Who has the authority to critique your street photography?

[Hsg]

On the internet forums its common to come across photographers who argue that street photography has no rules , everyone should follow their 'vision' and all street photography are 'good' because they document life.

On the opposite side is those who approach photography through the vision of an authority figure, an experienced photographer with certain achievements in the field of street photography who's paid through workshops to critique the work of others.

Magnum photographers are the authority figure for most street photographers. Through Magnum workshops many street photographers get their work critiqued. In the following link, Costa Manos, a veteran of magnum photos critiques the work of one of his students.

Watch the video and discuses if you agree with such an approach to street photography, namely by trying to become 'better' by the critique of an authority figure.

Constantine Manos : Critique for Karl Edwards

 

[FrankS]

IMO, its not just street photography that has no rules. Any art is subjective, and the best anyone can do is to explain why they like something or not.

It is up to history and academia to determine what art works are significant.

It is up to dealers and galleries to determine what art can be profitable to them.

 

[jesse1dog]

Started watching the video, but the sound and presentation was so bad I gave up after a couple of minutes. What I did see and what I could hear left me singularly unimpressed - just me again I suspect - pity!

 

[airfrogusmc]

I'm very lucky that I have a circle of friends include artists and photographers. One of those was one of my professors from college who is retired now and was the head of the photography program for 25 years and a couple of others that are still teaching. We get together every quarter and have critiques of each others work. We look at each others portfolios and have really solid conversations about the work. Pretty much resembles the weekly crits. we had in college.

The things that I think will make anyone better is to learn all you can about art and photography. Go to museums and look at paintings and sculpture. Learn about the history of art and photography. If you love visual arts this should be easy.

I think you can get much better through critique. You just have to be careful that you are listening to people that are about the same place on the journey as you are father along. You want to be careful you keep growing vertically and not just horizontally.

 

[Hsg]

Here is another video where Eric Kim who has a following in the social media gets some harsh feedback from Costa Manos.

Costa Manos Critique of Eric Kim

 

[shadowfox]

I watched the video. Thanks for sharing.
But I don't think it contains a critique as the word 'critique' is often used.

I see an almost gentle subjective preference from the teacher on his student's work. And he's mostly talking about the visual aspects of the photos (what makes an image interesting and to what degree), which I fully agree that Street photography is not immune to those.

And we see this all the time here on RFF. It's just from time to time we see some comments that are delivered in a condescending tone, that is neither helpful nor it is well-meant (except probably from the giver's own very narrow definition of well-meaning). Even only a handful of these could drown out the constructive critiques. As one proverb says, it only takes one drop of ink to render a bowl of good milk useless.

As an aside, I love the photos being critiqued in the video, I think those are excellent examples of Street photography in color.

So to answer your question, Hsg, I am on the side where there is no authority figure, singular nor organizational. There are degrees of mastery, and there are masters (those who are gifted by both talent and resources to set a high standard).

Some of these masters are also good teachers who aims to share their knowledge and experience (I would be glad to attend workshops or gallery from one of them given the chance) and some of them won't be as generous.

But I believe you have as much right to criticize my photos as I do yours. And the goal is not to say "Your photo sucks" or "I'm swooning", the goal is to start a conversation (just as it is in this video) in which both of us may learn something. Sometimes this happens, other times not.

 

[mdarnton]

When I was about 12 one of my friends' fathers said to me "Listen to what they have to say, then do what you think is right." Personally, I'm willing to listen to anyone's criticism, but that doesn't mean that I will feel the need to follow their advice. When someone acts as if he is beyond criticism, that in itself is a warning sign that he's probably BS.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Ok let's try this. I'll put myself out there. I prefer to post one of my own for a couple of reason. First and foremost I don't feel comfortable posting someone else's work for this purpose and two I know why I took it. Not that I think this is anything spectacular but i do think it works on several levels. I will first talk some about it and include some of the critique that was given. I showed this in out last session.

What caught my eye is when she was starting to walk by I noticed all the stripes. (repeating shapes) and the the guys watching her. I waited until she got to an interesting point in the frame and I took the image.

So what makes this work for me is she is young and from the side she is hold the jacket you don't know if she is yet a woman. The guys looking and the reflection clearly shows that she is. Then you see the advertising poster that in the window that is what advertisers show as the perfect woman. So it I think it works on a visual level with all the repeating shapes (the stripes which are everywhere) and it starts to say a little bit about who we are as a society. Now whether it has any real merit I will leave to the others.

So let's hear your views. Like, hate whatever. HAVE AT IT...

