back alley
IMAGES
...No longer is the merit of photos based by many on communication ability or visual impact…
communication and visual impact…
what does this image say?
what kind of (emotional) impact does it have?
i like this!
communication and visual impact…
what does this image say?
what kind of (emotional) impact does it have?
i like this!
thegman
Veteran
My instinct would be yes.
The problem with photography is that the skills required to do it well are ill defined. Whether you think the Mona Lisa is a good painting or not, it's undeniable that it required a huge amount talent to create.
Photography on the other hand, well, some people 'shoot from the hip' and get a photo they like, which is great, but what talent did it require? I guess being able to spot an interesting moment, but many people would not put that talent on the same pedestal as other talents in art.
Or maybe it's just because photographers such as ourselves (I'm very much stretching the definition by calling myself one) tread a blurred line between creativity and just liking new toys. It's easy to get into photography because you like old brass cameras, I'm not sure it's easy to get into sculpture because you like chisels.
So those of us creating photographs and those judging them, always have in the back of our minds that the photograph was not made by some creative lone genius, but by a dude that likes playing with cameras.
You can be a creative genius and like playing with toys of course, but I think it's harder to explain that, than understand the creativity behind other forms of art.
Also I guess there is intent, I have no illusions that I even am an artist, so I can hardly expect others to judge my work as art. If I painted or sculpted it would be hard to call myself anything else.
Alpacaman
keen bean
I think crits are likely the same as any other medium, at least in schools. Not so much on the internet. The general positivity of the forum follows into critiques, where it tends to hinder anything constructive. This is fair enough, people will often post work because of this - but on the other hand there is no place for ripping the living daylights out of people. Which might be more helpful, or more appreciated depending on your own drive.
In schools work is often utterly destroyed in crits for a reason. Maybe a thread for this would get some use.
In schools work is often utterly destroyed in crits for a reason. Maybe a thread for this would get some use.
mdarnton
Well-known
I suspect that a lot of people who ask for criticism don't really want it, but are looking for praise. I do think, however, that even those who want it will accept it better from someone they respect, whom they've asked individually for comments. Putting one's self up in front of an anonymous mob and expecting something meaningful? Nah.
Pablito
coco frío
...it's sometimes difficult to tell the lions from the christians...
and which are the good guys?
Pioneer
Veteran
I am likely a bit too careful. I do not rely on random internet critiques. I select those I wish to critique my work. Those that I select are those whom I know to be competent, and trust to advise me.
There are certainly others I trust, but believe it or not, my wife is definitely one of those I trust to critique my work.
There are certainly others I trust, but believe it or not, my wife is definitely one of those I trust to critique my work.
gb hill
Veteran
Most are too kind when critiquing a photo. It's when you open up a topic for discussion when you are liable to get slammed around here.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
Anybody can take a photo and now easier than ever with the latest technology. In these forums and photo sharing sites people just want to show us the photo of their cat or the Golden Gate bridge or their vacation to Venice or photos of their family. There is nothing to critique.
Ranchu
Veteran
maybe a little OT, but interesting
maybe a little OT, but interesting
"Some days I flip through certain art magazines:
glossy paper, squeaky clean, repetitions and very few
differences, but it doesn’t matter. These papers are made
to put one in the mood, like certain soft drugs. And in
the mood, one discovers a particular kind of omnivorous,
but levelling, visual sophistication. All things become
equally appreciable once delicately placed on the white
rectangle of their pages, the forms and colours travel
from the white cube to this new square and they have
everything to gain there.
One mustn’t believe that the vision of the world of
these papers excludes radicality, even in its explicitly
political form. But this radicality is only a shadow of
‘what one should detect of it’, and never an expression
of what it is possible to do with it. It is inevitably a
question of taking distance from this radicality, not
because it’s needed to show that we do not go along with
it, but because the problem isn’t even one of hearing its
message, one must simply judge its tone. And the tone is
always monotonous or excited.
Why are you shouting, damn it, if we know that
things are the way they are? We already know: stop yelling!
Disappear or turn into your image, so we can turn down
the sound or put some music on instead, if necessary.
These papers don’t have their own voices, but that’s
how they would speak if they started to speak, and
it is not even because of cynicism, but because of lack
of experience. The authors of articles, who consider
themselves clever theoreticians, anti-conformist or
disabused intellectuals, ignore the ways words affect
bodies to the point of generating the ordinary miracle of
mobilisation and the extraordinary one of insurrection.
These articles are a form of disguised pornography,
in so far as whenever we are dealing with the least
communicable moments, when everyone is bare and
everyone is the same, and all the bodies are indistinctly
breathing together, we can say whatever we want about
it because we always already know what we want to see
there. It’s this violence that is as obscene, superficial and
brutal as an identity check."
