critique thread

[photobug]

The big problem I have with critiquing pics is that the poster very seldom takes the time to explain what the vision/purpose/aim of the pic was.

Since I don't have ESP, I usually guess wrong on the above items, or I'm reduced to "I like it" or "I don't get it", neither of which are useful or helpful.

Mostly I just don't bother to reply when I see "I just took this pic, what do you think?"

Now, if somebody asked "I was trying to do "X", does "Y" make it work, or detract from my desired result" I have something to work with and can render an honest opinion.

But that's just me. :?

 

[markc]

The big problem I have with critiquing pics is that the poster very seldom takes the time to explain what the vision/purpose/aim of the pic was.

I like to know this after I've looked over an image. Otherwise I can have a hard time seperating out what I knew ahead of time and what I got from looking at the image. Plus, a lot of times people don't have a conscious idea of what they are trying to say beyond making a nice looking image, so they might not be able to tell us.

That said, if a poster does have a goal in mind, maybe putting a spoiler tag just before saying what it is will give people a reminder to scrutinize the image first before reading any further. I don't think there's any need to make it a formal thing, but it might be helpful to keep in mind.

 

[photogoddess]

The big problem I have with critiquing pics is that the poster very seldom takes the time to explain what the vision/purpose/aim of the pic was.

I like to know this after I've looked over an image. Otherwise I can have a hard time seperating out what I knew ahead of time and what I got from looking at the image. Plus, a lot of times people don't have a conscious idea of what they are trying to say beyond making a nice looking image, so they might not be able to tell us.

That said, if a poster does have a goal in mind, maybe putting a spoiler tag just before saying what it is will give people a reminder to scrutinize the image first before reading any further. I don't think there's any need to make it a formal thing, but it might be helpful to keep in mind.

I think the idea of an explaination of what the photographer had in mind with the spoiler line is a good one. That should make giving a true critique easier.

 

[motcon]

I think the idea of an explaination of what the photographer had in mind with the spoiler line is a good one. That should make giving a true critique easier.

this is where it gets sticky. i disagree.


"Si tu fais des images, ne parle pas, n'écris pas ne t'analyse pas, ne réponds à aucune question." ["If you take photos, don't speak, don't write, don't analyze yourself, and don't answer any questions."] --(Robert Doisneau)


perhaps after a few critiques come through, the photographer could point out where it was supposed to go. after all, it's a photograph; it should stand on its own.

 

[Digital Matt]

I think if you are serious about your work, you should be open to a critique. I don't show my work to anyone without expecting, or at least being ready for a critique.

I open to a critique no matter what subforum it's posted in. If you are not, it's like saying that you've already learned everything you need to know, and you're already as good as you'll ever get, which is never true for anyone in any field at any time.

That's my 2cents. I don't think we need a seperate subforum. I'd hate to have a section where I felt like I couldn't make a suggestion about an image or something. That's just wierd.

 

[photobug]

The big problem I have with critiquing pics is that the poster very seldom takes the time to explain what the vision/purpose/aim of the pic was.

Ah, I didn't finish the statement. The next sentence should have read "Because... they frequently don't know themselves what the object of the pic was."

That's not a knock on said mythical poster, it's more a comment on the state of learning photography. I think many people have a strong desire to improve their photograpy. This is good.

Where the problem comes in (for me) is when they post a pic for critique and they have a vague feeling that something isn't quite right, but they aren't sure what might be "wrong" with it. This is a matter of experience, and ties in with this statement-

perhaps after a few critiques come through, the photographer could point out where it was supposed to go. after all, it's a photograph; it should stand on its own.

which assumes that the photographer knows what (s)he was trying to convey in the pic. Now when motcon, or Dew, or Voodoocat, or vonnagy, or, or, or... post a pic for a critique I'm confident that they know what they were trying to achieve.

