View Full Version : Is there any interest in Critiques?
ClaremontPhoto
03-20-2007, 05:28
We used to have one or two critique threads every week. Five people uploaded photos and each particpant critiqued the other four particpants' photos.
But it hasn't happened for a month or more.
Is anybody interested in photos here, and we'll revive this feature? Or if we're more into bags and GAS we'll leave critiques to fade away?
Gabriel M.A.
03-20-2007, 05:31
I think seeing the usual suspects over a long time discouraged a lot of people from participating.
We used to have one or two critique threads every week. Five people uploaded photos and each particpant critiqued the other four particpants' photos.
But it hasn't happened for a month or more.
Is anybody interested in photos here, and we'll revive this feature? Or if we're more into bags and GAS we'll leave critiques to fade away?
:)
Well as a G2 user, much of the gear related stuff is completely irrelevant to me...and the Contax forum is a fairly quiet place...so I spend most of my time browsing and commenting in the gallery - great for inspiration and to pick up hints on film types and what's achievable.
I'm very interested in the critique side...but am on the road so much that processing and scanning happens every 2-3 months - meaning I'm not in a position to join in that often...and when I am there'll be hundreds of shots... :)
Most of my photography - particularly work related - is digital SLR and has no place here...
This is just my OPINION so take it only as that:
Photorgaphy (and art) is subjective. What looks good to one may not to another and there is simply a difference of opinion. The way I see critiques working is if there is a "student" and a "teacher" where the student defers to the opinion of the teacher based on experience and ability (that last one is problematic). Between peers, it's just a difference of opinion. This happened very recently when rbiemer asked for votes on his photo of a dieing pointsettia plant that included a portion of a bright blue candle holder. (Rob explained what it was as it was not evident.) My opinion was that it was distracting, he felt the picture needed that shot of colour. Difference of opinion.
I think Gabriel is right - to those not involved such threads might appear like a private party, and one is naturally reticent about intruding.
There is also a perhaps equally significant point. I imagine that most of us are dissatisfied with our photography. If we are not, then we ought to be. The problem with critiques is that most people naturally hope for approval - to be told that their work is not the miserable trash they secretly believe it might be.
I wonder if the best sort of critique thread might not demand self-criticism. A theme is chosen and people then submit a picture which has proved especially popular in their gallery (for example) and proceed to outline what they see as its faults. This could then lead to a general discussion of problems with the genre, or with attitudes to photography. There would be no need to criticise anyone else's work, but rather a desire to identify common problems and difficulties. If done with honesty and good spirit I think that all those participating would benefit significantly . We are, after all, our harshest critics. I would happily start such a thread, if there were any interest.
Ian
Jocko, IMO your approach is a good one. I participated in a critique. The rules state to give constructive criticism, which frankly sometimes can be really difficult. Working the other way around as you suggest, puts the criticism at the shooter's side. That would make it easier for the viewers to be more frank about their opinions.
pesphoto
03-20-2007, 06:29
For me the whole point of photography is doing it simply because I like doing it. I like when someone comments on my work in the gallery, even critically, but it's not why I shoot and post my photos.
ClaremontPhoto
03-20-2007, 06:46
I agree with all of the above.
Personally, I like the old critques for when a photo of mine which I think is pretty good gets very little attention elsewhere. The critique people would point out what I'd done wrong.
I think the idea of a photographer presenting and criticising his/her own photo is a good way of beginning a critique.
back alley
03-20-2007, 07:03
Or if we're more into bags and GAS we'll leave critiques to fade away?
i am so tired of these cheap shots.
jon, please start your own forum so you have exactly what you want and then you can be somewhere that you really like instead of here with the gearheads.
as to the critiques...i participated in a couple and was mostly disappointed.
i post more of my stuff on my flickr account than here. i get more comments there than here.
joe
jan normandale
03-20-2007, 07:30
Or if we're more into bags and GAS we'll leave critiques to fade away?
i am so tired of these cheap shots.