-Claire Fontaine, from Human Strike Has Already Begun
http://www.postmedialab.org/human-strike-has-already-begun-other-writings-claire-fontaine-0
maybe a little OT, but interesting
"Some days I flip through certain art magazines:
glossy paper, squeaky clean, repetitions and very few
differences, but it doesn’t matter. These papers are made
to put one in the mood, like certain soft drugs. And in
the mood, one discovers a particular kind of omnivorous,
but levelling, visual sophistication. All things become
equally appreciable once delicately placed on the white
rectangle of their pages, the forms and colours travel
from the white cube to this new square and they have
everything to gain there.
One mustn’t believe that the vision of the world of
these papers excludes radicality, even in its explicitly
political form. But this radicality is only a shadow of
‘what one should detect of it’, and never an expression
of what it is possible to do with it. It is inevitably a
question of taking distance from this radicality, not
because it’s needed to show that we do not go along with
it, but because the problem isn’t even one of hearing its
message, one must simply judge its tone. And the tone is
always monotonous or excited.
Why are you shouting, damn it, if we know that
things are the way they are? We already know: stop yelling!
Disappear or turn into your image, so we can turn down
the sound or put some music on instead, if necessary.
These papers don’t have their own voices, but that’s
how they would speak if they started to speak, and
it is not even because of cynicism, but because of lack
of experience. The authors of articles, who consider
themselves clever theoreticians, anti-conformist or
disabused intellectuals, ignore the ways words affect
bodies to the point of generating the ordinary miracle of
mobilisation and the extraordinary one of insurrection.
These articles are a form of disguised pornography,
in so far as whenever we are dealing with the least
communicable moments, when everyone is bare and
everyone is the same, and all the bodies are indistinctly
breathing together, we can say whatever we want about
it because we always already know what we want to see
there. It’s this violence that is as obscene, superficial and
brutal as an identity check."
-Claire Fontaine, from Human Strike Has Already Begun
http://www.postmedialab.org/human-strike-has-already-begun-other-writings-claire-fontaine-0
Sparrow
Veteran
... surely that's so introverted to be of no use to anyone, what good is critique if it isn't about the photo? In a studio we analyse and make open comment, usually without rancour and learn by the experience mostly, we don't generally criticise each other.
emraphoto
Veteran
I cannot agree and I mean no insult in saying that this shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the logic or language of (in photography) 2 dimensional design.
There is a well developed and centuries old language that serves as the basis for how we arrange things in a frame, on a 2 dimensional plane. This 'language' and the artists use and/or understanding of it can most certainly be identified and critiqued by the trained and knowledgeable eye.
Sparrow
Veteran
Possibly true, but what you're describing here is the images' suitability for its intended application ... not an assessment of its intrinsic beauty
I see these things from a commercial POV ... not a tutorial one
Sparrow
Veteran
Sorry, I thought you were teaching for a reason ... if they, or you for that matter, intend to take a poor photo and succeed in taking a poor picture do you feel that those photos have some merit? I was talking of its application.
Sejanus.Aelianus
Veteran
Of course you are welcome to disagree with me. What a boring world it would be, if we all shared the same views. :angel:
However, I simply can't buy into the idea that there is such a thing as a "good" picture or a "bad" picture, nor that there are "rules" that define such things. Just accept that all such elitist attitudes annoy me and add me to your ignore list, if you so wish.
mdarnton
Well-known
Originally Posted by Sejanus.Aelianus>
...it's sometimes difficult to tell the lions from the christians...
Easy: Who's eaten the most recently?
...it's sometimes difficult to tell the lions from the christians...
Easy: Who's eaten the most recently?
MartinL
MartinL
Look at a photo. On the one hand, our response will be shaped by opinions and preferences. Some few can place these views in a coherent context of theory, history, technical understanding, culture, and so on. Express these contextualized preferences in a style that makes them accessible, efficient, not boring . . .; develop and collect enough experience, reputation, and credentials----a "name," if you will----so that the "community" of photographers (in this particular case) recognizes your expertise, the value in what you have to say, and trusts you, and you have a critic.
everything else is commentary
everything else is commentary
Sparrow
Veteran
... did you ever consider leaving the teaching to people who can do that?
Rangefinderfreak
Well-known
Yes, I consider leaving people in need of that in their nice belief of being perfect...
MartinL
MartinL
This sort of "good/bad" discussion of photo criticism brings to mind a few expressions:
"I can't tell you what it is, but I know it when I see it"
"If it feels good, do it."
"I know what I like."
I wouldn't suggest that these sentiments have no standing or that they preclude one's being a competent photographer or even a teacher. On the other hand, they don't contribute much to the discussion of photography except to say that the discussion has no meaning.
IMO, there is such a thing as responsible and informed criticism. Whether that criticism is elitist depends a lot on the critic's attitude. Dismissing criticism and insisting on "you either have the photographer's gift or you don't" can be it's own form of elitism (since those making such a claim typically believe that they posses the gift.)