Criticizing other's work (websites) - cool or uncool?

[photoguy6405]

I stumbled across a website of some wedding photographers and found their work to be unbelievably atrocious. Far beyond "just bad", IMHO.

I want to post a link here and see if anyone else thinks I'm onto something or if maybe it's just me. They do get work and seem to keep busy, so maybe it is just me.

Would that be too rude to do to someone else's work without their knowledge or approval?

[RiKaN HaVoK]

I don't think so - As long as you ain't slandering them on their own website and/or contacting their customers to state how bad their work is - hey is a free world. You can criticize all you want .. lmao

I just want to see the pictures - :P

[chauncey]

Why does it concern you?
You could contact them to inform them but do no more.

[Nistelrooydude]

I just want to see the pictures - :P

Me too. I think as long as your providing them comments that will help them improve, as opposed too "Just commenting to say your work sucks and that you don't deserve to own a camera. ", then that's fine. If you're simply bashing them with no constructiveness, then that's just jerky.

[Gentleman Villain]

No worries....99% of wedding photography is bad. Wedding/portraiture is where all the photographers go that can't shoot commercial. :p

[narlus]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v517/mtbbaboon/smilies/popcorn.gif

[FOX2PRO]

It wouldn't be rude at all. They can't reasonably expect people not to talk about their work if its online.

[USER876]

Whats the link?

[camerageorge]

Maybe you could post it in the photo business section about how great their marketing must be to be able to keep busy with poor photos :)

[LostShootingStar]

If people dont want opinions on their work, they shouldn't post it in the public eye IMO. if it's bad it's bad, maybe they could benefit from some criticism http://m08o1124znfu179.imageshacknow.info/img/2465/e08g1214bfbr/wink.gif

[rdenney]

Just be prepared to post your own work to show them how it should be done. And don't be offended if they attack you in return. If free speech applies to you, it also applies to them.

In the end, though, if the pictures are really bad, does it need to be said that they are bad? If they must be declared bad for people to realize it, then maybe they aren't so bad.

The 99% of weeding and portrait photography that's bad (in the opinion of another poster) still got paid for. And I've seen work I thought outstanding that still ended up in court because the customer thought it atrocious.

It's a visual medium that should be self-evaluating and talking about it probably just confuses the matter.

Rick "thinking good photography speaks for itself without commentary" Denney

[MJPhotos24]

It hasn't stopped anyone else from posting others sites and doing the same.

Think it depends on the purpose of posting there link, if it's just to rip them that's pointless. Just out shoot them and land the jobs they would get.

[cdifoto]

No worries....99% of wedding photography is bad. Wedding/portraiture is where all the photographers go that can't shoot commercial. :p
I've seen commercial work that's so bad, a wedding client would never pay for it.

[Gentleman Villain]

I've seen commercial work that's so bad, a wedding client would never pay for it.

True...actually most commercial work is poorly crafted too

The difference is that you'll never meet a commercial photographer that wants to be a wedding photographer...But you'll find plenty of wedding/portrait shooters that originally wanted to be commercial shooters.

[Gentleman Villain]

The 99% of weeding and portrait photography that's bad (in the opinion of another poster) still got paid for. And I've seen work I thought outstanding that still ended up in court because the customer thought it atrocious.


Yep, that's exactly my point in a round-a-bout way :)

[cdifoto]

True...actually most commercial work is poorly crafted too

The difference is that you'll never meet a commercial photographer that wants to be a wedding photographer...But you'll find plenty of wedding/portrait shooters that originally wanted to be commercial shooters.
I dunno. I haven't met many of either. I try to avoid both because they tend to be arrogant as hell. Same goes for painters and gallery owners.

[photoguy6405]

It hasn't stopped anyone else from posting others sites and doing the same.

Think it depends on the purpose of posting there link, if it's just to rip them that's pointless. Just out shoot them and land the jobs they would get.

Part of the reason I'm asking the question is precisely because I am questioning my motivation, I guess. The link was pointed out to me by a friend. This photographer lives and works in another part pf the country, so even if I did shoot weddings, they wouldn't be competition just for geographic reasons.

