Are you prepared to say you don't like someone's pictures?

Are you prepared to say you don't like someone's pictures?

  • Yes - I'll tell anyone what I think.

    Votes: 18 10.2%

  • I'll try to be constructive when I post but I will be honest.

    Votes: 109 61.9%

  • I don't believe in being negative.

    Votes: 20 11.4%

  • Why bother, it'll only bring personal attack.

    Votes: 29 16.5%
  • Total voters
    176
fstops said:
If you don't know how to critique other people's work how would you know what to critique in your own work?
Click to expand...

The point I'm making is that only the photographer knows what they were trying to portray when they hit the shutter release. Only they know whether they achieved the objective or, if they didn't, what is missing or isn't as it should be?

Being able to understand at least that much should provide some basis upon which the photographer can receive and discuss constructive criticism of the photograph from others.
 
Paul Jenkin said:
The point I'm making is that only the photographer knows what they were trying to portray when they hit the shutter release. Only they know whether they achieved the objective or, if they didn't, what is missing or isn't as it should be?
Click to expand...

We all know that the viewing of images is not that simple. It doesn't matter what they wanted to portray... the image will mean different things to different people depending on their experiences.
 
They must fully comprehend that my opinion is no more than just one persons opinion, others may have different opinions, and that conflicting opinions may both be valid.
Click to expand...

That seems to me like the most profound statement this thread has produced.
 
I know exactly if a photograph is good or it isn't good. I can tell instantly, within a fraction of a second. You can absolutely rely on my judgement, 100%, no matter what anyone else may claim after reading this.

I make exceptions:

1) Family photos or photos of people which have a sentimental value to the owner of the photo. In this case, the photo can be "good" without being a "good photograph".

2) Straight catalog or documentary photos of an object. These can be technically good or bad, but the "artistic" quality does not usually matter. (there are of course photographers who can make certain objects look "better")

3) Very old photos of cities, objects, historical events, etc. Just by their rarity, they are usually "good".

4) News photos of historical events. These can also be judged "artistically".

The preceding aside, I absolutely know if a photograph is good or not.

If anyone would like to post a photo in this thread, I will tell you whether it is good or not as soon as I see it. This can put your mind at rest without a lot of rigamarole or mental calisthenics.

Sejanus.Aelianus said:
That seems to me like the most profound statement this thread has produced.
Click to expand...
 
Critique is more of an art-world thing, on the basic level such as internet forums, just plain criticism is more helpful.


Right now the biggest help that people can benefit from is telling them not to overcook an image in post-processing. Secondly, don't shoot boring stuff and try to make it exciting with processing i. e. high contrast, HDR and other techniques. Don't sharpen film scans, and if you do use a proper technique so the grain don't get all screwed up.

As far as shooting is concerned. Don't just lazy-shoot and hope for the best, move closer, frame carefully and try to arrange the frame so the clutter is minimized. Even if you're doing hip shots, do it carefully and don't just spray and pray.

And of course try to show something with your images, which hasn't been seen before. Don't recycle the same stuff again and again. Also don't rip off famous photographers and their look, its just a waste of time.
 
OK! Sensible advice! Let's see some of yours and I'll tell you how good you are.

fstops said:
Critique is more of an art-world thing, on the basic level such as internet forums, just plain criticism is more helpful.


Right now the biggest help that people can benefit from is telling them not to overcook an image in post-processing. Secondly, don't shoot boring stuff and try to make it exciting with processing i. e. high contrast, HDR and other techniques. Don't sharpen film scans, and if you do use a proper technique so the grain don't get all screwed up.

As far as shooting is concerned. Don't just lazy-shoot and hope for the best, move closer, frame carefully and try to arrange the frame so the clutter is minimized. Even if you're doing hip shots, do it carefully and don't just spray and pray.

And of course try to show something with your images, which hasn't been seen before. Don't recycle the same stuff again and again. Also don't rip off famous photographers and their look, its just a waste of time.
Click to expand...
 
I Love Film said:
I know exactly if a photograph is good or it isn't good. I can tell instantly, within a fraction of a second. You can absolutely rely on my judgement, 100%, no matter what anyone else may claim after reading this.

I make exceptions:

1) Family photos or photos of people which have a sentimental value to the owner of the photo. In this case, the photo can be "good" without being a "good photograph".

2) Straight catalog or documentary photos of an object. These can be technically good or bad, but the "artistic" quality does not usually matter. (there are of course photographers who can make certain objects look "better")

3) Very old photos of cities, objects, historical events, etc. Just by their rarity, they are usually "good".

4) News photos of historical events. These can also be judged "artistically".

The preceding aside, I absolutely know if a photograph is good or not.

If anyone would like to post a photo in this thread, I will tell you whether it is good or not as soon as I see it. This can put your mind at rest without a lot of rigamarole or mental calisthenics.
Click to expand...


In order to use your kind suggestion, I would have to know what photos you take, and, even more importantly, what photos interst you.
So you may or may not be that ultimate critique person as you are presenting yourself :) Even if all the other conditions above are met.
 
It doesn't matter. One doesn't have to be able to cook to be a gourmet.

You don't have to be a mechanic to win races.

MIkhail said:
In order to use your kind suggestion, I would have to know what photos you take, and, even more importantly, what photos interst you.
So you may or may not be that ultimate critique person as you are presenting yourself :) Even if all the other conditions above are met.
Click to expand...
 
Hi Bob!

Great link.

We all need to weave this methodology/technique, humor & satire, into each of our critiques! Especially when the chance takes place with a "famous" photog and/or pic.

However, I still believe that, like Dean Collins said, "beauty is in the eye of the checkbook holder." I still wait to say anything at least until the check clears!
 
I Love Film said:
It doesn't matter. One doesn't have to be able to cook to be a gourmet.

You don't have to be a mechanic to win races.
Click to expand...

That's why I am saying that at least I have a to see what kind of pictures you prefer, you like or praise, not necessarily take. You may not be photographer at all, as long as you possess a visual culture and certain general cultural baggage.
 
I will say that my photos in that thread come under my classification of "news documentary" primarily, and secondly as "lens test" photos of a new fisheye lens.

In that I think I succeeded. As for any ulterior "artistic" motives, I did not have any, as noted.

As a self-critic, I would say technically I was pleased with the results. As documentary photos of a current event, I succeeded.

As for any of them being timeless masterpieces, decidedly not.
 
I Love Film said:
I will say that my photos in that thread come under my classification of "news documentary" primarily, and secondly as "lens test" photos of a new fisheye lens.

In that I think I succeeded. As for any ulterior "artistic" motives, I did not have any, as noted.

As a self-critic, I would say technically I was pleased with the results. As documentary photos of a current event, I succeeded.

As for any of them being timeless masterpieces, decidedly not.
Click to expand...

See, that's my point..... Technically, photography is not a complicated act. I realize that forum is wrong for this here but it really not, now days anyway. Then the second milestone comes up - now you know how but WHAT? It's much bigger question.
 
MIkhail said:
See, that's my point..... Technically, photography is not a complicated act. I realize that forum is wrong for this here but it really not, now days anyway. Then the second milestone comes up - now you know how but WHAT? It's much bigger question.
Click to expand...
Very true, despite the best efforts of equipment nuts and Zonies who love to pretend that it is.

Cheers,

R.
 
The wife and I have a small gallery. We mainly try to sell our own work and do picture framing to pay the bills. The wife has her paintings and I have my photographs. We have two other artists as well.

I've seen enough art that I thought was utter crap sell like crazy and work that I thought was pretty good just sit there.

I've decided not to comment on others work unless I have something good to say. For the most part art is a matter of taste and I really only know what I like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom