" SOLID REVIEWS????""

[New England Moments]

skieur.... Thanks for coming back and your comments are well taken..

and I couldn't agree more on what you said -----> """"The person whose work is being critiqued should be evaluating the value of that critique on the specifics of technique and composition in the context of photography. The experience of the person doing the Critique is the critical element in determining the importance of the comments."""

and again I throw in what I said...--->""""Beginners" Take Critique Lightly... and also, do some homework on the person who is giving you the Critique!! In other words , there are a lot of people who can talk a good photograph, but also can't take one... so weed and feed thru your critique..IT'S AS MUCH FAIR PLAY FOR YOU TO KNOW THEIR WORK , AS IT IS FOR THEM TO CRITIQUE YOURS! """

Can we agree on this??

Again Thank you, and hope your not taking anything I said as an insult??

This is more or less my opinion, and a type of ,,,, if The Shoe Fits Wear It...suggestion..

 

[New England Moments]

Ok, guess the case is closed , and jury is out on this.......

Thanks All.................

 

[aammoore]

ONce AGAIN...
I LOVE THEM, BOTH!

 

[Murray Bloom]

I think that, to a degree, you sandbagged us. When you ask for a critique and then counter by showing us how your images have been published is an apples and oranges situation.

When I had a commercial studio, hundreds of my photographs were published, in magazines, catalogs, newspapers, on TV, etc. But were they good photographs? Not always. More often than not, they were simply what was required for their particular use.

Many were the times when I received an assignment where the primary directive was that the final image fit the art director's use of the space. The quality of the photo was less important than whether the proper space was left for copy, logos, etc.

Is your cover shot a good image? Hard to say. It has enough technical and aesthetic flaws to keep any knowledgeable critic busy, as has been already noted. Were it not for the fact that it fit your client's needs, would it have ever been published, and if so, in what venue? Did the image come about as the result of an assignment, and if so, what were the instructions given to you?

I have a formal art education at a top school and learned about critique at an early stage in my development as a photographer. Critique is not for the faint of heart, and I question whether "beginners" can benefit from detailed, serious criticism without getting their feelings hurt. However, I doubt if many will put away their cameras just because others find fault with their images. After all, they're here on this site asking for the criticism.

Any photograph can be made better. Always. It is human nature to focus on the elements which strike us as flawed, and much harder to dissect what makes an image work well. Critique generally deals with the former a lot more than it does with the latter.

I think that you have implied that, because your image was used for a magazine cover, the comments you received, while (in your words) were "valid," your follow-up seems to say that being published is more important. Maybe so, but what does one have to do with the other?

 

[Deadeye008]

I like where New England Moments is coming from. Good point. Take critique for what it is, someones opinion.

 

[sage95]

I am just a newbie here but I see the point that New England is trying to make. I have not yet posted photos on this forum for critique yet but in various judged shows I have had one or two judges tell me an image was horrible or was poorly executed while the other one or two judges praised me for a great shot. So I am used to critism and I think it can be beneficial but if it isn't explained how to improve the shortcomings then it is useless. I also agree that there is no benefit in having someone give you a false sense of ability if your ability is lacking. My father was a quite talented amatuer photographer and he is the first to tell me when something I shoot is garbage. I appreciate every bit of it as long as I am told why. But also like every other photographer I have shots that are dear to me even if they are not good photos and I think it is easy for a photographer to think because he likes a certain image that it must be good. I think it is better when a person can say I like it but it isn't very good or it is very good but I still don't like it. Just my two cents I see both sides of the argument here.

 

[New England Moments]

aammoore... thank you!!

Deadeye and sage..... ok this is for you and anyone else still looking at this post..... I didn't mean to start an argument here, nor sandbaggin anyone...

I'm only going to say this once again... Critique is very important to a photographer / Artist etc etc... but although you take all critique in mind and learn from it ... YOU MUST also, take the critiquers work into consideration...

Sticking to my guns on this.... If your Plumber tells you that your car needs a engine overhaul, you are going to heed what he says.... but you are still going to take your car to a mechanic...

All I am saying, is EACH of us involved in photography thru the years have found hero's in the art... Its the same here... you take critique with a grain of salt, file it.... It is only fair for you as a poster being critiqued , to have feelings about the persons work , who is critiquing you... Lets face it, if you feel the person s work represents talent, your ears will open wider...

Now all this above is not to Pi-- anyone off...and everyones critique is GREAT... I'm just saying some bares more weight...

 

[jimiismydaddy]

is that how the cover looks or did you lose saturation when scanning or transfering? If thats hot the hardcopy looks, they screwed your photo. The original one you posted looks much better.