I don't shoot weddings not because I don't think I'm good enough, or couldn't learn to be good enough, but mainly because I am not mentally wired to deal with the demands and resulting pressures caused by the demands. For me the process would be miserable, regardless how good my work was or how happy the client even was... hence, I stay away completely.

Having said that, I reject the notion that some have that says you cannot voice an opinion if you haven't "been there done that" yourself. Sometimes, it's the outside opinion that is the more objective opinion, and the people on the inside are 'too close' to the issue to be truly objective.

Anyway, back to my motivation... normally whenever I see bad work I shrug and move on. This just seemed especially bad to my eye. I'll probably post a link and see what others think. Maybe it is just me. That'd be fine, I'm ok with that. Who knows... maybe somebody here will see them and like their work and hire them. That'd be fine, too.

Regarding Mr Denney's comments, my website is in my siggy, and constructive C&C is always welcome.

[cdifoto]

Having said that, I reject the notion that some have that says you cannot voice an opinion if you haven't "been there done that" yourself. Sometimes, it's the outside opinion that is the more objective opinion, and the people on the inside are 'too close' to the issue to be truly objective.
I agree. When I want an honest opinion, I ask people who are neither photographers nor have a crush on me. And I'm serious about both. Photographers nitpick stuff that doesn't matter, and if a girl has a crush on me she's only going to feed my ego.

[friz]

I'm all for people critiquing my pictures. To be honest I value the opinions of people that are not in the hobby or profession more because it is usually from the gut. They might not be able to tell you why they don't like something, but they always know what they like or don't like. I appreciate a professionals advice also, but these guys usually tell me what I was taught in school.

[MJPhotos24]

For me the process would be miserable, regardless how good my work was or how happy the client even was... hence, I stay away completely.

Same here, I've gotten some good offers to shoot weddings including a partnership with one of the best DJ's around that we'd do a package deal. However, I just do not like shooting them so stay away.

I reject the notion that some have that says you cannot voice an opinion if you haven't "been there done that" yourself. Sometimes, it's the outside opinion that is the more objective opinion, and the people on the inside are 'too close' to the issue to be truly objective.

There are way to many people out there that try to start a photography business because the people on the "inside" only said great things, even if the results were far from it. I agree with this completely, rather have a harsh critic on the outside than a friend trying to be nice on the inside. General statement - If you've never heard any criticism about your photography then you haven't asked the right people. It helps to hear it from someone who's done it, but bad photography is bad photography and those with knowledge should be able to share even if they don't have first hand experience.

... normally whenever I see bad work I shrug and move on.

See a ton of them from great to mediocre to why are they selling a service when they don't know where the focus button is, and everything in between. You can learn a lot from a good photog, you can learn a lot from a bad photog. What not to do is just as important as what to do sometimes I guess is what I'm saying.

[photoguy6405]

Here ya go... (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7188233#post7188233)

[Gentleman Villain]

Actually, I would consider that person to have natural talent and ability.

The series of photographs are very dynamic...THe photographer is constantly searching for new and interesting angles. Also, the moments captured are often full of energy and the subjects look very happy. This is an indication that the photographer has an excellent rapport with the subjects. I would consider dynamic composition and rapport to be natural talents.

The idea behind the work is also very good. I'd categorize it as lifestyle and the purpose is to give average people some fun and interesting pictures of themselves. The photographer definitely succeeds at this and I bet is very popular with the market. From a business point of view I'd consider this photographer to have good potential.

Of course, the craftsmanship needs some tightening up. The obvious problems are a lot of bad exposures and soft shots. The photographer is a little too dependent on macro-contrast....The highlights are blown, the shadows lack detail and the midtones are disappearing. But these problems can be fixed over time and with some help from a mentor or something. Overall, I think this photographer has good natural ability at shooting lifestyle and also lots of potential to be successful in selling to the market that buys that type of lifestyle photography.

