Critque VS A Happy Customer

[RebeccaAPhotography]

I know personally that my pictures are not perfect as far as photography perfection standards go but the photos that I do take my people love and order.

Do a lot of people find that the constructive criticism they get on a picture its great so you can learn. But your customers are still happy with the pictures you've taken?

Just curious b/c I have been selling my pics and the people I take them for love them. ROFL! and a lot of the pictures I see on here I guess I look at it from a buyers prospective still not a photographers (experienced photographer anyways rofl!) like hey "I love how that picture looks, if that were my son! I'd buy that for sure!" they I read the C/C and I'm like woah I thought it was nice. Yup NEWBIE is stamped on my forehead rofl!

 

[clanthar]

The general public is a really bad choice for an arbiter of quality. Which is really good news for most people who have something to sell.

Joe

 

[rpm]

here's the thing, a buyer, how many of them actually know what makes a good photograph? im sure if they saw some of the quality (i stress the word there...QUALITY) work found on dA they will change their views about some of the work they're paying professionals for....but then theres also the personal value (as the photographer) in their own work...sure the photographs may sell, pay the bills, get the equipment, but the pictures you strive for should be at a higher standard...should be the pictures that people will instantly say 'wow id have that picture on my wall despite it being some random person' to and not simply 'if that was my son i'd get it'.

 

[PJL]

The general public is a really bad choice for an arbiter of quality. Which is really good news for most people who have something to sell.

Joe

The music industry has thrived on that concept for decades. Oh wait, maybe 90s boy bands and Justin Beiber are better musicians than Yo Yo Ma or Wynton Marsalis...

Here's a great case study in how oblivious the average person is to quality. Joshua Bell, one of the world's greatest violinists, sat in a Washington, DC metro station and played some of the most difficult violin pieces in the world. On a Stradivarius, no less. Over 1,000 people passed him, only seven people stopped and listened and he successfully busked $32.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040401721.html

 

[clanthar]

The general public is a really bad choice for an arbiter of quality. Which is really good news for most people who have something to sell.

Joe

The music industry has thrived on that concept for decades. Oh wait, maybe 90s boy bands and Justin Beiber are better musicians than Yo Yo Ma or Wynton Marsalis...

Here's a great case study in how oblivious the average person is to quality. Joshua Bell, one of the world's greatest violinists, sat in a Washington, DC metro station and played some of the most difficult violin pieces in the world. On a Stradivarius, no less. Over 1,000 people passed him, only seven people stopped and listened and he successfully busked $32.

Pearls Before Breakfast - washingtonpost.com

Hear hear! I could show you 30 bars of Mozart that contain more musical creativity than the sum total of all hip hop, country and grunge combined.

Now you know we're both snobs.

Joe

 

[PJL]

Now you know we're both snobs.

Joe

And don't even get me started on beer!

 

[Stradawhovious]

My .02...........Just because a client is happy isn't an excuse to settle into mediocrity. It's good that your client is happy with the work, but taking to heart the critiques you receive from professionals and seasoned amateurs will only make you better, and your clients happier. Also, for me, the last thing I want is for a client that doesn't know any better to be brimming with pride as they show my mediocre work to a real photographer. I would rather have that "real" photographer say "hey, that pretty good!" Than "who the hell took those? I hope you didn't pay for that!".


Not to mention the whole concept of pride........

Just sayin.

 

[clanthar]

Now you know we're both snobs.

Joe

And don't even get me started on beer!

http://bnobeverage.com/Images/Beer/slav_premium.gif

 

[pgriz]

The general public is a really bad choice for an arbiter of quality. Which is really good news for most people who have something to sell.

Joe

Not very surprising. Although, as a society, we have aquired a lot of knowledge and expertise, it tends to be concentrated in a few individuals (proportionaly to the population). How many of us know the basics of starting a fire, making a radio, building a basic wood structure, know how interest is calculated, know how to grow a plant and get fruit, etc., etc. We generally know enough to manipulate enough of our environment to be able to function. Most of us know how to drive and use a vehicle, but how many know what actually goes on under the hood? All of us are using software that was programmed, but how many actually understand what programming is? We all use electricity, but how many know the difference between a series circuit and a parallel circuit? There's a lot of stuff going on that we are oblivious to, and are assuming that somehow it all works. Until it doesn't, and then we have to find someone to diagnose it/repair it, or we throw it out and buy the next shinier, newer thing.

Same for the arts. Who can name ten painters and explain their contribution? How about writers? How about the ten influential photographers? Who are the world's best choreographers? Who can name ten artists who are not from North America or Europe?

The point is, we tend to think, deep down, that what we know is the sum total of knowledge that there is to know. Some people are gifted with innate curiosity that allows them to explore and push back the boundaries of their ignorance, but most of us have enough issues to deal with that we tend to skim over whatever we don't feel we need. This directly relates to perception of quality - if a person doesn't really know what constitutes quality in a given field, then they default to "price" as a standin for quality ("you get what you pay for..."), and then, the game that gets played is the pricing of something as "expensive" to give it the feeling of "exclusivity", surrounded by propaganda (um, marketing/advertising) that tries to convince you of the "quality" one is getting. This further gets reinforced by the buyer feeling the need to justify why they paid the price they paid.

Yup, it's a seller's market, especially for sellers without scruples.

 

[JWellman]

It's kind of like comparing a child's crayon art from school and gazing upon the Mona Lisa. Perhaps that child's art will one day expand into more, but not without development. Critiques are a form of aiding that development.

 

[Stradawhovious]

Perhaps that child's art will one day develop into more, but not without development. .

So the challenge then is developing the development of the developer into the developed.

(sorry, couldn't resist.)

 

[ababysean]

You are selling an educated product to an uneducated market. Most likely the photos are of someone dear to the buyer. I can take an out of focus, blury camera phone picture of my daughter and find it to be the best photo EVER taken well because it is my kid. I don't care about limb chops or blown out shirts or color casts....Also, most likey they've never experienced better. But I've often found that the photo I was about to trash and not even put up in the gallery is the one the client chooses to blow up to 50*80 and hang over their fireplace, usually because it is something they see in their own kidsand they have an emotional connection to that look that I thought was just a wacky looking smile....

 

[JWellman]

So the challenge then is developing the development of the developer into the developed.

My choice of wording is what I get for being in a hurry.

 

[JG_Coleman]

It's my experience that if an individual isn't particularly skilled in shooting a great photo, they probably aren't too qualified to provide insightful critiques, either... which is why they are generally just happy with whatever you put in front of them so long as it strikes them the right way.

It's not that the customer doesn't have an opinion, or that they lack artistic insight or taste, because any given person is entirely capable of looking through a portfolio and saying," I like this one the best". But, most of the time, they can't articulate the reason they like it the best in terms of composition, technical quality, exposure, etc.

Another way to look at it is this: I tend to try and judge my photographs by in "ideal standard". That is, I look at my photograph and ask myself," Is this the best job I could do with this scene?" To be 100% satisfied with one of my landscape shots, I need to believe that:

- I couldn't have gotten a better angle of the same general scene.

- I couldn't have put together a much better composition given what was available.

- I couldn't have framed it more tightly or more loosely to produce a better overall view.

- I couldn't have gotten a better exposure.

- I couldn't have made it any sharper.

- I couldn't have used a more appropriate depth-of-field.

- I couldn't have gotten there at a better time or during better weather.

Now, I won't pretend like there's a hard and fast answer to all of these questions with every photograph. Sometimes photography is about making intelligent compromises between this or that to produce the best photograph possible given the circumstances.

But my point in listing these criteria is that the ordinary customer probably can't answer ANY of these questions about your work. They don't look at photographs that way, because they aren't generally familiar with the craft of photography.

Insofar as customers are entirely capable of deciding which photograph they like the best out of a line-up, they do have a discerning opinion. What customers generally lack is the ability to look at a photograph and see flaws that prevented that shot from being the best it could've been.
The ordinary customer won't usually ask questions like this:

"Hey, did you thoughtlessly stop down to f/22 for this shot, sacrificing foreground detail for needless depth-of-field, when you could've gone with a more modest f/11 and maintained most distant detail in this shallow scene while making your foreground object much sharper?"

"Oh, by the way, did you accidentally underexpose this shot by 1.5 stops and then boost the exposure in post to try and compensate? I think I see a tad bit of color noise in the shadows beneath this rock in the corner."

"Wouldn't you have done better with this shot if you moved the horizon line higher up in the frame and let us see a bit more of the beach?"
"Why are you dedicating so much real estate in the frame to the most uninteresting part of this landscape?"

"Couldn't you have applied a graduated neutral density filter and kept sky detail while getting a foreground that wasn't so damn dark?"

"The colors here don't look too natural... why did you over-saturate poor color data in post, when you should've used a polarizer in the field to get deeper, more accurate colors?"

Indeed, customers will probably NEVER ask a landscape photographer these questions. But the difference between a good photographer and a mediocre photographer is that the good photographer ASKS THEMSELVES these questions before they even show their work to a potential buyer.

 

[KmH]

Your customers have a strong emotional attachment to the subjects in your photographs, and will love even poorly made photos for that reason. Few, if any, of your customers have any idea what qualifies as a technically good photograph.

They don't know anything about lighting, composition, posing, framing, scale, selective focus, white balance, sharpness, etc.