How do you evaluate a photograph?

[weepete]

So, on the back of a recent thread I thought I'd ask what process you use to critique a photograph?

The idea is we can get an insight into how other people view our shots, what criteria they apply and get a better understanding of what other people can look for in the shots we put up for critique. Please consider what you look for beyond just liking a shot and let us know spesifically why you like it.


Personally I first take in the whole shot, then I consider the subject. I ask myself do the techniques used add to the feel of the shot? Then I consider balance and I note how my eye moves through the frame noting any areas that are:
a) not the main subject but draw the eye putting the image off balance
b) leading lines taking the eye out of the frame

I'll look over the image several times for this not thinking too much, just noting where my eyes go.

Then I dive into the more technial stuff:
Does the processing fit the image?
Is my eye drawn to the areas I think the photographer intended?
Is the image cohesive?
Does the shot evoke a mood/feeling?

Lastly I look at the finishing:
Is the shot level?
Are there any areas of bad cloning/pp?
Is the sharpness acceptable for the subject?
is there enough detail?
What strikes me about the image?
Are there areas that I think are done particularly well?

That's roughly my process. What's yours?

PS @Designer I'd be particularly interested in hearing yours as you brought this idea to my attention!

 

[Jeff15]

This is all very well Pete but most shots on the forum I would consider as observation shots. Now competition judging is a whole different ball game...

 

[Space Face]

As far as can read into what Pete is saying, it's nothing to do with competition judging.

My view has always been, that on Forums, unless specifically requested (ie Just for Fun etc) a picture is posted and open to crit. This is often written into a Forums rules.

I'd agree that a lot of the photos posted on here are 'observational' with scant regard to composition, image quality, sharpness and the other points Pete identifies. As a result some are pretty dreadful.

Crit should be given so as the OP can learn and improve their photography skill sets. However, I have learned over the years that some people don't like being told their pictures are substandard and as I said before, take it as a personal insult, which should never be the case if the crit is given in a constructive, helpful and detailed manner. For example it's pointless saying 'it's out of focus' or 'it's soft' without giving advice as to how this may be improved.

Similarly just repeatedly saying 'nice shot' as a post count boost is pointless imo and helps no one. That said, some do like their ego's massaged, regardless of how bad their photography skills are.

I'm fairly new here and haven't given crit as much as I normally would for the reasons I give above. I do find it an endless source of frustration tho to see poor/ish shots that have potential, being praised as good, nice, fine etc. This can leave the OP thinking a bad shot is good and there's no need to do any more thereby not improving.

I also appreciate that different folk want different things out of photography and what gives one pleasure may not be reciprocated by another. Some are happy to soldier on and capture what gives them pleasure and not care about the finer detail and technical side of things but I believe most would like to improve and refine their abilities.

For me looking at a photograph, I take into consideration mostly the points Pete has raised. It's important to me as a photographer to produce the best images I can in the prevailing circumstances but I'm always willing to learn new tips, methods and techniques.

 

[Derrel]

Well-stated, Space Face.

 

[Space Face]

As far as can read into what Pete is saying, it's nothing to do with competition judging.

My view has always been, that on Forums, unless specifically requested (ie Just for Fun etc) a picture is posted and open to crit. This is often written into a Forums rules.

I'd agree that a lot of the photos posted on here are 'observational' with scant regard to composition, image quality, sharpness and the other points Pete identifies. As a result some are pretty dreadful.

Crit should be given so as the OP can learn and improve their photography skill sets. However, I have learned over the years that some people don't like being told their pictures are substandard and as I said before, take it as a personal insult, which should never be the case if the crit is given in a constructive, helpful and detailed manner. For example it's pointless saying 'it's out of focus' or 'it's soft' without giving advice as to how this may be improved.

Similarly just repeatedly saying 'nice shot' as a post count boost is pointless imo and helps no one. That said, some do like their ego's massaged, regardless of how bad their photography skills are.

I'm fairly new here and haven't given crit as much as I normally would for the reasons I give above. I do find it an endless source of frustration tho to see poor/ish shots that have potential, being praised as good, nice, fine etc. This can leave the OP thinking a bad shot is good and there's no need to do any more thereby not improving.

I also appreciate that different folk want different things out of photography and what give one pleasure may not be reciprocated by another. Some are happy to soldier on and capture what gives them pleasure and not care about the finer detail and technical side of things but I believe most would like to improve and refine their abilities.

