Looking at and critiqueing photos

[RML]

Shutterflower's thread caused me to think about what makes a good photo and how to describe what you find good about it (or not!).

So, who is daring enough to venture out there, select a photo (rff member, famous photog, your own) and discuss its merits and its weak points? I want to learn how to look at photos, learn to critique them constructively, and learn what terminology is used and what it means. 😱

 

[jaapv]

Let's pull this one to pieces: 😛

P.S. It was not easy to find a photo for critique on your blog. Most were too balanced and well executed....

 

[Sparrow]

OK RML your Avatar
:- the overall high contrast gives an initial impact and interest is maintained by a well proportioned triangular area formed by the bottom of the frame, the line through the subjects shoulders and the shadow on the extreme left, however other than the symmetry of the paving there is little detail to hold the viewers attention for any length of time

PS the overall line from top left to bottom right gives a sombre feel not justified by the subjects themselves

 

[RML]

OK! Let's pull it apart! 🙂

 

[jaapv]

O.K.
1. This is an action shot and you did capture the exprssions well, but
2. She has red eye
3. The composition is correctly off-centre, but the arm on the left is just clutter and should be cropped I would put the black lady just slightly left offcentre in the process
4. The exposure is typically flash. That can be corrected in PS, especially if it was captured RAW
5.I would select the black lady in PS and try to give her some more presence by slightly increasing midtone contrast
6. I would vignette the overexposed righthand bottom "moon"

Please do the same to me, Remy. Did you get the magazine, btw?

 

[jonasv]

I don't mind the flash in that picture at all. Somewhat longer exposure in combination with flah is a very typical style that often works well (see National Geographic). Unfortunately, the vibrance of the movement, both photographically and in the parade, seems lacking in the subjects. I can see three faces yet none looks exalted/vibrant/happy or whatever the technical aspects would suggest. The girl in the front's expression doesn't really say anything at all.
The style seems to clash with the subject here, instead of working together. Just my .02, it's a nice picture and I really love the colors.

 

[varjag]

Surprisingly enough, critique is not really about finding technical defects in a shot. It is about articulating visual language in words, explaining why photo works (or why it doesn't) and what (and how) can be improved. The most basic components of visual language is interpositions of tone (or color), shape, distance and repetition: those can be asessed and (unlike emotional or descriptional part of an artwork) confirmed by various people.

In case of RML shot above, we have repitition of shape (left hand gestures, located on a diagonal). We also see repetition of color (yellow and violet), although too irregular in shape and size to be a strong connection. Most obvious improvement could be if the girl at left didn't have her hand blurred. More strong connection of shape *and* actual rhythm of color would result: hand/yellow hand/yellow + hand/blue hand/blue (reading left to right). It is fairly easy to see other similar possibilites too.

This shot would not be improved though with better lighting, contrast or red eye removal. All this is mostly irrelevant to the visual impact.

I've enjoyed some of Remy's wonderful Mongolia shots, but this one is more of an incomplete sketch.

 

[RML]

OK. Some background to the photo might be in order.

This is a very old shot, taken in Februari 2000 with a Canon Eos 3000 and the 38-76mm kit lens that came with it. It was carnaval and I had at that time almost zero experience shooting activities, people and crowds. From a whole bunch of shots, this was the best one, the one that spoke the most. I wrote about it on my _photo blog_ not so long ago, where Jaap found it. I posted this photo on my blog to use it as a peg to hang a short story from. I like the shot for its colours and the motion but, yes, it lacks some emotion and technical skills. 🙂 The lack of emotion in the participants is probably due to the long day this kids had had already. I think they had been dancing and parading for some 5 hours on the hot troical sun of Curacao and, later, in the still warm but humid evening.

 

[jaapv]

I hear you Remy and I suspected as much. But it is no fun criticizing a perfect shot, and you have too many of those 😉 If you pull the worst one one from my gallery i'll post it in this thread. Eugene has a valid point. Critique should not be just technical but also be aimed at the artistic content and context.

 

[RML]

Jaap, I'm actually a bit happy you picked this particulat shot. It gives me insights in what makes or breaks it.

I'm glad you like my photos. 🙂

I have a hard time picking any of yours, really, as I'm terrible in that. Most of the time I feel bored when I look at photos, which says more about me than the (lack of) quality of the photos I'm looking at. But perhaps someone else dares to pick up the challenge...?

