Saying you like something

[Overread]

If I don't like something, I really do try to point out why. If I like it? Saying I like it is enough...

Yes and no - depends on the experience of the person you're talking to. Just saying you like something to a new photographer doesn't teach them anything; the same as saying you dislike something. The explanation of what elements you do like - of what works in the photo is just as valuable (as a form of critique) as what you dislike and why.

It's something we oft forget; the beginners need just as much guidance on what is wrong as what is right.



limr - to add to that often the back and forth debate/discussion that forms around critique can be even more valuable; sometimes getting the person giving to elaborate in more detail or simply the person being critiqued starts to appreciate what is said. Or heck the original critique comes to actually agree that their impression and comment might have been wrong within the context of the photo.
Sadly all to many react in a hostile nature on both sides and once its a fight that's it all value is lost.

 

[bribrius]

Half the issues with C&C is the photographer who posts the picture. The photographer can't ask for a critique and then argue back to the person when they give you their opinion. Usually it's responses like: "Well, I couldn't get closer to the subject." or "My lens wasn't long enough" or "Well, the lighting was bad." No one really cares what problems you have as a photographer. The photo must stand on it's own. Trying to explain away a critique gets you no where. You learn nothing if you do that.

Also, what happens when you're defensive, no one wants to give you an honest critique. Who wants to be told your critique doesn't matter or is wrong. So you post simple platitudes like, "Nice work."

part of this Is situational with me. I posted a photo the other day of a wasp. Now if someone told me ten things involved with that which leads to needing a macro lens, well I don't have a macro lens. I actually do what you speak of a lot, as to shut down the direction the critique is going. There is no point in critiquing something of mine on things I already know are wrong, or that are out of my control. It is a waste of both parties time. I have said wrong lens before as well. Reasonably. No problem with the critique bring up a problem with the photo, but it should be clear what the options are that was available. Saying it is wrong, when no other option was available does no good as I cant make that photograph correct by that standard. while there is a technical problem it is one I literally could do nothing about. Critiquing is I thought for improvement. If it is something you cant do anything about at the time, there is no way for that line of critique to aid in improvement.
For instance you tell someone to shoot something at a different time of day, negative effects in the photo from light or something. But the moment being captured is at THAT TIME it was shot. Well how is that even beneficial? If you say bri I see this, this , this wrong with lighting. Well, the shot was at 12 noon. It is what it is. if you can explain a way to do it different at 12 noon instead of saying it is wrong and it should have been at 3 oclock that would make sense. They aren't excuses, they are realizations of situations. The final image is the one taken at the time, with what is available. using the resources the best you can for the situation presented.

 

[bribrius]

just a quick add, I've also posted before critiquing photos along the lines of "for what you had to work with you did well". Because I try to take this into account what the photographer had for a situation at the time. To me, that matters. I have also liked photos, with problems, knowing the photographer made the best out of the situation despite flaws in the photo and still came out with a presentable photo. To me, it all factors in.

 

[Overread]

bribrius - sometimes you've got to clearly outline what settings, situation, conditions, camera, lens you used all at the start. If you provide little to no information up-front and if you provide no understanding in words of what you do and don't already know as weaknesses in the photo then people will bring up the obvious. If you want to avoid that check the link in my signature - the first one. Read through it - the more information you put up front about a shot the more relevant critique will be to your specific situation. If you go further and give your thoughts on the faults and on what you wanted and what you think is wrong you can again get even better critique.

Put nothing up and you're risking it all on luck as to what you get back.

 

[bribrius]

bribrius - sometimes you've got to clearly outline what settings, situation, conditions, camera, lens you used all at the start. If you provide little to no information up-front and if you provide no understanding in words of what you do and don't already know as weaknesses in the photo then people will bring up the obvious. If you want to avoid that check the link in my signature - the first one. Read through it - the more information you put up front about a shot the more relevant critique will be to your specific situation. If you go further and give your thoughts on the faults and on what you wanted and what you think is wrong you can again get even better critique.

Put nothing up and you're risking it all on luck as to what you get back.

true. I also speak of methodology. I don't normally ask for critique now anyway.
If you concentrate on just having great photos here, you will have a lot of crappy photographers only posting their best photos. People will post to appease. I was told recently to only post my "best" work. why? i couldn't tell you my best work doesn't really explain my problems I have in my photography. But if you concentrate on just final image you aren't making photographers in my opinion. You are making people only post their best images and most of them could be more luck than skill. If you concentrate on photography, you will have a lot of improving photographers that end up turning out more great photos. Final image as first priority being a methodology, is better left to contests and commercial applications and is not conducive to learning environment.

your teacher when you were in school learned more from what you got wrong on your test about you, than what you got right. And your progress wasn't just considered on the one test you decided to turn in, but on your entire scope of work including the ones you didn't do so well at.

 

[Overread]

When you're learning and they say post your best they mean if you took 50 shots of a wasp on a flow you show the best ones of that set - not every one - not the last or first, but the one that came out the best. And then you work upon those to improve your best, because as you improve your best your worst also improves as well.

That said if you're learning and after input then sure post your weaker shots for critique and feedback.

Posting yourbest and only your best is really only for if you're going professional and want a good clear well presented portfolio

 

[Derrel]

In a group discussion or lesson, oftentimes the poorer efforts reveal as much as the better efforts. Same when it comes to privately reviewing your contact sheets/proof sheets/digital downloads/entire takes from whole shoots. On second- and third-visit shoots, it really pays to go back and review what you shot on earlier trips to the same location, to see what you did BADLY, so you can figure out a way to get better shots at places you didn't have success earlier. Same thing with C&C where a person posts 4,5,6 frames and asks, "What can I improve on?" Those types of posts will often have some weak, some better images, and the weaker ones will often be the ones that will give the most VALUE as sources of feedback and C&C comments.