jon, please start your own forum so you have exactly what you want and then you can be somewhere that you really like instead of here with the gearheads.
as to the critiques...i participated in a couple and was mostly disappointed.
i post more of my stuff on my flickr account than here. i get more comments there than here.
joe
Uh oh... what's happening here..
back alley
03-20-2007, 07:45
Uh oh... what's happening here..
easy to explain jan, we have a few members here who like the cheap shot, for whatever reason. maybe they think they are being funny or cute or intelligent, but i find it less than amusing.
i think these people who have such a low regard for rff should start their own forum, a place of perfection where they can be funny and cute and intelligent all they like.
joe
A little cranky Joe? Hang on winter doesn't last forever. The sun will shine and it will be warm again and all will be OK.
back alley
03-20-2007, 07:55
A little cranky Joe? Hang on winter doesn't last forever. The sun will shine and it will be warm again and all will be OK.
actually, i'm not cranky today.
but these cheap shots are annoying.
it's like people who show up at dinnertime everyday and then complain about the food.
if you don't like the food then try somewhere else.
and tomorrow is the first day of spring and 'they' are promising plus temps from today on!! yeah!!!!!!!!!
joe
it's like people who show up at dinnertime everyday and then complain about the food.
joe
The name for people like that is ex-wife. (or husband as the case may be)
jan normandale
03-20-2007, 08:20
Jon, lets start the critiques but bi weekly and incorporate some of the features suggested and give it a try. Maybe in stead of putting good shots in we put in shots that have had criticism or bad response. No one can be hurt too badly at that point. Then we could do a 'photo mechanic's review' giving thoughts and insights on the photograph that may have lead to the poor response ie analytic and thoughtful analysis of what could be detracting from the shot.
I think that postive feedback is more appropriate for the weekly pix thread.
I think we can make a sticky list of photogs asking for critique and run the list for a week per participant. I hope the list will be good if we have at least 20 photogs.
What do you think?
>I think seeing the usual suspects over a long time discouraged
>a lot of people from participating.
I agree here with Gabriel. I'm not sure if he means the same members over and over --or-- the same subject matter in the photos over and over (probably the former), but either way, I think he's right.
I participated in a few and did my best to offer serious critiques but in too many cases I didn't feel like much time was spent in offering critiques of my submissions. Occasionally I felt that I got some interesting insight but this was the exception.
This leads me to believe that photo critiques on this forum (and others) generally dissolve into "love fests" (for the lack of a better term) (i.e., "I love it", or "Great colors", or "Nicely seen" -- I hate that one) and there isn't really much of value offered back to the photographer.
I recently hired a successful, veteran fine art photographer whose work I respect to "ruthlessly" edit my web portfolio. It's something like this where the rubber truly meets the road.
back alley
03-20-2007, 09:15
few here are truly qualified to offer creative and constructive critique, myself included.
this is not meant as a criticism of the folks here btw.
i know when i see a pic that i like but can't always be specific about why or what exactly about the photo draws me in.
if i knew better i would be a better editor of my own work.
as to the former critiques done on my pics, i guess i had an expectation that wasn't met and therefore i was disappointed.
joe
Usually, the excellent photographs are just ignored by folks, in public forums. I find this unbelievable. The bad pics gets great comments while the truly great shots get no comment.
And every time I've given my honest advice (which is always), I always ended up being the bad guy. If it's not supposed to be a love festival, just don't bother giving true critique as it won't work.
Look at this site: www.innerimager.com (http://www.innerimager.com). The introductory text makes you think the photog is truly an artist-the best there is. But the galleries slap you back to harsh reality. Of course, telling him his work needs refinement is useless.
Those guys who take themselves so seriously actually never enter such public contests nor do they ask for critique. They just post images and expect Wows without ever giving their thoughts to other posters.
The problems are many:
-Photographers trying to impress other photographers is useless and will never work. It's like setting up galleries just so that other photogs look at them. This translates to 0$ sales. And yet, 99% of the galleries are exactly just that.
-Photography as a hobby is the greatest thing. But I'm always getting itchy when I read things such as "my work blabla" where the word "work" is supposed to be a serious thing. The word work is seriously over estimated.
...
I'm not sure where I'm going with all tihs, but one thing is sure: Honest advice is never welcomed on internet forums. Just watch me getting flamed...
The word work is seriously over estimated.
Your signature reads:
Some of my personal work
:-)
Ian
OurManInTangier
03-20-2007, 09:46
There are some interesting points being raised here.
I have only taken part in one critique since I joined RFF in Nov. Not through want of trying either but simply because of time differences and not being sure of the etiquette of starting one up. When I did get onto one we, myself included, hardly gave much in the way of criticism - I did try two positive points and two negatives but its too easy to back out and sway more towards the positive.
I think the idea of putting one of your own photos on and starting with your own feelings on its positives and negatives is a good starting point. Maybe not having a limit to the number that can join too is a very good one. That or we use the gallery as more of a way to point out negatives as well as the positives.
I'd very much like to see more constructive criticism, and yes I am as guilty as many others at not being as honest as perhaps I should. I haven't seen Mauro on the board for a while but I always liked his honesty when he posted about my work...maybe he felt we were generally a bit too congratulatory towards one another.
EDIT: Scrub 'work' and put snaps!!! ;-)
I haven't seen Mauro on the board for a while but I always liked his honesty when he posted about my work...maybe he felt we were generally a bit too congratulatory towards one another.
I agree with that. I often disagreed with his assessments but I liked his willingness to be critical. Personally, I'm very happy if a photographer whose work (there's that word again) I like gives me a thorough critical going-over, positive or negative. If it's someone whose work (damn, that word just keeps cropping up) I don't think much of, I tend not to take much notice of them. There are plenty of people here who repeatedly post work (argh) that I like, and if any of them want to give me a good constructive kicking that would be welcome.
Ian
telenous
03-20-2007, 10:10
There is an intrinsic problem with critiques, but it is not specific to the ones focusing on photos but rather in every form of feedback: that is, we tend to maximize the positive input and minimize the negative one (i.e. choose the best of all the good things we can say about something and the least harsh from the bad things). This is the way a community of people who meet every day works. Saying very hard things about one's efforts positions you firmly in the receiving end of a harsh criticism, sooner or later.
The other thing is that most often our critiques (here or in the gallery) focus on the choice of subject matter or the composition. This is an area that is by its nature highly subjective - and trully anything goes. Contrast this with a criticism in some technical respect. When I first uploaded my photos in the gallery someone politely commented that the photo was nice but I had burnt the highlights - I didn't know what to 'burn' was, or 'highlights' for that matter. That sort of ciriticism taught me something because it was factual.
Last, when Mauro first posted his criticisms, not many people appreciated his approach (and style). It was very sincere and, at times, brutal - but it was also centred on composition, an area which, to repeat, there are no facts to have agreement upon.
Your signature reads:
:-)
Ian
I was expecting that one ;)
Gabriel M.A.
03-20-2007, 10:38
I've quoted this fellow before and I'll do it again:
"A little sincerity is a dangerous thing, and a great deal of it is absolutely fatal" (Oscar Wilde).
The "problem" is made worse when people actually give an opinion when they think it's a critique. An opinion is "I don't like it", or "that's good". That's an opinion. A critique is an assessment of what is good or bad about something with an explanation of why, a reason.
That's why the "that's good" by themselves are not critiques in my opinion (heh). Even worse are the "that's bad", the moronic catch-all "that's distracting", "nothing to see here", and my all-time-favorite, "perhaps if you try another cropping". Tossed without a foundation, they are just opinions and not critiques.