 

[ChrisN]

Let's see a good shot too and hear what it is that makes it work.

 

[oftheherd]

OK. Clone out the lights over the heads of the dancers. They are a distraction and add nothing. PS the girl in the foreground; her skin is too hot. I understand that is from the flash, but PS will help. Also clone out the flare or whatever it is below the top of her dress. Consider cropping down from the top. Not necessary, but worth experimenting with. You could crop out the dancers on left, but I thank that adds a dynamism that would be missing without it. Since the flash has sort of frozen the first two dancers, it helps me know there is dancing/movement there. The top of the dress of the first dancer just doesn't convey that. You might want to work with the highlights in the face of the darker of the two foreground dancers. Frankly, it may be best left alone as it does give good modeling to an attractive face. Hard to tell without experimenting. Certainly the hot spot in her forehead can be toned down.

Except for the face of the closest dancer, all above are nits. This is actually a nice photo with all the color. The expression of the closest girl doesn't bother me. In fact, I think it is almost provocative in a nice way. The blurring in the rest of the dancers is just about right. I can see it is people and there is movement, and there is still good color. In general I like the composition. The blur of those in front of the direction of travel makes a nice background but doesn't distract. Placing the foreground dancers to the right gives them a place to go, that is, they aren't cramped. The flash separates the two forground dancers from the rest well except for the hot spots as already mentioned.

A good remembrance for you. This is not the type of photo that standing alone would reach out and grab everybody who sees it, and that they would start talking to all their friends about. It is nonetheless a nice photo with lots of potential, and would fit well is a series, which is probably what you have. What interests me is that you mention this as an old photo when you knew little about photography, especiall this type of shot. I think you have a naturally "good eye." It shows in all your photos. You instinctively form good compositions and choose interesting subjects.

I like it.

Sorry for the long post. More than I would usually say, but it seemed this type of thread needed it.

 

[FrankS]

About critiqueing photos: I can understand that it can be useful when done by a person qualified to do so, but to open it up to anyone who feels like offering an opinion is of dubious value. You have to consider where the critique is coming from.

 

[oftheherd]

Your turn Remy!! (and anyone else who wishes to do so)

 

[oftheherd]

About critiqueing photos: I can understand that it can be useful when done by a person qualified to do so, but to open it up to anyone who feels like offering an opinion is of dubious value. You have to consider where the critique is coming from.

Well, you sure nailed me. 😀

 

[FrankS]

The ox has a more photogenic end! 🙂

 

[FrankS]

oftheherd: I typed that post before you had psoted your critique. It certainly wasn't aimed at you! Sorry for the unfortunate juxtaposition of posts.

 

[oftheherd]

The ox has a more photogenic end! 🙂

Than ... 😀

 

[RML]

Dang! Now I'm in the pit I dug. 😛

OK, I'll try but it has to wait until I'm home from work (and the other things that need to be taken care of at home). And, I'm not good at critiqueing. I have no training in it and, like I said, I'm easily bored, even/especially by my own photos. 🙂

I got a short lesson not so long ago in what could be considered a publishable photo from an art director. He was happy with photos that I would IMMEDIATELY dunk in the bin! The photos he chose were boring to my eyes, held few merits, didn't have much of a story going on, and were IMO not very good at all. I must talk to this man more if I get the chance, just to get an incling of what I'm not seeing that he is.

 

[oftheherd]

Dang! Now I'm in the pit I dug. 😛

OK, I'll try but it has to wait until I'm home from work (and the other things that need to be taken care of at home). And, I'm not good at critiqueing. I have no training in it and, like I said, I'm easily bored, even/especially by my own photos. 🙂

I got a short lesson not so long ago in what could be considered a publishable photo from an art director. He was happy with photos that I would IMMEDIATELY dunk in the bin! The photos he chose were boring to my eyes, held few merits, didn't have much of a story going on, and were IMO not very good at all. I must talk to this man more if I get the chance, just to get an incling of what I'm not seeing that he is.

Well, one trick is that everybody has their own tastes, just like in food, wine and women. Dosen't make them right or wrong, just different. But in your case, pay close attention as it may turn in to money. What do you care if he has no taste? 😀