For me looking at a photograph, I take into consideration mostly the points Pete has raised. It's important to me as a photographer to produce the best images I can in the prevailing circumstances but I'm always willing to learn new tips, methods and techniques.

Thank you.

 

[Designer]

PS @Designer I'd be particularly interested in hearing yours as you brought this idea to my attention!

Thank you for asking, but since I've been specifically asked by the mods to "stuff it" (not that exact wording) once, and been asked to "never comment again" on two posters' threads, I choose not to pour gasoline on the fire at this time. Let me think about it for a while.

 

[Space Face]

PS @Designer I'd be particularly interested in hearing yours as you brought this idea to my attention!

Thank you for asking, but since I've been specifically asked by the mods to "stuff it" (not that exact wording) once, and been asked to "never comment again" on two posters' threads, I choose not to pour gasoline on the fire at this time. Let me think about it for a while.

Surely if a poster does not wish to see your comments they can ignore you? Seems a bit odd being asked not to reply to specific members posts.

 

[Designer]

Surely if a poster does not wish to see your comments they can ignore you? Seems a bit odd being asked not to reply to specific members posts.

Apparently those two cannot simply ignore my comments. Since I don't care if they ever progress, I will oblige them.

 

[Jeff G]

I am probably one of those who annoys others by just posting "nice shot" etc., but when I say it, I mean it. I'm ok with that.

I'm not a professional so my criteria is probably quite different than most.

I look at whether or not I like the photo. If so/ if not, why?

Does something feel off? Balance, color, focus,

Does the style technique suit the subject matter.

Does it invoke a good/negative feeling or memory

You can be very technical photographer, and still not shoot interesting photos, same goes for being very artistic, if you don't have the basics down, you won't be able to share your vision.

For me photography is more art than skill, but I definately appreciate those of you that have honed that skill and share that knowledge with the rest of us. When you stop learning it's time to move on.
(I'm just a slow learner)

 

[zombiesniper]

I post a lot of "Nice shots"

Sometimes because it's a nice shot and sometimes I see the progress someone is making and we just need to let them learn on their own.

However I do give feedback "unless someone says CC welcome. That's being F'n lazy"
I will aid when I think it may be needed for someone to progress. NOT when I think someones image isn't to my liking.
The other thing I have stated before is that some things are facts, "can't shoot a 1000mm lens at 1/3 sec and expect a crips image" others are opinions "I think it would look better in black and white". Fact can aid you in getting better images......opinions will aid you in getting their image.

 

[waday]

Similarly just repeatedly saying 'nice shot' as a post count boost is pointless imo and helps no one. That said, some do like their ego's massaged, regardless of how bad their photography skills are.

While not a frequent “nice shot” poster myself, sometimes I’d like the OP to know that I like it. So, visiting and saying “this is nice,” is my way of being friendly. It sure beats not having any interaction when posting a shot, IMO.

And... Sometimes people don’t actually ask for critique, rather they just want to share. So, knowing the OP is important, because giving critique in those instances could be considered rude (depending on the person and situation).

 

[limr]

How do I evaluate an image?

Sure, I'll think about the same technical issues as weepete metioned in the OP, and I'll try just as hard to figure out what has gone well as I do trying to figure out what went wrong.

But all of that comes after that first initial impact. How do I first react to a photo? Does it give me an immediate emotional response, either good or bad?

That's when I try to figure out what I'm responding to.

There are a lot of photos that I see that should, on paper, add up to a strong positive first impact, but basically still leave me cold. There are others that I love at first sight but are technically flawed.

However, I am not trying to flog the whole "technically good, artistically boring vs flawed but emotionally impactful" trope. There are plenty of other shots that would have been just meh, but the technical skill of the photographer made it into a very interesting photo.

A question I often ask myself is, "Why was this photo taken?" and then "Why was it taken/processed in this manner?" I don't like pictures that were taken just to show off some technical element. I don't like processing something in a certain way just because we can. If I can't figure out the reason behind the photo - either the subject itself or the presentation of the subject - then once again, I am left cold.

 

[Space Face]

Similarly just repeatedly saying 'nice shot' as a post count boost is pointless imo and helps no one. That said, some do like their ego's massaged, regardless of how bad their photography skills are.

While not a frequent “nice shot” poster myself, sometimes I’d like the OP to know that I like it. So, visiting and saying “this is nice,” is my way of being friendly. It sure beats not having any interaction when posting a shot, IMO.

And... Sometimes people don’t actually ask for critique, rather they just want to share. So, knowing the OP is important, because giving critique in those instances could be considered rude (depending on the person and situation).

