Criticism..is it good, or bad to argue with taste?

[Photorob]

Everyone has their idea of what a 'good' photograph should be like, but I tend to view photographs as the same as looking at Artwork. You can't argue with taste, ideas or creative viewpoints as realistically a good photograph to one person might differ to another. The striving for perfection in my opinion only puts off the majority in seeking to become photographers, you could argue the equipment they use could be better enhanced and thus opens up more doors to exploit, but when someone is excited about a picture they've just taken. Only for a handful of people to say 'its too dark' 'its too pixelated' 'the colors don't equilize' 'too much noise/grain' and so on, why do you wonder these same people then just give up and go on to do other things.
It's supposed to be a hobby unless your being paid for it which is a different subject matter. But in terms of the hobbyist seeking subjective images for their own aesthetic pleasures what gives one person the subjective rights to say the picture is rubbish is good?

 

[kundalini]

At the precise moment you click the submit button to upload an image on the internet, all bets are off. If you have done this on a photography forum and asked for C&C, multiply that by one hundred fold. If you've added a garish watermark, expect to be trounced upon.

 

[bazooka]

Agreed with Kundalini. If you submit to a forum for C&C, you are no longer asking how you like the piece, but you are asking how everyone else likes it. At the very best, the submitter might specify if they want C&C only on technical aspects or composition, or pose, etc.... I think there are two reasons people submit photos for C&C. 1. They like the photo and they just want to hear about how everyone else likes it too. 2. They aren't satisfied with the photo and they want to know how they can get better. Perhaps there are more reasons, but these two seem to prevail.

 

[cgipson1]

if they ask for critique, they will probably get it. If they don't ask.. usually not, unless it is posted on a forum that generally critiques everything it sees. Art is indeed subjective... and what one likes may break all the rules.. and it doesn't matter. However, there is a loose set of rules, that have evolved over centuries... that tend to dictate what most people find acceptable. In general, those rules are (hopefully) what most of the critique in question is based on.

a picture taken of someones grandkid, underexposed, grainy, slightly out of focus, with a sharp tree growing out of his head (the tree is probably in sharper focus than the kid) maybe look wonderful to the grandmother that took the picture, or the mom of the kid.. but to those with no emotional content in the photo.. it looks like crap.

there are a lot of forums out there for the "wonderful picture, I love it" kind of comments.. where the above described photo would receive adulation. That is not the TPF forum... (even though I am fairly new here, that is rather obvious! lol!).

Most of the critique is supposed to be constructive and informative...(not always, unfortunately) and allow a photographer to "grow" and see how to improve their photography (or at least conform a bit more to the rules previously mentioned.. which hypothetically should help to produce a photo that is more aesthetically pleasing to all).

 

[imagemaker46]

Some interesting points were made, photographs like beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I make my comments based on my experience and skills as a long time working professional, if someone posts a photo that isn't good, I won't say that it's good, I may or may not comment on it. If I offere a suggestion how to improve it through a crop, then I will, if the photo can't be fixed without re-shooting it, there is no point in saying it can't be fixed, but in the future you might try this instead.

If a photo holds some great personal meaning to the photographer but is a poor quality photo, they open themselves up for heartbreak if the photo gets trashed, if the photo means that much, don't post it unless you have thick skin.

I am honest with my comments, I get dumped on for saying a photo isn't good, I read other comments that make the statements, "wow great shot" or "amazing pic" That's not being honest, that's being kind, it doesn't help the person that posted the picture. At times what I say comes across as sounding superior, it is not meant to.

Some people don't want to hear honesty, they just want to be praised for what they do, and praise for being mediocre doesn't help.

 

[Photorob]

Which then begs the question, why bother posting on a photography forum if artistic value has no merit, and it's only egotistical pride that drives those who want to perfectionise the quality of images uploaded onto ANY internet photography boards. When did egotism replace the merit of actually going out there into the world to take images that would be appreciative.

 

[willis_927]

Generally if a person puts a picture on a photography Forum and asks for C&C, they are looking for ideas on how to better themselves as a photographer from people who have more experience. Its not about putting down pictures, atleast it shouldnt be.

 

[dxqcanada]

Example, this thread dealt with an obvious artistic usage of photography: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photography-beginners-forum-photo-gallery/254674-my-first-few-rolls-any-feedback-appreciated.html



Photography as art ... like this whole Lomography thing?

Most of the time the requests for C&C have to do with technical and compositional aspects of the image ... so it tends to be automatic that we give that kind of reply.
Very few OP's state that the images they post are "Artistic" ... that they wanted the OOF effect, or extreme exposure (HDR comes to mind with that one).
On the topic of HDR's, looks like the photographs are more Artwork than Photograph ?
Hmm, I am rambling here without a point now.

