Critique Etiquette?

[Wildewinds]

I'm of the opinion that it's more useful to be honest to someone in this specific forum instead of only posting positive comments. I mean we all enjoy people complimenting our photos, and I'm sure most of the people posting their photos are doing so specifically for that reason, but what good does a compliment do you? Besides making you feel good about yourself, not much. It sure doesn't improve your technique.

However... unless you post a compliment, people may get upset. If I see a photo and I think it's bad, I think that if they post it here, they should hear from someone like me who thinks it's bad, right? I should, of course, offer up the explanation for why I think it's bad. Otherwise, it's even less useful than a compliment.

Am I wrong? Should we just be carebears and only try to make people good about their photos even if we think they have no redeeming qualities?

[markubig]

yes, i believe that if you see a bad photo, you should say why it is bad and offer suggestions on how they could improve it for the next time. But it should be said in a way that the recipient of the comments is not attacked and not discouraged from taking more photos and trying to get better.

[rosco1971]

i also agree.......its constructive critisism....(did i spell that right?)..anyways.....any comment positve or negative is good........it good to see what people think of our photos.......even if they say they are bad........then again....what is good and what is bad........its all personel opinion.....right?.

[mbze430]

I always welcome negative comment, ONLY if its productive. Meaning that the critic gives suggestions on how to improve. Comments, "I don't like the lighting" Is useless information. Explain and build upon why you don't like the lighting? And how would you have done it differently.

When I put in a critic I like to explain why, and than how. I wish more people would do that.

Oh this goes for the Positive comments too. "Its neat" or "nice" just doesn't cut it. Explore the feelings when you see someone's shot. Write down your emotion.

[Belmondo]

I find myself commenting on photos much less often than in the past. One of the main reasons is that there are just so many of them these days.

As a general rule of thumb, I won't say I like a photo if I don't. I'll just move along while Mom's words ring in my ear, "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."

When a poster invites comments and I do have some constructive criticism, I will offer it, but also do my darndest to couch it in terms that don't offend. There are always two ways to say the same thing, and I see no need to be brutal or condescending. Honesty and tact are not mutually exclusive terms. It is possible to help a person with their photos without being insulting.

[neil_r]

I have always tried to be honest in my critique. There have been a few occasions in the past when this has led to problems and on one occasion it almost reached animosity. The photo in question was clearly out of focus and the guy who posted it not only refused to accept this he was rude to all who pointed it out. I tend to give positive comments now and phrase my critique in terms of suggesting alternatives. When I see pictures I really don’t like or have no view on then I don’t comment.

In all things it comes down to taste, there was a recent post of a very grainy building interior, I loved it everyone else who posted hated it, so I guess when inviting critique we must all recognise that you can't please all the people all the time (unless you are CDS and you have a pigeon recycling plant outside your sisters bedroom window).

I am more than happy to receive constructive criticism on any of my posts.

[Croasdail]

I agree with the final post here - there is no right or wrong answer here. Take the post of a portrait of a gentleman with a green background - a lot of discussion was made to make it better - removing the yellow tint to it. In the end there were two trains of thought - one that preferred all yellow removed from his skin - others that found with the yellow the portrait to be warmer. Point is both were right. You can have a technically perfect picture that says nothing - and you can have a technically flawed image still carries a lot of emotion. We are all expressing our opinions here what makes a good picture to us - and there is no absolute right or wrong. One last thing - if you do provide critiquess - remember to also point out the things that were done right too. Quit often I do things right by accident - and I don't realize it until someone points it out.

Cheers all!

[napolar]

When I put I picture in here I am looking for both the good and the "if you do this next time...." I am just getting back into photography after years of taking snapshots. I look forward to any constructive criticism. Please tell me how I can take my photography to the next level, that is why I put a picture in here. just my opinion.

[dispatchermike21]

I was told by a MOD to post nice stuff or not at all.

[Belmondo]

I was told by a MOD to post nice stuff or not at all.

Somehow, I question if that's exactly what you were told.

[4nR]

I was told by a MOD to post nice stuff or not at all.

man, what were you posting? :confused: lol.

[jfrancho]

Some people put more energy into defending their criticism than was put into their inital critique. The only person that may need clarification of a criticism woudl be the original poster. I frequently ask for specifics and am surprised to find how defensive some can be. Usually you can work through it with a "I see what you mean, but what about...." Like I'm one to offer any advice, communication is not always my strong suit.

[DavidEB]

I went from self-employed to working for a big corporation and had to learn some of these skills the hard way.

One technique is the "sandwich" - start with something nice, then the constructive criticism, then something positive. Possibly the third comment can be a positive that might result from implementing the critical suggestion.

Also, consider trying to phrase critical comments in terms that are helpful rather than merely critical. "You can build on the good features of this photo by changing so-and-so..."

If you can't find anything good about a posted pic, consider that maybe you dont understand what the photographer was after, and phrase your comment as a question. "I see that the background is very busy, was this deliberate to create a mood?"

Still learning, and trying to get along, ....

David

[djonto]

Two words are important I feel - constructive criticism - and both have been mentioned earlier in the thread.

I feel if somebody posts here they are looking to improve their skills, so need to be guided, whilst encouraged at the same time.

That's my view for what it is worth

[Noni]

If I, a brand newbie, may chime in here...

If I post a photo here, I am looking to see what works for others, what does not work for others, and how I could've made it better technically. If I've gotten the shot, but it just is poorly executed technically, then it's not as good a shot as I could have made it.