This leads to confusion, which leads to frustration...vodka, anyone? :o
the moronic catch-all "that's distracting"
Seems to this moron that this IS a reason.
back alley
03-20-2007, 10:43
i agree with gabriel's comments.
my comments about a photo would fall under opinion more so than critique.
not that i am unwilling to critique it's just i doubt that i am qualified to.
joe
MelanieC
03-20-2007, 10:46
I like the idea of critique threads, but I never got in on the formal threads in time. Also, I feel I am not qualified to comment constructively on other people's photos, so I'd feel like a leech for participating.
Perhaps a more structured approach would help? For example like the one summarized here: http://www.scphoto.com/html/critiques.html, with a score for each category:
(1) COMPOSITION -CONTENT
(2) BACKGROUND
(3) CAMERA WORK -TECHNICAL
(4) CRAFTSMANSHIP
and finally
(5) YOUR OPINION ON THE PHOTO
I thnk amateurs like myself could learn from such a set up, if used.
"The "problem" is made worse when people actually give an opinion when they think it's a critique. An opinion is "I don't like it", or "that's good". That's an opinion. A critique is an assessment of what is good or bad about something with an explanation of why, a reason."
But this is still subjective, and is an opinion of the person doing the assessing, IMO.
"The "problem" is made worse when people actually give an opinion when they think it's a critique. An opinion is "I don't like it", or "that's good". That's an opinion. A critique is an assessment of what is good or bad about something with an explanation of why, a reason."
But this is still subjective, and is an opinion of the person doing the assessing, IMO.
But is a critique not always a personal opinion? How many plays, paintings, etc have been scathingly critiqued yet masses of people love them?
Gabriel M.A.
03-20-2007, 12:10
But is a critique not always a personal opinion? How many plays, paintings, etc have been scathingly critiqued yet masses of people love them?
That's why people should use the "Quote" button (and it's good ettiquette, too) so you know who said what. I thought I was having deja vu. ;)
Joe and Frank, for two guys who , between the two of you, have a total of ONE critique session, you sure are having a good old time trashing the critique threads and making anyone who found value there feel like a "moron."
Back on topic, as a result of the original question posed by Jon, I've had one request to initiate a critique thread, because of the goodwill expressed here there's probably not a person on this forum who'll join that thread now. Mission accomplished.
I hope the weather gets better north of the border so you two can find something constructive and positive to do.
:)
back alley
03-20-2007, 12:50
whoa!!!
i had 2 sessions.
and i'm not trashing them or calling anyone names.
they did not work for me because my expectations were not met.
that's on me not anyone else.
in general, in the gallery here i get very few comments but get more on flickr. what would keep me here and posting pics here?
and there was certainly no negs thrown your way.
joe
Sorry Ray, just expressing a personal opinion in a thread that raised the question. Maybe ask youself how successful those sessions were, and consider the possibility that that may be the reason for the lack of interest rather than casting about looking to lay blame.
A critique no matter how expertly done, considered, and reasoned, is simply an opinion, even when reasons are given to support/justify that opinion. There is no such thing as an objective assessment of an image. It's all subjective, and works when a learner is willing to defer to the opinion of a more experienced/better photographer.
That's all I'm saying and it's just my opinion.
Gabriel, maybe it's your situation that's making you so uppity?
Wow, I got quite a bit of work done today.
Ok, like every thing else, Leica or Contax, digital or film.... some people like them, some don't.
So, for those who find them of value we have our Critique Forum, and if this can help focus the critique threads to better fit the group, that is a good thing right?
telenous
03-20-2007, 13:06
I am not sure why the sparks are flying here, esp. among good people who are of the old guard. But this 'every critique is an opinion' statement certainly strikes me as wrong:
All opinion is subjective, but not everything subjective we say is opinion . Levelling everything that one can say to 'opinion' is just a way to licence ourselves with immunity from criticism. Interestingly, this is not the attitude we (usually) take when we go, say, to the doctor, or when when we send our kids to school or for advice to any other expert. If we do take it with photography, it is not because it is right (there are many people who are more talented or experienced than we are) but beacuse there is no real penalty in being wrong in our opinions in this specific activity.
