maybe, they ask what you were trying to do. Basically what you were trying to do is not relevant.

Just another perspective, if in the minority. :)
 

Shane Carter

New member
PS...this is new thread with photos I posted and is a perfect example of what I'm attempting to say...

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4714

I offered up photos and asked for critiques. Bart was kind enough to offer up an excellent critique. I then gave him some feedback, which talked about what I wanted to do, limits, etc. Not being a landscape shooter in any form...it is hard to me to be at his level because I don't have the experience or vision that he does. Regardless, it was a great critique because he know right off the bat what worked and what did not and why.
 
Top