 

[kxl]

I watched the video. Thanks for sharing.
But I don't think it contains a critique as the word 'critique' is often used.

I see an almost gentle subjective preference from the teacher on his student's work. And he's mostly talking about the visual aspects of the photos (what makes an image interesting and to what degree), which I fully agree that Street photography is not immune to those.

And we see this all the time here on RFF. It's just from time to time we see some comments that are delivered in a condescending tone, that is neither helpful nor it is well-meant (except probably from the giver's own very narrow definition of well-meaning). Even only a handful of these could drown out the constructive critiques. As one proverb says, it only takes one drop of ink to render a bowl of good milk useless.

As an aside, I love the photos being critiqued in the video, I think those are excellent examples of Street photography in color.

So to answer your question, Hsg, I am on the side where there is no authority figure, singular nor organizational. There are degrees of mastery, and there are masters (those who are gifted by both talent and resources to set a high standard).

Some of these masters are also good teachers who aims to share their knowledge and experience (I would be glad to attend workshops or gallery from one of them given the chance) and some of them won't be as generous.

But I believe you have as much right to criticize my photos as I do yours. And the goal is not to say "Your photo sucks" or "I'm swooning", the goal is to start a conversation (just as it is in this video) in which both of us may learn something. Sometimes this happens, other times not.

Except for the statement that I highlighted (in my own well-meaning way), I agree.

 

[mfogiel]

Experienced photographers are always interesting to listen to, because they know what works and what does not, and also, they have a formed vision and style, therefore through their critique, you can have an insight how a mature "artist" or if you prefer professional, is reasoning.
To all those who say, that history is junk, and only your "original" and "new" vision counts, I say to be more humble and learn from others first - this will save you several hundred years of time....
Then, once you will know what's going on in your creative process, you will be able to look for your own way forward.


20142117 by mfogiel, on Flickr

 

[airfrogusmc]

Experienced photographers are always interesting to listen to, because they know what works and what does not, and also, they have a formed vision and style, therefore through their critique, you can have an insight how a mature "artist" or if you prefer professional, is reasoning.
To all those who say, that history is junk, and only your "original" and "new" vision counts, I say to be more humble and learn from others first - this will save you several hundred years of time....
Then, once you will know what's going on in your creative process, you will be able to look for your own way forward.

Agree so nobody wants to talk about the work. Come on..Agree with me disagree and mfogiel would you want to talk some about the image that you posted? I would be interested in hearing your thoughts....

 

[jesse1dog]

That is some photograph!

That is some photograph!

Ok let's try this. I'll put myself out there. I prefer to post one of my own for a couple of reason. First and foremost I don't feel comfortable posting someone else's work for this purpose and two I know why I took it. Not that I think this is anything spectacular but i do think it works on several levels. I will first talk some about it and include some of the critique that was given. I showed this in out last session.

What caught my eye is when she was starting to walk by I noticed all the stripes. (repeating shapes) and the the guys watching her. I waited until she got to an interesting point in the frame and I took the image.

So what makes this work for me is she is young and from the side she is hold the jacket you don't know if she is yet a woman. The guys looking and the reflection clearly shows that she is. Then you see the advertising poster that in the window that is what advertisers show as the perfect woman. So it I think it works on a visual level with all the repeating shapes (the stripes which are everywhere) and it starts to say a little bit about who we are as a society. Now whether it has any real merit I will leave to the others.

So let's hear your views. Like, hate whatever. HAVE AT IT...

It's a good photograph on so many counts.
You summarise the situation well - I assume you did see the potential here before you took the shot!
I consider this to be 'extra- ordinary' street photography. You would be hard pressed to get anything quite like this again however hard you tried, and that to my mind places it out of the 'ordinary'.

 

[mdarnton]

Is this morphing into a critique thread? If so, I have something to say.

One of the things I find lacking in a lot of street photographer is that the intellectual statement often pushes out the visual [visual: composition, balance, dynamics, etc], to the point where there's often no visual tickle at all. My personal belief and approach is that photography is first and foremost visual, and so, fundamentally, the visual needs to be respected, dealt with, and utilized, as an underlying requirement. Beyond that, you can go ahead and have your philosophical statement.

This is the reason, IMO, for the strength of HCB's work, and its durability. When I started as a news photographer, I went into it with that attitude, that every photo not only had to tell the story, but also be a visual experience. Anyone who wants to see what I did with that idea can look at my 35mm Flickr stuff, linked below, where there's a selection of my old news stuff (distilled version here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mdarnton/sets/72157628767257187/ )

You can argue that this isn't a requirement, but doing it earned me awards every year, and got a lot of wire service attention and international distribution; unusual, considering that I was working on a very small town paper with less than 15,000 circulation and never promoted myself at all (my editor was entering me in contests--I just wasn't interested). Given a choice, I think people will prefer content + vision to only content.

In my opinion, too many street photographers get wrapped up in the situation and what it means to them, and nearly entirely forget the fundamentals of formal photography, ending up with half of a picture, something inadequate no matter how good the subject matter is-----merely snapshots of interesting things.

OK, I should just shut up, now....

 

[airfrogusmc]

I do agree that visuals are first and foremast and what certainly stimulates me to start to look if there is a possible photograph. I think great photographs work on many levels that start with visuals first and then the more you look the more meaning they reveal. And then how does each piece fit into a larger whole. A body of work. I say when someone asks about critiques why not show how one works. Or not it is after all the world wide web LOL...

Some philosophies I tend to follow for my work and tend to look for in others though I am not locked into any of this. I have found every time I get rigid with what I think is an absolte I find something that changes my mind but here is a base I tend to start from.
"What reinforces the content of a photograph is the sense of rhythm – the relationship between shapes and values." - Henri Cartier-Bresson

"To me, photography is the simultaneous recognition, in a fraction of a second, of the significance of an event, as well as of a precise organisation of forms which give that event its proper expression."-Henry Cartier-Bresson

"....content cannot be separated from form. By form, I mean the rigorous organisation of the interplay of surfaces, lines and values. It is in this organisation alone that our conceptions and emotions become concrete and communicable. In photography, visual organisation can stem only from a developed instinct." - Henri Cartier-Bresson

 

[airfrogusmc]

It's a good photograph on so many counts.
You summarise the situation well - I assume you did see the potential here before you took the shot!
I consider this to be 'extra- ordinary' street photography. You would be hard pressed to get anything quite like this again however hard you tried, and that to my mind places it out of the 'ordinary'.

Thanks and I also wanted to point to one of the negative comments that the reflection of the girl is to close to the edge. I agree but it is in the moment and you have a fraction of a second to respond. I did wait till she moved into the empty space so the guys could be seen and that was literally a fraction of a second.

 

[Monochrom]

Very interesting.

Very helpful!

Thanks for sharing.

 

[kxl]

So what makes this work for me is she is young and from the side she is hold the jacket you don't know if she is yet a woman. The guys looking and the reflection clearly shows that she is. Then you see the advertising poster that in the window that is what advertisers show as the perfect woman. So it I think it works on a visual level with all the repeating shapes (the stripes which are everywhere) and it starts to say a little bit about who we are as a society. Now whether it has any real merit I will leave to the others.

I always hesitate to provide input into these types of threads because it usually turns into a pointless debate, but here goes... No hate, just honest opinion. The things that work for you are the very things that don't work for me. The stripes on the girl and on the storefront make this for one very busy scene. If the stripes on the storefront were somehow blurred (very shallow DOF or some other technique), it would be an improvement.

IMO, one of the things that makes an image interesting to me is a single point of 'focus (pun intended)' or several components that work together as a whole yet not make the entire composition appear busy.

As a side note, the men are not looking at your subject but at someone else.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Thanks Keith. I tend to see patterns, leading lines, repeating shapes and other things like that and I tend to see in triangular composition so indeed my work might not be in your favor. And thats ok. The very reason I pushed the shutter are the negatives to some. LoL....

Great that we all don't see and work the same way but the guys in the reflection were looking at her. It's more apparent on a large print. Thanks so much for the input Keith. Always good to hear opposing views. I also agree that if it were a portrait of just her it would be to busy.

 

[Hsg]

So let's hear your views. Like, hate whatever. HAVE AT IT...

As a viewer, I see nothing in this photo that is even mildly interesting. I see 'a very simple shot' where the subject was passing and the photo was taken without any regard for form or beauty.

There is a gaping dead space behind the subject, which draws my eyes and yet there is nothing there. The subject has a sullen face, she seems bored, and she's walking in front of a store. The reflections and so on are very weak and one has to look really hard to see them but even then they neither add to the form nor the beauty of the photo.

A very simple and boring shot that the likes of it are all over the internet and anyone can take.

 

[airfrogusmc]

And you certainly have the right to your opinion.
But those things I mentioned are there and whether they are important to you or not is what makes us all different and is a very good thing.

And if the guys looking at her and the stripes (repeating shapes) weren't behind her you might very well have a valid point.