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

[manaheim]

IMO, to go at a picture from the point of view of what the critic would have done is just substituting your own artistic judgement and taste for the OP's.

I try to deal with the picture as posted, respecting the OP as an artist, and say why it works or doesn't work for me. Technical issues of taking or PPing the picture may come into it but as one of possible methods to improve what the OP has done to make the picture better in my eyes.

What he said.

What I like or don't like in a picture is essentially irrelevant for purposes of "critique". There are plenty of pictures I see that I don't "like", but that are amazing pictures.

I try to focus on whether or not the image had an impact for me, whether or not I got the impression that the artist delivered the impact that I believe was intended, and how effective the technical execution of any such impression was.

That said, I will generally also comment on whether or not I like it because it's probably interesting for the photographer to hear... but it not the focus.

 

[Derrel]

Subway and McDonalds are two of the MOST-SUCCESSFUL "restaurants" in the USA...Gallo jug wine sells the most wine in the USA in most years...Kraft individually-wrapped processed American "cheese" slices are a top seller every year...Jersey Shore is a hit TV show watched by millions...popular taste has a lowest common denominator whose belly scrapes along the sidewalk when it slithers...so, first one must consider the source of the "taste" that is being evaluated for its usefulness,correctness, or its appropriateness.

 

[manaheim]

Subway and McDonalds are two of the MOST-SUCCESSFUL "restaurants" in the USA...Gallo jug wine sells the most wine in the USA in most years...Kraft individually-wrapped processed American "cheese" slices are a top seller every year...Jersey Shore is a hit TV show watched by millions...popular taste has a lowest common denominator whose belly scrapes along the sidewalk when it slithers...so, first one must consider the source of the "taste" that is being evaluated for its usefulness,correctness, or its appropriateness.

Wow. That was a sledgehammer of truth if I ever saw one.

Welcome back, Derrel.

 

[The_Traveler]

popular taste has a lowest common denominator whose belly scrapes along the sidewalk when it slithers

Although the mixed metaphors hurt a bit.

 

[manaheim]

popular taste has a lowest common denominator whose belly scrapes along the sidewalk when it slithers

Although the mixed metaphors hurt a bit.

Are you saying you don't like his choice of words, or are you critiquing his technical execution of them? *grin*

 

[The_Traveler]

popular taste has a lowest common denominator whose belly scrapes along the sidewalk when it slithers

Although the mixed metaphors hurt a bit.

Are you saying you don't like his choice of words, or are you critiquing his technical execution of them? *grin*

yes

 

[pgriz]

Albany.

Next?

edit: gotta start reading to the end of the thread...:banghead:

 

[The_Traveler]

When we assume that popularity is necessarily a mark of low taste or intelligence, we have to deal with lots of popular things.
Like for instance, over half of the household in the US own guns; is that a mark of poor taste and the hitherto denominator belly slinking and scraping?

I think that we should not try to make over-general statements but treat every issue, as we should do pictures, on its merits, popular or no.
Of course that means we lose the chance for bombast but ........

 

[manaheim]

When we assume that popularity is necessarily a mark of low taste or intelligence, we have to deal with lots of popular things.
Like for instance, over half of the household in the US own guns; is that a mark of poor taste and the hitherto denominator belly slinking and scraping?

I think that we should not try to make over-general statements but treat every issue, as we should do pictures, on its merits, popular or no.
Of course that means we lose the chance for bombast but ........

I suppose that's a fair statement. I wasn't actually reading the implication that popularity necessarily meant low-quality or poor or whatever... so much as just popular. And where I tend to get annoyed at things that are popular just because everyone constantly rattles on about them, I think I glazed over that it may have been implied.

What I read into it (and what I agree with) is that popularity does NOT imply quality, but many people do interpret it as such.

 

[GeorgieGirl]

A result of a Herd Mentality.

 

[toddmclosson]

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?

In the classes & groups I teach I utilize the Feldman Method of critique. Which allows a professional critique but allows for personal vision and freedom of subject matter. You CAN professionally critique an image even if you don't like the subject. You CAN use a professional judgement of the artists intent/execution, without touching on their subject.

Here is an example of touching on a subject matter. The artists intends for the viewer to empathize with unwanted pet euthanasia - yet shows us a picture of a clown at a circus. We could begin to comment on effectiveness of the imagery for the stated intent. However, on a general professional critique...subject matter isn't critiqued. I like portraits, but I don't bash on landscapes. I CAN however professionaly critique the technique. Definitely Google the Feldman Method of critique!

 

[pgriz]

Thank you for the above. A good, structured way of approaching a critique.

 

[Derrel]

Thank you for the above. A good, structured way of approaching a critique.

Yes, the Feldman Method is a good way to critique art. Unfortunately, it also requires training in the arts. It requires that the person doing the evaluation understand the elements of art, as well as design principles. And therein lies the rub; the vast majority of McDonald's-eating, Gallo-guzzling, Jersey Shore-watching Americans have absolutely ZERO training or education in any of the fine arts, and are blissfully ignorant of the underlying principles that experienced, educated artists and critics are fully aware of. My first post, which was misunderstood by some (obvious, based upon replies it garnered) was made to cause people to reflect upon the wisdom of listening to the vast majority of uneducated people and their opinions on matters of taste. Is a guy who eats McDonald's and Subway for lunch every day likely to be a good evaluator of French cuisine? Is the Gallo jug wine drinker going to be well-schooled in the differences between various 1990's vintages of California whites? Will the typical Jersey Shore viewer be able to appreciate the subtle humor found in an old episode of Upstairs Downstairs, or a play by Moliere, or a play written by Shakespeare? The answer to all three questions is, "probably not". I know the word "uneducated" gets peoples' hackles raised, but there is no other word for it: if one has studied art and or design, one has educated himself about that field. If one has NOT, he is "un-educated" about that field. Arguing with the uneducated about matters of taste, in ANY field, is not a worthwhile pursuit.

I see people quite frequently state that my point of view about art and design education is snobbish. Yet, who among us would pretend to offer opinions on a heart surgeon's techniques, methods, and approaches on a three-way heart bypass operation? No uneducated regular Joe or Jane in his/her right mind would pretend that his/her layman's opinion about surgery methods was worth a tinkered damn. And yet, at the same time, I have seen people spend countless effort and make multiple posts defending tacky, kitschy crap as artistically "valid", or "pleasing" or "good". "Good shot! Nice colors! What lens did you use? Is that with flash?"

 

[bentcountershaft]

Derrel, I agree with you almost one hundred percent. Probably close to ninety five. The other five percent of my opinion has to scream out that McRib's are delicious.

 

[manaheim]

HAHAHAH...

bent's post was basically extra cheese on the post that was derrell's double quarter pounder.

or I guess maybe I should say bent's was the rolled chocolate on derrel's petit foir?