tbcass
Forum Pro
Some point out only the things they think are wrong with a photo while others give only praise. I think a good critique should include both. What do you think?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
How do you critique a photo?
- Thread starter tbcass
- Start date
nicodimus22
Senior Member
When someone is doing mine, I only want to hear about the negative things, because those are the only things that I can learn from and improve. However, I understand that some people want to hear both sides, and that's OK. Everyone is different.
--
http://www.naturecratephoto.com
http://www.etsy.com/shop/NatureCratePhoto
https://www.instagram.com/nature_crate_photo/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nicodimus22/
--
http://www.naturecratephoto.com
http://www.etsy.com/shop/NatureCratePhoto
https://www.instagram.com/nature_crate_photo/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nicodimus22/
Last edited:
tbcass
Forum Pro
But the positive comments are just as important because you need to know what you are doing right just as much as wrong. Learning requires information about both.
Yes.
By the way, your post was clear and to the point. I liked the way you were very specific with your question.
However, it could have included some context as to why you are asking. That could be helpful to those who may respnd.
By the way, your post was clear and to the point. I liked the way you were very specific with your question.
However, it could have included some context as to why you are asking. That could be helpful to those who may respnd.
Goethe
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,649
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 2,239
I think in general that critiquing a photograph is useless. Only the photographer who captures and creates the image will be able to truly critique it. Anything that other people can say about the image, positive or negative, will be based on experiences and criteria that the image creator is simply not privy to.
Of course I understand the futility of holding an opinion such as this. Sure there are scenarios where a more experienced shooter can critique an image of a beginner from a purely technical standpoint, with no consideration of artistic merit or without worry about the photographs 'higher' purpose. But even this, critiquing technical aspects, is still essentially useless. A photographer will make his or her journey primarily from a very personal path of experimentation and implementation of mistakes and discoveries.
Do the opinions of others factor into this? Of course they do. I am sure many people, including members here, will argue that they have become better photographers because of critique they have received in their lifetime about their images. But there are also people who have become great photographers who dont ask for critique, or ignore it when they get it. And yet still they become accomplished in image creation. Therefore critique is not required for skill to develop. In that vein I believe that an artist or photographer should not worry about what others think about their image. Create for yourself. Make images that move YOU. Image creation should be a selfish past time. If you are not making images that move YOU then you shouldnt be making images to move others. Even if they are paying you.
Sorry, this is getting into several different philosophical areas of photography. It is just a rambling explanation of why I dont really concern myself with image critique. Even though I myself have participated in it in the past. I do not expect anyone to share this view and I dont even care if anyone understands it.
Any negative response to my opinion will be considered a critique which i will ignore. ;-)
--
Straylightrun- "Are you for real?"
Goethe- "No, I'm a unicorn. Kudos for seeing thru the disguise."
http://photolumiere.net/
Goethe, this is a notification that you have been temporarily banned from dpreview, details of the reason are as follows: Excessive use of glitter.
Of course I understand the futility of holding an opinion such as this. Sure there are scenarios where a more experienced shooter can critique an image of a beginner from a purely technical standpoint, with no consideration of artistic merit or without worry about the photographs 'higher' purpose. But even this, critiquing technical aspects, is still essentially useless. A photographer will make his or her journey primarily from a very personal path of experimentation and implementation of mistakes and discoveries.
Do the opinions of others factor into this? Of course they do. I am sure many people, including members here, will argue that they have become better photographers because of critique they have received in their lifetime about their images. But there are also people who have become great photographers who dont ask for critique, or ignore it when they get it. And yet still they become accomplished in image creation. Therefore critique is not required for skill to develop. In that vein I believe that an artist or photographer should not worry about what others think about their image. Create for yourself. Make images that move YOU. Image creation should be a selfish past time. If you are not making images that move YOU then you shouldnt be making images to move others. Even if they are paying you.
Sorry, this is getting into several different philosophical areas of photography. It is just a rambling explanation of why I dont really concern myself with image critique. Even though I myself have participated in it in the past. I do not expect anyone to share this view and I dont even care if anyone understands it.
Any negative response to my opinion will be considered a critique which i will ignore. ;-)
--
Straylightrun- "Are you for real?"
Goethe- "No, I'm a unicorn. Kudos for seeing thru the disguise."
http://photolumiere.net/
Goethe, this is a notification that you have been temporarily banned from dpreview, details of the reason are as follows: Excessive use of glitter.
Last edited:
Surely this is massively dependant on the purpose of the photograph?
tbcass
Forum Pro
I just saw a post where someone cut down what I thought were a good photo by pointing out a two things he thought were wrong with the photo in an overall negative tone. He said;
"You botched the exposure on the only keeper you might have had--the first one!
Rest have busy backgrounds.
Not that anything could be done. the sensor is small, after all.
Poses are nice though."
Nesting Egrets with the RX10 IV . . .
They were fun to watch! Wonderful birds! Jack -- http://www.pbase.com/jrs40 https://jackschollphotography.shutterfly.com/pictures
The photos he claimed weren't keepers I thought were very good.
tbcass
Forum Pro
That can be interpreted is "the photo sucks but the cat is cute".
Goethe
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,649
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 2,239
I looked at that post in context. It seems the OP was not asking for critique just posting some photos he thought were fun.
I agree with the OP they are fun photos showing some birds.
Had the OP asked for critique my only critique would have been blown highlights.
The post you quoted seems to be from a poster who joined a few days ago with a different agenda.
The more interesting thing to me are posts like that all over the forums from first time posters that never come back. Whether it's posting photos or asking for help. That always seems odd to me.
Don Lacy
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,181
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 2,624
When I critique an image I try to do three things first I mention what I like about the image to start the process off in a positive manner. I then will comment on the technical aspects is it exposed properly are the highlights blown, is it over sharpen things along that nature. I will finish with suggestions on what I might have done if the image where mine since this is often a matter or taste I make sure that the photographer knows that these are only suggestions.
What I don't do is make it personal or belittle them it has been my experience that here what some pass off as a critique is nothing more then an opportunity to put someone down. Just read some of the comments on the image of the week articles.
What I don't do is make it personal or belittle them it has been my experience that here what some pass off as a critique is nothing more then an opportunity to put someone down. Just read some of the comments on the image of the week articles.
Don Lacy
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,181
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 2,624
Goethe
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,649
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 2,239
Subjective world or not, if the purpose of the image is a defined impact on a defined audience, then critique from members of said audience is far from useless.
Goethe
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,649
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 2,239
But do you see the problem? In this scenario you are doing nothing more than to try and illicit a pre determined response (defined impact) from a specific group (defined audience). If this is the case we arent talking about critique, we are talking about instruction. Feedback from the group is pertinent only insofar as you need to create exactly what they want to see, or to make them give a response you desire.
You really do like talking in a very roundabout way don't you?
Anyway, yes, you could deem any form of critique to be a form of instruction. I don't see why that should change it's value.
AmbleYonder
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,960
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,341
you are correct, professional photographic judges do the same.
BrownieVet
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,833
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 1,666
Martin.au
Forum Pro
Depends on the photo (and sometimes depends on the person posting it, and how badly they've behaved in the past). 
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum