iml
Well-known
NB23 said:
Your signature reads:
Ian
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
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 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!!! ;-)
Last edited:
iml
Well-known
OurManInTangier said:
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
Well-known
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.
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.
Last edited:
Ororaro
Well-known
iml said:Your signature reads:
Ian
I was expecting that one
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
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?
"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?
FrankS
Registered User
the moronic catch-all "that's distracting"
Seems to this moron that this IS a reason.
Seems to this moron that this IS a reason.
back alley
IMAGES
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
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
Well-known
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.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
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.
(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.
FrankS
Registered User
"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 this is still subjective, and is an opinion of the person doing the assessing, IMO.
R
RML
Guest
FrankS said:
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.
My Red Dot Glows For You
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.RML said:
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
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 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
IMAGES
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
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
FrankS
Registered User
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?
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?
Last edited:
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?
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
Well-known
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.
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.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Well put, Alkis. I often forget some things are not understated.
iml
Well-known
telenous said:
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