Unfortunately, I'm sometimes a little bit slow on the uptake and it isn't always obvious to me what I'm supposed to be looking at/for. That's a personal failing on my part, not the photographers'.

So, because I wasn't in your head when you took the pic it's hard for me to say if you accomplished your goal if I don't know what it is. Thus, for me, I want/need to know what you were trying to do in order to evaluate whether or not you accomplished the goal.

Show 10 people a pic & you'll get 10 versions, all differing to some degree, of what is right or "wrong" with it. Show it to me 10 days apart and I might give you 2 differing reviews. Nature of the beast.

For me, I'd like the hint. Doesn't have to be before I see the pic, but I'd still like the hint.

All of which is a long winded way to say I'm not comfortable critiquing someone elses' work (seriously) if I don't know the goal, so I seldom do.

Geez, I could'a saved a bunch of typing and you all a bunch of reading if I'd just said that right off the get go, huh?

 

[markc]

I think if you are serious about your work, you should be open to a critique. I don't show my work to anyone without expecting, or at least being ready for a critique.

I think that's the goal, but I know a lot of people who have troubles taking a critique. For them it's something that has to be learned. Plus a lot of people aren't all that serious about it. They just want to share.

 

[photogoddess]

I think if you are serious about your work, you should be open to a critique. I don't show my work to anyone without expecting, or at least being ready for a critique.

I think that's the goal, but I know a lot of people who have troubles taking a critique. For them it's something that has to be learned. Plus a lot of people aren't all that serious about it. They just want to share.

It's nice to share but I am still very serious about it too.

 

[motcon]

which assumes that the photographer knows what (s)he was trying to convey in the pic. Now when motcon, or Dew, or Voodoocat, or vonnagy, or, or, or... post a pic for a critique I'm confident that they know what they were trying to achieve.

.....but that is precisely my point. i know what i want to convey, but how do other people see it? a hint or explanation leads one to my idea. i'm more interested in the impression the photo makes without my words.


for those that aren't sure what they are trying to convey, what is the difference? nothing. if you want a photo posted for critique; post it. whether you intentionally did something or not, i can pretty much assure you that you will get feedback either way.

 

[MDowdey]

see i guess im the polar opposite of you guys...


i take pictures to take pictures. to have memories that i can look back on...i couldnt give a crappola what someone thinks of it.

however, if everyone wants a critique thread of its own...myself and the others will be happy to lay down the law!!!!


md

 

[motcon]

however, if everyone wants a critique thread of its own...myself and the others will be happy to lay down the law!!!!


md

the beauty of a critique forum is that there are no laws except that one learns and gives so that all elevate their knowledge and desire.

 

[Geronimo]

I dont think I have my 2 cents in this mess. But why do I take photos?

Because like the great country song of late, "The chicks dig it"

 

[MDowdey]

however, if everyone wants a critique thread of its own...myself and the others will be happy to lay down the law!!!!


md

the beauty of a critique forum is that there are no laws except that one learns and gives so that all elevate their knowledge and desire.

yeah, thats what i meant, geez.


md

 

[ksmattfish]

If the photographer chooses to give explanation with the photo, that's okay; if not, that's okay too. Different strokes... I learned critique in the classroom, and the artist was always right there to comment upon my comments or give an introduction to the material if they chose to do so.

I think that each critique request should be limited to one photo, unless there is a common theme, it's a triptych, etc... There should be some sort of relation beyond "these were all from the same day or same roll". If the final work is composed of several photos, it should be displayed in the post as such.

I don't think that there needs to be a whole bunch of rules, just an understanding what the critique process is all about. It's asking other folks to spend some time taking a good look at your work and telling you what they think. It doesn't make anyone right or wrong; hopefully it encourages conversation that helps everyone involved learn and grow and think in new ways.

Besides, as I said before, I am an artistic genius, and if you guys can't see my vision, then fooey on you! :twisted:

 

[vonnagy]

so have the mods come to a conclusion about the critique forum yet?