So, I think Gabriel is not disputing the subjective aspect of a criticism (anything we say is 'subjective' in the above sense) but, rightly, the relatively unjustified way of making a criticism. If a criticism is reasoned then it is justified; if it has the benefit of techinical experience, it may even be veridical to the facts. And if it is both it is more than just opinion. Spelling out your reasons for making a particular criticism is harder (and it takes time) but all the more informative to the interested party.
Gabriel M.A.
03-20-2007, 13:17
Well put, Alkis. I often forget some things are not understated. :o
So, I think Gabriel is not disputing the subjective aspect of a criticism (anything we say is 'subjective' in the above sense) but, rightly, the relatively unjustified way of making a criticism. If a criticism is reasoned then it is justified; if it has the benefit of techinical experience, it may even be veridical to the facts. And if it is both it is more than just opinion. Spelling out your reasons for making a particular criticism is harder (and it takes time) but all the more informative to the interested party.
Absolutely. But sometimes something that is no more (or less) than a well-stated subjective opinion is useful input too. Many times people have made a comment about something of mine that has made me look at it differently, and that's all part of learning what you're trying to achieve.
Ian
jan normandale
03-20-2007, 13:22
I'll re iterate because I think this got lost in my earlier post regarding what form or shape a critique thread could take
Maybe instead of putting good shots in we put in shots that have had criticism or bad response. No one can be hurt too badly at that point.
Then we could do a 'photo mechanic's review' giving thoughts and insights on the photograph that may have lead to the poor response ie analytic and thoughtful analysis of what could be detracting from the shot.
I think that postive feedback is more appropriate for the weekly pix thread.
ClaremontPhoto
03-20-2007, 13:30
When I visit my dentist I want her to tell me the truth. Why should she say that my teeth are fine when they're not?
When I put a photo in a critique thread I want the same.
Wayne R. Scott
03-20-2007, 13:49
I'll re iterate because I think this got lost in my earlier post regarding what form or shape a critique thread could take
Maybe instead of putting good shots in we put in shots that have had criticism or bad response. No one can be hurt too badly at that point.
Then we could do a 'photo mechanic's review' giving thoughts and insights on the photograph that may have lead to the poor response ie analytic and thoughtful analysis of what could be detracting from the shot.
I think that postive feedback is more appropriate for the weekly pix thread.
I think you are onto something here Jan. I have participated in a few of the critique threads. I have posted photos that I know for a fact have faults (a couple of them were really horrible) and waited for the slaughter to begin. It never really happened. Most of the people here are too nice. Actually, many times I think we get "too much sugar for our dime".
They are kind of "closed session" threads limited to 5 participants, so the vast majority of the rff viewers do not look at the threads. Hopefully the threads that I participated in were worth while, but I doubt that I will enter another.
Wayne
I run a 'physical' print exchange in Europe with a web based critique forum and from experience know that you are never going to get a concensus on what constitutes a good or bad level of feedback. People have all sorts of constraints and may happily volunteer for an exchange only to find that the other participants are slow or they find time constraints suddenly impede useful discussion.
I have participated in a few of the RFF critiques and, although the comments were on the brief side and generally positive rather than negative, I did learn something from all of them. But there were no earth-shattering revelations that would change the way I work very much. But I didn't expect this either.
What more would you expect from a forum such as this where you are looking at often badly scanned versions of prints or negatives and where conversation is limited by the medium of the web forum format and time zone variation? I'm sure if 5 of us got round a table and had a discussion with the prints in front of us we would have a much better discussion, but we can't do that so we should accept the limitations of what we have here: which is a very useful and friendly forum where we can exchange ideas without getting our heads blown off.
Also with respect to politeness, isn't it better to gently nudge a contributor in the right direction with some positive as well as negative feedback. If they are smart they will know what to do about their technique and where it is lacking. It is too easy on internet boards for strongly negative comments to get taken way out of context and get out of hand.
This is just my opinion of course, ymmv :)
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.