A sincere question regarding photo feedback / criticism.

[Out to Lunch]

No problem: just add that you invite those who post their own photos to critique yours. Cheers, OtL

 

[farlymac]

This actually sounds like it might be what I am looking for at this stage of the game. Perhaps one of you could tell me a bit more about how this works. Thanks in advance!

Just post your photo in the Critique/Salon sub-forum, and ask what folks think about it. Sometimes it's just crickets, and sometimes you'll get a lot of opinions. Never seems to be a good middle ground there.


As to the mentoring thing, I just read and look at what others are doing here to find out what I could do to improve my photography.


PF

 

[jawarden]

Why limit this to the Gallery? Whenever positing a picture in whatever thread, just add the invitation: ''Please critique my photo''. Cheers, OtL

I agree. It could even be part of your signature so everyone knows it's okay to talk about your images (respectfully) no matter where they find them.

To the OP: The best experiences I've had with critiquing my photography have been with a small group (there are four of us) on Facebook. We just set up a private group and have been discussing images, projects, and life, ever since, and are close friends though we all live in different countries. I think we started the group ten or twelve years ago and have supported each other ever since.

 

[jawarden]

This last sentence should probably be part of the conversation. There are many people on this forum who post thoughtful comments, but never post photos to the threads, or the gallery. In a photo forum all the verbal posts, no matter how thoughtful or informative, go nowhere towards informing other members who you are, as a photographer. It’s another case of a picture being worth a thousand words. If everyone posted more of their own photos, more often, it would go a long way towards making their critiques of another’s work more meaningful to that person, or, as Guth intimates, less meaningful. If someone offers either kudos or downvotes to your work here, that’s only really helpful if you know who they are, and if they haven’t been posting their own photos, and enough of them to delineate their “vision”, nobody really has any idea how they might be as a judge, or more specifically, “their” judge.
Obviously no one should feel compelled to post their photos if they don’t feel like it, but it does enter into the mentoring/critiquing discussion, I would think.

We all have our preferences and there is no wrong way here, and I've been on both sides of that issue; I used to devalue opinions shared about photography unless the critic had work on display that I admired. And if the photographer happened to share work and be an awful photographer I thought even less of their remarks.

But criticism is different from the art being critiqued, whether movies, music, photography, or anything else, and I no longer feel there is a need for the critic to be an accomplished photographer in order to engage in an erudite discussion about the work.

What's important to me now are the critic's ideas, how they are delivered, and whether or not they encourage me to develop my ideas.

Some great photographers are terrible critics, and vice versa.

 

[ptpdprinter]

I hate to be so cynical about it, but my own experience reading comments about photographs across many forums is that with rare exception, none of it, positive or negative, however well intentioned, is likely to make you a better photographer. I think we all know when we have made a good image, and especially a great image. If you have to ask if it is good, it probably isn't. And there is probably no saving it. And you know that. I think you become a better photographer by looking at a lot of images and making a lot of images.

Of course that is no reason not to cruise the gallery. You might see something you like or something that may give you an idea for a series of your own photographs. In that sense, posting your photographs in the gallery may be more beneficial to others than to you. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[jawarden]

I hate to be so cynical about it, but my own experience reading comments about photographs across many forums is that with rare exception, none of it, positive or negative, however well intentioned, is likely to make you a better photographer.

People learn differently. Some respond to imagery, others to text, and others conversation. Lots of ways to improve your enjoyment of photography. And if a few simple atta-boys gets you to expose another roll you're likely to learn something in the process. It's all good, and when you find others willing to go deeper than atta-boys, you can.

Does all that make you a "better" photographer? I think so. Just look at me - last year I was an 86.4 photographer, and this year I'm a 86.6. I leveled up!

;-)

 

[Bob Michaels]

I see the key problem with critique in general is that the person offering the critique has no clue what the photographer was trying to accomplish with the photograph. Vast majority of the time it is because the photographer had no idea themselves. Sometimes a critiquer can review a body of work and implicitly conclude what the photographer was implicitly trying to do. Sometimes not. It is next to impossible to evaluate a trip with no clue where you wanted to go.

