How do you evaluate a photograph?

[BananaRepublic]

I'm not qualified to critique.

It is my observation that many of those "qualified people" often dont know or have much understanding of things out side of their own bailiwick.

artistic vision

subject is interesting

Those are completely subjective.

 

[Designer]

Diesel doesn't ignite like gasoline but it still burns.

Please tell me how that remark adds anything to the conversation, or even remotely connects with the topic.

 

[DanOstergren]

artistic vision

subject is interesting

Those are completely subjective.

That doesn't invalidate subjective criticism. What is your point?

 

[johngpt]

Time to unwatch the thread.

 

[BananaRepublic]

Diesel doesn't ignite like gasoline but it still burns.

Please tell me how that remark adds anything to the conversation, or even remotely connects with the topic.

It doesn't really add to to the topic of conversation but you did say that you have gotten some blow back over comments made or points raised and you were reluctant to make comment/critique in future because as you outlined the may cause offence. My understanding of the idiom to pour gas on the fire is to not want to have things blowup. When I said diesel fuel doesn't ignite in the same manner as gasoline it was primarily an off the cuff remark that does has a factual bases and secondly, although its only now fully coming to mind, that one could reword any future comments in a different manner which would equate to a slow burning diesel fire instead of the apparently outrageous comments, critique and advise that were made previously.

 

[BananaRepublic]

artistic vision

subject is interesting

Those are completely subjective.

That doesn't invalidate subjective criticism. What is your point?

No it doesn't but my remarks were made in the context of what I had read previously in the thread. I quoted the above to try and make my comments as concise as possible to avoid going into a half cocked rant.

With regards to yours specifically; it is my experience that majority can see artistic merit only in things that they are aware of or have personally encountered, now perhaps you yourself are an artist and are open to things but the majority are not.

As for a particular subject being interesting or not is entirely personal taste now that doesn't invalidate the criteria but when people have been inculcated over decades to have regard for certain subjects it diminishes things. I recently entered two prints into a regional photographic federations POTY comp, it was my first time going to one of these things just representing myself. The "qualified judges" on the day where professional and regarded nature/wildlife, portrait/baby portraiture and landscape photographers, needless to say people doffed their caps to them as if they were Plantagenet kings.
What I observed is that they were far from objective, images of animals, babies and beachscapes did well but anything different, ergo that they didn't know or care about didn't, regardless of quality. Even though everyone in the room knew that the animals were baited, the babies doped, and the beaches seen and done before.

FYI I did moderately well in the sense that I qualified for the national POTY comp, so this is not a "because I didnt do well" thing, but the judging was much the same there and in other competitions of high regard.

 

[Designer]

.. a slow burning diesel fire ...

Now I wish I had some visual evidence to show that diesel can burn rather furiously when sprayed directly onto hot coals.

 

[BananaRepublic]

.. a slow burning diesel fire ...

Now I wish I had some visual evidence to show that diesel can burn rather furiously when sprayed directly onto hot coals.

here is a video that isn't relavant to anything only this exact micro discussion

 

[limr]

Just let it go, hmmm?

 

[DanOstergren]

artistic vision

subject is interesting

Those are completely subjective.

That doesn't invalidate subjective criticism. What is your point?

No it doesn't but my remarks were made in the context of what I had read previously in the thread. I quoted the above to try and make my comments as concise as possible to avoid going into a half cocked rant.

With regards to yours specifically; it is my experience that majority can see artistic merit only in things that they are aware of or have personally encountered, now perhaps you yourself are an artist and are open to things but the majority are not.

As for a particular subject being interesting or not is entirely personal taste now that doesn't invalidate the criteria but when people have been inculcated over decades to have regard for certain subjects it diminishes things. I recently entered two prints into a regional photographic federations POTY comp, it was my first time going to one of these things just representing myself. The "qualified judges" on the day where professional and regarded nature/wildlife, portrait/baby portraiture and landscape photographers, needless to say people doffed their caps to them as if they were Plantagenet kings.
What I observed is that they were far from objective, images of animals, babies and beachscapes did well but anything different, ergo that they didn't know or care about didn't, regardless of quality. Even though everyone in the room knew that the animals were baited, the babies doped, and the beaches seen and done before.

FYI I did moderately well in the sense that I qualified for the national POTY comp, so this is not a "because I didnt do well" thing, but the judging was much the same there and in other competitions of high regard.

It's just a little comical that you are criticizing others in this thread on how they might critique hypothetical photos. I couldn't care less what you think about my personal criteria for evaluating a photograph to be honest though, or whether you think I or anyone else here is qualified to do so.

 

[zulu42]

Diesel and other kerosene products have a higher flash point than gasoline products. The Flash Point is the temperature at which the vapors can be ignited. Above their flash point (126 F for diesel) the rate of flame spread is similar to gasoline. If the guy in the video had tested in ambient or fuel temperatures above 100 F, the jet fuel would have lit just like the gas.
Gasoline has a flash point of -45 F, so it is virtually always above the flash point.

Jet Fuel Fire 'a monster'

 

[limr]

@zulu42

Just let it go, hmmm?

 

[marmle]

I am my own worst critic which is why I rarely post any of my photos here. I am no expert in judging photos, but I like to believe I can tell a good shot from a bad one. Composition is the first thing I look at, distractions from the main subject, then focus...all the obvious things. I don't know if I could tell if a photo had been over processed or badly lit or not, though I know sometimes less is more. I know I have seen some which I thought were, but I don't know whether I was right in my assumption or not.

 

[Designer]

..I don't know whether I was right in my assumption or not.

You could spend some spare time independently studying art, particularly if your study materials lean towards contemporary examples of photography. It's not terribly difficult to pick up.

 

[BananaRepublic]

artistic vision

subject is interesting

Those are completely subjective.

That doesn't invalidate subjective criticism. What is your point?

No it doesn't but my remarks were made in the context of what I had read previously in the thread. I quoted the above to try and make my comments as concise as possible to avoid going into a half cocked rant.

With regards to yours specifically; it is my experience that majority can see artistic merit only in things that they are aware of or have personally encountered, now perhaps you yourself are an artist and are open to things but the majority are not.

As for a particular subject being interesting or not is entirely personal taste now that doesn't invalidate the criteria but when people have been inculcated over decades to have regard for certain subjects it diminishes things. I recently entered two prints into a regional photographic federations POTY comp, it was my first time going to one of these things just representing myself. The "qualified judges" on the day where professional and regarded nature/wildlife, portrait/baby portraiture and landscape photographers, needless to say people doffed their caps to them as if they were Plantagenet kings.
What I observed is that they were far from objective, images of animals, babies and beachscapes did well but anything different, ergo that they didn't know or care about didn't, regardless of quality. Even though everyone in the room knew that the animals were baited, the babies doped, and the beaches seen and done before.

FYI I did moderately well in the sense that I qualified for the national POTY comp, so this is not a "because I didnt do well" thing, but the judging was much the same there and in other competitions of high regard.

It's just a little comical that you are criticizing others in this thread on how they might critique hypothetical photos. I couldn't care less what you think about my personal criteria for evaluating a photograph to be honest though, or whether you think I or anyone else here is qualified to do so.

Why did quote me in the first place so.