In that case why not say why you think a shot is good, what does if for you, expand slightly.

I don't think it's rude at all to give positive crit in the manner I detail unless specifically asked that none is given. The point was on every other photography forum I'm on if a picture is posted it's open for crit as was confirmed by a Mod on here if I recall correctly the last time the subject came up.

As I said in my original post, I am aware that some folk don't like it and are stuck in a bubble thinking poor pictures are better than they are. That's fine if that's what you want out of photography but I think most would like to improve. I certainly learned that way.

 

[407370]

Generally speaking I dont post unless something about the pic grabs me. There was a pic of a childs grave and 2 different interpretations of the same pic. The first example was awful and the second one broke my heart so that was what I said in the post.
I dont enter photography competitions for the exact reason that I dont give a hairy rats crack what most people think about my photography. There are a few people on this and other forums who's opinion I do respect deeply.
My photography philosophy is not for everyone, I get that, but that is why I have been a photography nut for most of my life. I am pushing my own boundaries not other peoples.
I am due to retire in the next few years and I have a hankering to enter a few photography competitions just to see if I can conform to the normal rules sufficiently to be recognised for it. In the same plan I want to specialise in Super Macro of a specific fungus.

 

[Overread]

One thing I've often done to find if a person really wants critique is not to comment, but instead to ask questions. Even something as basic as "What camera/lens did you use" and "what mode" etc... can not only sift those who want to learn from those who are just posting to share their enjoyment of photography; but it also allows you to start getting information about the creation of the photo. This can directly impact what critique you give in reply.

Learning that someone used a bridge camera might well change how you reply compared to if they used the latest SLR with a laser spotter and motorised rail. Some improvements are impractical/difficult/impossible on some camera systems. Meanwhile engaging a person in dialogue starts to get them to open up to their method. This isn't just what they used, but also starts to tell you what thought process they were going though. Get enough from them and you can start to work out their internal thought process. This might highlight that they actually do know the theory of what they are doing, but they are perhaps giving more weight/importance to the wrong area or doing things in an order that can result in a lowered performance. It can also show where there might be some subtle gaps in their understanding which might compound or even confuse them if you start to explain latter stages in a process.


Because so many of us learn photography in an ad-hock manner, with fits of intense study and then periods of just casual shooting. It's possible to end up with a lot of gaps in understanding and theories that are only understood at a functional level. Often enough this is all we need and even some theory teaching aids only teach things in a more practical application rather than scientific study approach. (eg arguments over what counts as contributing to exposure and exposure triangles can go in circles for pages and pages).




So my first part of evaluation is to learn about the creation and the creator. If the prime intent of a critique is to help a person to improve then the first step has to be to learn more than just the photo before your eyes. Opening up that dialogue is important. You can be the best of the best of the best, but if you've no ability to communicate and engage with others then sometimes it can be like trying to push a square into the circle. You might get it to fit, but its never going to be an ideal result.



I also remain open to the fact that people will disagree with what I say, or they will question it, or even counter it. This is good, yet so often its taken as a negative by many giving critique*. Not only are there variations in theory in the technical and artistic areas, but there's also the fact that when giving critique there's a learning process going on. You aren't just feeding information into a computer, you're teaching someone a new way of understanding. For some this might just be confirming what they've already read and reinforcing it; for others its totally new and for some it goes counter to some critiques and feedback they've had before. So a pushback or counter is great since what it is in effect saying from a person is that they don't fully understand and/or agree with you. At that point you can start to provide more detail and depth to the discussion to elaborate the point. In theory it should result in shifting the discussion to a higher level of depth which might result in taking a very basic point to a higher level.
Sometimes a person just won't agree with you and that's good too. In the end we all want a different thing from our hobbies and whilst many of us want to continually improve, some are happy where they are and don't want to change. Or don't feel a need or whatever. There's nothing wrong in that. It's our hobby our rules. I think its important to respect that aspect in the end. Forums are full of people from all walks - from pros with National Geographic awards to people who just snap away blindly. Each is engaging in their own way with their own gear, skills etc.... Those who wish to help others (which is in its own way how many engage with their hobby) should always be open to the fact that some want the help and some don't. It's better to identify who wants help and who doesn't and to focus our energy on those who do - rather than focusing our ire and anger and frustrations on those who don't.


*as a mod I've made the observation many times that some giving critique complain that "newbies can't take criticism of their creations". Yet I've also witnessed many of those same people then get into fights and arguments when their advice is questioned/critiqued in turn.