[Gentleman Villain]

photosguy6405

I just checked out your work and it's very interesting! I can understand why you don't like the lifestyle photographer. Essentially, the lifestyle shooter is Mr Hyde to your Dr Jekyll...an evil twin....a mirror image....the exact opposite :)

Your work has very good exposures....lots of controlled detail in highlights and shadows...good midtones...good micro-contrast. Your colors are very natural. Your compositions are very traditional. Your work shows a good deal of structure and careful thought and planning.

The lifestyle shooter is the EXACT OPPOSITE.

you shoot natural colors - the lifestyle person shoots vivid unnatural colors
your shots are careful and planned - the lifestyle person is more spontaneous
You shoot objects and places - the lifestyle person shoots people
your compositions are very traditional - the lifestyle person is a bit more experimental
your approach to PP is minimal and safe - the lifestyle person's PP is heavy and experimental

You both are very good at what you do...but for very different reasons :)

[photoguy6405]

GV,

Fantastic comments. I very much appreciate them, and they are not falling on deaf ears.

To the other photographer's credit, they are being more spontaneous and experimental, and that in and of itself is a good thing. They also come across as a couple ladies who are having immense fun at their work, and that's great. I can see the "lifestyle" aspect. I actually like the minimal number of stiff formal poses. Those are traditionally way overdone, IMHO.

For me it was more the technical aspects, I think, that screamed out to me. I don't mind some overexposure for effect, but way too many shots were way too overexposed. I don't mind a few odd 45-degree tilted shots for effect, and even do that myself on occasion, but they did it so much that the effect was, well... effectively lost. I felt like the only thing they were lacking was a circular fisheye lens to complete the trendy/gimmicky/non-traditional theme.

[Gentleman Villain]

For me it was more the technical aspects, I think, that screamed out to me. I don't mind some overexposure for effect, but way too many shots were way too overexposed.

Yeah man...I'm totally vibing with you on that.

While we all may have different ideas of beauty and likes/dislikes....The one thing that should unite all photographers is a set of shared standards in craftsmanship. SO I totally agree with you....what's really missing from that work is not necessarily talent or vision....but some standards of craftsmanship.


I don't mind a few odd 45-degree tilted shots for effect, and even do that myself on occasion, but they did it so much that the effect was, well... effectively lost. I felt like the only thing they were lacking was a circular fisheye lens to complete the trendy/gimmicky/non-traditional theme.

You and I share very similar taste and approach to photography.

When I critique a photographer...I do my best to figure out what market will purchase the photography. My view is that the lifestyle/wedding/portrait consumer market is pretty much in love with gimmicks...so I try to factor that in when judging a lifestyle photographer and usually give them extra points for willingness to embrace trends that will surely be popular with their market. Personally, I'd rather work in a bagel shop than do the "fisheye"-thing with a camera....but I understand that the lifestyle market embraces those kinds of trends and gimmicks LOL It's also why my first post in this thread was making fun of wedding photography a bit...because most of it has craftsmanship problems...but that's not necessarily what's needed to sell to an unsophisticated consumer market anyway. They usually respond best to trendy gimmicks and good rapport...So those are the things that really seem to matter for appealing to that market.

Just trying to keep it in perspective :)

[londonblue007]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v517/mtbbaboon/smilies/popcorn.gif

awesome.

[wyntrsnyte]

Photoguy - I, too, do not see much "wrong" with the pictures in the links provided. I agree that they seem to be overexposed, but without seeing actual prints, I don't know if it is my laptop screen or not.

I was married not too long ago and the photo style of this particular photographer is very typical of what brides in my area of the country want for their wedding day. I actually recogonize many of the staged detail shots and they are almost identical to photos many brides-to-be shared on a wedding chat board I used to frequent.

Trendy? Yes, but if there is market demand it will be supplied in one way or another. Realize that many brides aren't into photography and they aren't looking at lighting and composition like we would. All they care about is that they and their bridal party/families look great in the pictures and that all the little things they spent way too much money on are documented in a way that they can look back on and justify to themselves that it was all worth it. (I also realize this isn't true of all parts of the US or the world, I am only speaking on my area of the globe and what I noticed when I was planning my wedding.)