Brutally honest critique thread

[Black]

..... Betty?

She had lovely, long, black, curly teeth.

 

[Black]

No. This is only a thread set by an op with a very distinct demand.

You are free to start a "friendly sugar-coat critique thread" and if I participate in it, I'll make sure to double sugar-coat my comments.

Lets not hold our respective breath for either, eh?

 

[helen.HH]

No. This is only a thread set by an op with a very distinct demand.

You are free to start a "friendly sugar-coat critique thread" and if I participate in it, I'll make sure to double sugar-coat my comments. You will be very happy with my very friendly comments.

Lol, so upsurdly Childish
Have You had too much Sugar for breakfast
Or having a Tantrum when someone Disagrees with your Golden Rule

Rekax. Keep it Fun
I Enjoy your Photography very much
just like i Enjoy lots of Photos here on RFf...

'Brutal' was another tongue in cheek word here
Like your Thread word 'Extraordinary'
Lets All keep it in Good Fun !

 

[Sparrow]

... the thing is Ned it isn't necessary for others to fail in order for you to succeed

 

[helen.HH]

And the eye of the beerholder in this particular case...

The Viewer looking at your Photo... Silly 😉
Whoever looks and takes the Time to view 'the photograph'
and hopefully gets touched, moved, stirred

Are You giving away beers ...Guiness please! 😉

 

[tuanvinh2000]

Me thinks,
If Youv'e got a Good EYE and can feel the Pulse, the surroundings the atmosphere
you can be ANYWHERE in the World
And Capture the Eye of the Beholder

You don't need no stinkin Moscow ,NYC or any other big city 🙄 :angel:

Totally agree with Helen, great photography is coming from the interpretation of the photographers, not related to where we are. The world is big and i find every corner can be as interesting as others.

I do like Ned's points a lot though he really says what's there and I dont like sugar coated comments either. Love the comparison of spending time with family vs time spent on a photo.

 

[daveleo]

 

[Tokoza]

The intent of the picture is not clear to me.

Thats it, the subject is rather boring. This is the problem with this picture. 🙄

 

[helen.HH]

Dave:
Overall Good one
The Good /The Bad
albeit possibly too simplistic , No Decisive Moment, planned and executed
though its just a Sculpture ... To some it may be Boring to some Beautiful
The photo moves us Out of the Dark into the Symbolic
More a meditative reflective photo paying homage to a Sculpture

 

[Hsg]

A critique must be 'factual' and not just an opinion. If one shows a flaw in the picture to the photographer, and he cannot deny that flaw then the critique has been successful and no feelings gets hurt.

For example in the image posted by daveleo (post # 208), there is no shadow detail, that is a fact that he can agree with, its not just my opinion.

 

[Hsg]

Spot on....Good Points indeed, Brill in fact !!

Though when I look at a Photo i for one am looking to be Moved
be it thru the Intellect or Emotions
I am not looking for a Perfect technically sound photo
although it can add to the Beauty for me its the Essential

Not all images moves us, even good ones, so with critique one must start with the basics because if one misses on the basics, the chances of creating something moving becomes impossible.

For example shadow detail is very important in b&w images otherwise the sense of depth in the photo is lost, leaving the image flat, and once again that is a fact and not my opinion.

 

[paulfish4570]

dave, the sculpture photo ain't no street photo. so, it holds not interest for me in this particular forum ...

 

[Hsg]

Quite Right, "NOT All Images moves us"
But the Good Ones DO and thats the point... They may or may not be technically perfect
Its what they Portray to the Viewer

I Agree with You that the 'Technical' steps in making a photograph are essential in becoming a Well rounded photographer
But If You don't have an 'Eye' or 'the Vision'who cares for technicality

Sometimes pulling out the Shadows works , more so in Photo journalism where Truth is essntial
Not necessary in Atmospheric , Noir type of photography where heightening the Moment creates the Mark hence shadow detail may not be necessary

Just my silly 2 cents

If you draw with a pencil, an egg, you have to give its shadow detail and in fact you have to draw its shadow with skill to make the oval shape look like an egg, otherwise its a flat oval shape with no depth. This is the famous problem of 'depth' in 2D images.

In b&w photography the problem of depth is a big problem, because without depth there is no separation, without separation there is no feeling of 3D, without 3D feel a b&w image falls flat.

 

[jky]

Just my silly 2 cents

Not so silly to someone like Ray Metzker 🙂

 

[jky]

I Thank You for turning Me unto his work ... Yummy good indeed ! !!

As Steidl said "F....k the midtones".

😉

 

[daveleo]

dave, the sculpture photo ain't no street photo. so, it holds not interest for me in this particular forum ...

Paul, there is no indication anywhere that the thread is limited to street photos. It's in the "critique" subforum.

 

[paulfish4570]

ah! thanks, dave. i had assumed it was from the new street forum.

 

[Pherdinand]

Well it is certainly more useful that pot-shot or nit picking.

I have known a number of really great artist/photographers in my lifetime, when they were young.

Can you actually imagine that trivial compositional nitpicking would have been useful to them, or to my friendship with them? I looked at their work, we talked about photography. I'm not taking just talented amature friends, but acquaintances who went on to have shows at the Whitney and MoMA.

Some photographers are good, some aren't. Same as any other profession. One can get a lot better, if one is around mentors, but the improvement is limited. But one has to be careful. I had an awful drawing teacher, that I did not understand was a terrible artist when he was my professor. Years later I wanted to draw more like William Wegman, but it was too late, the bad habits he gave me were ingrained.

Here some ways to mature your work:
You look at "better" work than your own, but you don't copy it.
Look at "wrose" work than your own, but you don't copy it.
You let your mind wander into work you are looking at when you visit museums.
You learn to read people you trust, and trust those you admire.
Learn by watching others.

And most important do not take advice from those who you don't know well, or at least admire and trust. Looking at individual work on the web is pretty useless IMO.

I have worked with a lot of students using the nit-picking method, their work does become much more tolerable, especially when I would question why they were taking photos of stuff they could care less about, and began taking photos of subjects they cared about like friends and family.

One year I became so exhausted by "street" cliches (when I was in grad school and easily exhausted) that I made them do a Larry Clark, and only shoot inside their family home. Best photos I ever got from first year students.

To be "brutally" honest most photos which appear on the RFF are not great art, but many are VERY interesting to me, or I would not waste my time looking at them.

And if hobbyists like being picked on -- it's their life. 🙂

William Wegman

And there! you've just killed a perfectly valid post of yours with a pretentious, nonsense image 😉

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I must be brutally honest with the critique of those who think they're being brutally honest with their critique: you have sucked the air out of this thread, and therefore you suck.

However, the spirit of "brutally" was well-executed. The "critique" part needs a bit more exercise. Helen seems to keep her cool among the kids yelling and throwing words across the room, so kudos to her.

 

[Hsg]

I think this is a good thread, brutal or not. For me the lesson learned from this thread is that I should not neglect the basics.

One cannot build on a shoddy foundation.