A key lesson I learned from a instructor / mentor who was a broad thinker and good communicator while being a mediocre photographer was her questions:

* Why does this photograph exist?
* What were you trying to do with this photo? What was your message or goal?
* How well do you think you did at accomplishing you goal?

I learned the key point was not her responses but my own. I began to repeat that process by myself when editing. It was not easy. Too simple to cheat by just mentally assuming "obvious, you know, everybody knows" and moving on. But forcing myself to really answer those questions became key in self editing, either an individual photo or a body of work.

 

[emraphoto]

Guth: I suggest developing a relationship, which may be virtual, with one individual that you have developed confidence in their ability to offer helpful critique. They need time to understand what you are trying to accomplish. You want to make sure you weed out those who do not have the knowledge base to actually help as well as those who will only offer consistent "attaboy"s. You will want your discussions to be private so they will have no hesitancy giving their honest opinion.

My personal view is that public opinion from responders that you know nothing about is slightly worse than neutral. They can have a tendency to narrow your view to that of group.

I would agree with Bob. Seeking a critique can be very helpful. To make it work there is a little work on your end. Find a few folks who you trust to offer advice and suggestions a on how to get where you are going with your work. The public forum approach seems rather pointless in my humble opinion.

 

[CMur12]

I haven't posted images here because I don't have a scanner and because I couldn't post directly to the RFF website if I had one.

I have only offered feedback in the form of acclaim for an image I really like, normally telling the poster why I like it.

I would only consider offering a critique if elicited by the OP. And even then, I would word it as positively as possible and I would state specifically what would make it better to my subjective eyes. As long as the person offering feedback is courteous and specific about what they see, the original photographer can easily determine if the feedback is of value to him/her or if it is to be disregarded.

I believe that feedback will either speak to the photographer, or it won't, regardless of whether the feedback comes from someone who has posted photos in the gallery.

- Murray

 

[Yokosuka Mike]

I see the key problem with critique in general is that the person offering the critique has no clue what the photographer was trying to accomplish with the photograph. Vast majority of the time it is because the photographer had no idea themselves. Sometimes a critiquer can review a body of work and implicitly conclude what the photographer was implicitly trying to do. Sometimes not. It is next to impossible to evaluate a trip with no clue where you wanted to go.

A key lesson I learned from a instructor / mentor who was a broad thinker and good communicator while being a mediocre photographer was her questions:

* Why does this photograph exist?
* What were you trying to do with this photo? What was your message or goal?
* How well do you think you did at accomplishing you goal?

I learned the key point was not her responses but my own. I began to repeat that process by myself when editing. It was not easy. Too simple to cheat by just mentally assuming "obvious, you know, everybody knows" and moving on. But forcing myself to really answer those questions became key in self editing, either an individual photo or a body of work.

Well said as usual, Bob.

When I was much younger and started really getting serious about photography I had a mentor of sorts. He was an accomplished photographer with a gift of getting right to the root of what worked and what didn’t work in a photograph. After I would get a roll of film developed I would eagerly take my pictures to this fellow and we’d sit side-by-side and go over them.

One question he would ask me sometimes was “what’s your point of view”? Usually this question was asked about an image that was kind of busy, like a street scene or nature shot that covered a lot but really nothing in particular.

He would say, imagine my eyes are looking at your picture, they’re looking all over, what do you want my eyes to constantly come back to and rest on when they get tired of looking around? The one thing that the picture was really all about, the point of view. Others would probably call it the main subject.

He shared a lot of things like that with me and even though I haven't seen him for over 40 years I can still clearly remember my time with him and the advice he shared with me.

All the best,
Mike

 

[Larry Cloetta]

We all have our preferences and there is no wrong way here, and I've been on both sides of that issue; I used to devalue opinions shared about photography unless the critic had work on display that I admired. And if the photographer happened to share work and be an awful photographer I thought even less of their remarks.

But criticism is different from the art being critiqued, whether movies, music, photography, or anything else, and I no longer feel there is a need for the critic to be an accomplished photographer in order to engage in an erudite discussion about the work.

What's important to me now are the critic's ideas, how they are delivered, and whether or not they encourage me to develop my ideas.

Some great photographers are terrible critics, and vice versa.

I agree with everything you are saying here. But, wanting to know whether or not a critic is himself a great photographer wasn’t what I was asking for.. My interest, personally, in having seen work from those offering criticism wasn't because I thought they had to be great, whatever that means, to be useful to me, it was because, to be helpful to me, it would be better if the vision of the person criticizing my photos matched my vision, or what I thought was my vision. And, I have no way of knowing what their vision is unless I have seen enough of their work to internalize it. I’d like to be Galen Rowell; I don’t really have any interest in Robert Mapplethorpe’s style, although they might both be great photographers. Not that I’d disregard any advice from Mapplethorpe if I got any, but it’s immensely helpful to know where people are “coming from” and mull all of that over together. Both dead, but you catch my meaning.
It’s possible to brighten someone’s day with nothing more than a “that’s nice” even though that doesn’t help their development at all, other than encouraging them to keep at it. As long as you mean it, and you mean it because it strikes you in some way. If you want to get more analytical on top of that, so much the better.

 

[jawarden]

I’d like to be Galen Rowell; I don’t really have any interest in Robert Mapplethorpe’s style, although they might both be great photographers. Not that I’d disregard any advice from Mapplethorpe if I got any, but it’s immensely helpful to know where people are “coming from” and mull all of that over together. Both dead, but you catch my meaning.

Yep I get where you’re coming from Larry.

 

[Richard G]

I will post a photo to the Gallery which I think is one of my better ones, but sometimes I'm not so sure. Am I seeing more in it than there really is? Editing is the short suit of most photographers. Many fall flat with few views and no comments. Some elicit a few comments. This can be on a minor point or it can be the polite support of regular members with a friendly disposition. And by submitting, I visit the Gallery. Over the last ten years there have been some truly stunning photographs. I remember one of Steveh's with a Routemaster bus, the London Bridge, a Telephone box, the Gherkin in the background, a Victorian lamp in the foreground, and fog. London squared.

It was from frequenting the Gallery that I have picked up from photographs and the comments so many nuances of light and lens offerings and other aspects of photography.

The other great thing arising from the Gallery is the main forum weekly Gallery picks thread. This too is very much a lesson in editing, especially if you make your own selection and especially if you do this early in the week before you see what others have singled out. It is always so humbling to see some clever photographs cited that you have totally missed when deliberately going through the Gallery.

 

[robert blu]

As long as the person offering feedback is courteous and specific about what they see, the original photographer can easily determine if the feedback is of value to him/her or if it is to be disregarded.[/COLOR]

I believe that feedback will either speak to the photographer, or it won't, regardless of whether the feedback comes from someone who has posted photos in the gallery.

- Murray

... it would be better if the vision of the person criticizing my photos matched my vision, or what I thought was my vision. And, I have no way of knowing what their vision is unless I have seen enough of their work to internalize it. ...
It’s possible to brighten someone’s day with nothing more than a “that’s nice” even though that doesn’t help their development at all, other than encouraging them to keep at it. As long as you mean it, and you mean it because it strikes you in some way. If you want to get more analytical on top of that, so much the better.

Of course courtesy is a requirement in every human relationship, especially when you want to build something positive.

Having taken part in many workshops and portfolio readings I've always seen famous photographers make comments in a positive and polite way, I remember a famous American photographer who, after examining beautiful photos of a participant which did not express what the photographer intended, began by saying "beautiful photos, well done but now I have to tell you something you will not like" and always politely explained what was not working in the work.

If the vision of the "critic" coincides with that of the photographer everything obviously becomes easier and more constructive.

But it is not essential: it depends on the ability (and desire) of the photographer to understand the person in front of him, his intentions and his skills.

I had the experience of taking part in a workshop together with my wife with a well-known photographer, wars, prisons and other things like that were among his specialties. My wife loves to photograph but is not particularly experienced or determined and I was worried thinking how they could work together.
I have to say he understood very well my wife's photographic limits and managed very well to push her beyond, always without asking something for her impossible to do.

In fact she managed in a week to make a very good porfolio. One of her best photographic works.

And finally, I suggest to always distinguish between comment and criticism. In the gallery here we have mainly comments, critcs should have an appropriate place or individual thread.

These are my thoughts about this interesting point.