I think this is a case where the poorer examples have much more value, and the entire group can see the "wrong way" to do something, and a lot can be learned by the mistakes. Famous inventor Thomas Edison has a couple famous quotes about how mistakes are learning opportunities. One issue that exists today with digital shooting is that many people immediately discard and forever delete mistakes/not-so-goods/half-baked results, and never really LOOK AT their mistakes, never use their less-than-best efforts as guides, as tools, to address weak areas. With film and contact sheets, we always had a record, the good mixed in with the bad.

I think the weaker shots, which tend to be the majority of shots we all make, are probably the ones that provide the most fodder for C&C and for learning what hurts shots the most. And because of that, that's one reason I think the advice, "post one or two frames at most" is often wrong for the beginning level shooters who actually come here looking for suggestions to improve. For those people, I like to see 10,15,20 shots (admittedly on another hosting site or their web pages) so I can see enough shots to get a feel for what they are doing, how they shoot, if they make the same mistakes over and over, and so on.

 

[Overread]

Derrel you raise a good point on teaching, but sadly many people don't want to critique 10 or 20 shots - one has to socially be accepted by the group before the group is willing to invest that might time and effort into such an undertaking. Or you've got to make it very clear in the opening post that you're showing the shots collectively and are after a collective assessment.


On the subject of poor shots I often find that shots I thought were bad right after I Take them are often not all that bad after a day or two. It's not that they magically got better, but that often you can more easily realise the good when you've not got the 10001 things you did wrong (or think you did wrong) in your mind.

 

[Derrel]

Derrel you raise a good point on teaching, but sadly many people don't want to critique 10 or 20 shots - one has to socially be accepted by the group before the group is willing to invest that might time and effort into such an undertaking. Or you've got to make it very clear in the opening post that you're showing the shots collectively and are after a collective assessment.


On the subject of poor shots I often find that shots I thought were bad right after I Take them are often not all that bad after a day or two. It's not that they magically got better, but that often you can more easily realise the good when you've not got the 10001 things you did wrong (or think you did wrong) in your mind.

Yes. My numbers are actually representing two, distinct, actual TPF C&C seekers; regular posters offering 3,4,5 or 6 frames, which is VERY common on "people" sets like wedding sets, or maternity sets, senior portraits, and so on, and people are free to offer C&C on as many or as few frames as they feel like doing.

And then we get the the first-time, or beginning posters who often show up, and provide 10 frames or so, or link us to a page where they have 10 to 20 shots, something like that, and ask for a "What do I need to work on? How am I doing". For those people, the ones showing in bulk, I think the C&C they deserve/need is typically more generalist, like, "You need to frame more tightly," or, "Watch out for really bright backgrounds, and take close-up meter readings," and other basic tips & tricks kind of commentary. Those types of people might, or might not become TPF regulars. I expect that whether we "recruit" them, as Lew mentioned, depends on how much value they perceive they can get here.

 

[table1349]

Oddly, I mostly agree with this.

I knew you'd come to your senses...

:mrgreen:

Oh great, he will be hard to put up with for at least a week now.

 

[Steve5D]

Half the issues with C&C is the photographer who posts the picture. The photographer can't ask for a critique and then argue back to the person when they give you their opinion. Usually it's responses like: "Well, I couldn't get closer to the subject." or "My lens wasn't long enough" or "Well, the lighting was bad." No one really cares what problems you have as a photographer. The photo must stand on it's own. Trying to explain away a critique gets you no where. You learn nothing if you do that.

Also, what happens when you're defensive, no one wants to give you an honest critique. Who wants to be told your critique doesn't matter or is wrong. So you post simple platitudes like, "Nice work."

The flip-side to that is when someone is so brutally frank that is sends people to the door.

There used to be a guy on the HDR forum; long since banned. He had difficulty explaining what might be wrong with a photo, so he would impart wisdom-filled little nuggests like "You should stop posting until you learn what you're doing. This is horrible".

An "honest critique" is meaningless if it's not also "constructive"...

 

[Steve5D]

Yes and no - depends on the experience of the person you're talking to. Just saying you like something to a new photographer doesn't teach them anything; the same as saying you dislike something. The explanation of what elements you do like - of what works in the photo is just as valuable (as a form of critique) as what you dislike and why.

Well, this brings me back to the point I made about flaming puppies. If I like that there are no flaming puppies is a photo, does it really help the photographer to mention that? I think not.

So, we'll just go ahead and disagree on this point...

It's something we oft forget; the beginners need just as much guidance on what is wrong as what is right.

I think I was clear when I stated that I will always try to point out the reasons I think a photo needs work. But if it's good, it's good.

No drawn out manifesto about why it's good will have much impact...

 

[otherprof]

I like this post. Oh, wait, forget it.

 

[table1349]

I was going to say I like bunnies..........


But then I would have to give some long winded explanation about bunnies, what makes them likeable, their good traits, their bad traits, what makes a good bunny, what makes a bad bunny and what makes an outstanding bunny. It ain't worth it. So I am just going to not say anything about bunnies and just look at the pretty picture.

 

[JacaRanda]

There is no rule that only one response in a topic is allowed; if one person posts a simple "I Like It" response then others can still post in the same thread. There really is room for both and there really is no limit to how many people can respond to a topic. If one person posts a simple "I Like It" then all is not lost, someone is still able to post a comprehensive critique if they are so inclined. Feel free to post all the comprehensive, exhaustive critiques that you desire, and others can post their "I Like It" posts. It works quite well that way.

BINGO on 10 cards!