 

[clanthar]

Everyone has their idea of what a 'good' photograph should be like....

A photo offered as "art" can be judged in multiple ways.

1. Objective technical standards exist and are agreed upon by the professional discipline. It is possible for the sake of expression to occasionally deviate from those standards, however it is risky and success is rare. These objective technical standards are well defined.

2. Standards for design are more difficult to objectify but they also exist. These are more difficult to objectify since they will change somewhat with fashion -- "taste." Still professional members of the discipline will tend toward agreement.

3. Success requires satisfying items one and two above and furthermore having something to communicate. In the event that the content of the communication is awesome then some degree of failure with items and 1 and 2 can be forgiven.

If everyone had their own idea of what a 'good' photograph should be like then all photos would be good and no photos would be any good. It's an old fallacy.

Joe

 

[cgipson1]

Which then begs the question, why bother posting on a photography forum if artistic value has no merit, and it's only egotistical pride that drives those who want to perfectionise the quality of images uploaded onto ANY internet photography boards. When did egotism replace the merit of actually going out there into the world to take images that would be appreciative.

who defines "artistic value"???? Some people consider "Rap" music to be art.. I hardly consider it to even be music, since it seldom meets most of the defined rules for "music".

If a crappy artist defines what they produce as "art".. does that really make it art? When a six year old draws a picture with their crayons, and states that it is "art", does that make it so?

Speaking of ego.. I find it interesting when someone tries to justify what they do, as "Art".. even though everyone else disagrees with them.....

 

[mjhoward]

But in terms of the hobbyist seeking subjective images for their own aesthetic pleasures what gives one person the subjective rights to say the picture is rubbish is good?

The First Amendment

 

[kundalini]

The First Amendment

The OP is British. The First Amendment does not apply in this case.

 

[Overread]

TPF in particular gets a lot of newer photographers - people who have just gained their new camera and are lost, both technically and (most) also artistically. As a result the majority of their posts and critique they ask for (and receive) is in the form of technical commentary - pointers on what to do next time to get the shot to come out right.
Of course because these people have little to no artistic desire of their own, save to emulate photos made by others, at this stage in their learning they are often pushed down typical style paths - for example macro photos are often advised to use flash/tripods and to use small apertures - as if small apertures are the only way to take such photos.

It takes a bit more maturity in the learner and the teacher to open up the possibilities a little more to be more generalistic about getting the correct exposure, whilst also tempering that against not limiting creative freedom by being to draconian with the technical critique on a given subject/situation.

Add to that the fact that many people don't get a constant education from select members through forums; the rather haphazard interface means that many will get bits here and bits there and will have to, in their own time, link it all together and also make up their own minds somewhat. Some will and some won't - others will take longer to release the shackles and be a bit more experimental than others. It's a risk of self-teaching, but can equally be the result of only learning entry level courses which tend to focus on repeating tried and tested methods in the aim of producing good results (once done more advanced courses branch out to allow more freedom, the learners already having a confidence in their own base skills from their earlier success).



Then we come to individuals - some can give crits and some can't - and likewise some can take it and other can't. This becomes the quagmire of the confusion that can rise up fast when you get those that can't take and can't give mixing together - breeding rants and raves as they end up grinding insults on each other more than commentary about the photos.


My own view is that it is not wrong to question the commentary one gets on their photos and that indeed such questions are ripe for producing a good dialogue - since often comments don't go into full depth until later in a conversation on the net. There is nothing wrong with debating tried and tested methods - trying to work against them and indeed working with them -- the key however is to show that you have understood what is being said and then also manage to explain why you disagree and want to go the other way.

However this is tempered against inexperience and sometimes its good to show the humble side and prove that you can do what the "tried and tested" methods show and then show the "artistic" direction you want to go in (since often a lot of people will use "its artistic" as an excuse to cover a lack of ability/experience)

 

[mjhoward]

The First Amendment

The OP is British. The First Amendment does not apply in this case.

Once its on the internet, I can view it in the US. So, at least for 300 million people, the First Amendment does apply.

 

[kundalini]

Once its on the internet, I can view it in the US. So, at least for 300 million people, the First Amendment does apply.

Semantics. Right, so 300 million people may know what you are referring to, but I highly doubt it. Quick..... What is the capital of New York?

There are 196 countries in the world. This includes the newest country South Sudan. The Vatican and Kosovo are also included although they are independent and not a member of the U.N. Should all of them be aware of what the First Amendment entitles a citizen of the US? Should they be expected to know our Constitution and the First Amendment is actually a part of the Bill of Rights? Having a broader perspective of the world, since this is an international website, may give you an opportunity to be seen less closed minded than you have just shown yourself to be. Peace, out.