It seems there are two things a photographer needs to capture; the "mood"/feeling/emotion, and the technical aspects. I can set the mood, or catch a feeling/emotion, just by being there at the right time and right place, but if I can improve on something by understanding the technical stuff better (i.e. aperture, shutter speed, lighting techniques, and so forth), then I have just learned something which makes me better.

To have critique is to make someone better...I don't think that can be done with the right time/place stuff, but it sure can via the technical stuff.

"Your photo sucks, and so do you" does nothing. Likewise, ""The picture is extremely noisy and the fobulation factors are too high. Dial down the antipodal chroma a bit and maybe we can see it better." doesn't help someone unless they really get the antipodal v. chroma argument. [BTW, "(I made this up, but you get the point, I think)." thank God you made that up...I didn't understand a word of it, and it worried me.... :wink:]

If one can explain the antipodal argument - why it should be dialed down, how come it helps, and so forth - then I can really start to understand the aspects of antipodal art.

Additionally, since I have nothing nearly ready for this particular forum, I lurk it. I read, read, read, look, look, look, and then read it again, hoping to glean something I can use in the future in my own photography. If there is a discussion which I can learn from - something I can bring away from here when I get out there with my camera - then this forum has done two things: helped the original poster, and also taught the lurkers like me a thing or two.

Just my .02...which isn't even a valid .02 because I've not submitted a post for crit before....

Best-
Noni

[O/confusion]

The very first thing we were told when I studied art history and critical theory at university was that our personal tastes and preferences were to be checked at the door--in fact, it is often a much more valuable exercise to attempt a serious analysis of something that you actively dislike, because then there is a golden opportunity to discover exactly what constitutes the grounds for your own personal value judgements. A technically and formally successful image, if grounded, for example, in a personally unacceptable ideological construct, may well be abhorrent to you--but that doesn't make it bad.

I respectfully disagree with the notion that good or bad is in the eyes of the individual viewer; like or dislike, yes--but the only truly "bad" art is that which fails to generate any interest whatsoever: the visual equivalent of muzak. It would perhaps be useful if the poster of an image could supply a starting point for a critique, along the lines of: "I was trying for (X), does that come throughat all? If not, how does it come across to you, and how do you think I might have done things differently to achieve this desired result?" Note that this does not mean that we are being asked what our criteria would have been for making the shot, or if we think it was worth taking in the first place; the poster has taken this image, and we have not.

(It is also important for us to remember that the history of the arts is the story of constant rebellion, experimentation, and eventual assimilation into the canon of ideas and techniques that were at some point or other completely rejected by mainstream cultural traditionalists. It's sobering to think that even the Waltz was once considered totally scandalous and socially unacceptable in decent society because it required close face-to-face proximity between opposite-sex partners!)

I recently posted a reply to a different thread in which I commented that we might all be wise to treat each image as if it were submitted by a child experimenting. Assuming our aim is to encourage further creative growth and understanding in a mutually supportive environment, I think the least we can all do is to take some time to think our responses through carefully before we post them, avoid both damaging rejection and empty, non-constructive praise alike, and concentrate more on developing both our individual and collective analytical skills.

Bloo Dog is perfectly correct to assert that art criticism, properly considered, is a formal process with many avenues of approach, each with its own methodology and criteria for consideration. While it is clearly impossible to expect many of us to even want to pursue the process with this degree of rigour, it is probably within the reach of all of us to tackle some very basic questions: " How am I reacting to this image? (What does it make me think about, remember, or feel) ; What is it about this image that is making me feel this way about it? (Is it e.g. the subject matter, the compositional scheme, the colour scheme, the tonal range, the selective focus?); Why am I reacting this way? (Is the response e.g. physiological, psychological, or philosophical in nature--or perhaps somehow vaguely unsettling because it doesn't square with certain cultural or personally developed "norms" and assumptions?).

If we don't think about these matters and openly discuss them in what should be a relatively safe venue like this Forum, we are each doomed to live inside our own cosy little boxes, hedged in by our vigourously defended but largely unexamined "likes" and "dislikes", and any discourse from such a position can only be rather less than satisfying, at best.

Just my opinion on the matter, of course, and subject to debate like any other--but it is, I respectfully submit, an informed opinion, and one offered in a spirit of encouragement and support. (Apologies for going on at such length, folks--but this is one of the more important subjects for discussion on the boards, and I felt it deserved some time and attention.)

best regards,
Terry

[Noni]

Hi, Bloo.

Thanks. I don't mean to exclude the artistic value of a shot, or the creation of a piece of art. I do find that, as in your Sousa v. Jazz argument, it tends to be different strokes for different folks. Personally, there are types of music I don't consider music at all...and yet they sell millions of copies and win awards. However, I can (despite my dislike) discuss the music theory behind it, discuss rhythm and counter rthym, rhymes and discordancies. Thus my commentary on the technical aspects of photography. Art is subjective, and, as you said, reality and truth are so, as well.

Perhaps a solution would be a request to crit a particular part? For example, if I am working on lighting, then to prephrase the post with: "I think I could've done better at the lighting. Could you review and add your comments?" or the like. That would give the poster the opportunity to exclude a part of a photo which may not be to a particular person's liking, but will allow them to post a constructive comment with direction.

Likewise, if I was working for a certain mood or particular effect, I would post "I was working to show the diversity in the farmer's market. Do you think I achieved that? If not, please give me your suggestions for the next time I'm looking for that effect."

Realizing that all art is personal, a representation of self and of vision, one must also have a bit of a thicker skin. I was not born knowing how to (fill in the blank), therefore I can learn from those who offer opinions and commentary.

'Twould seem there needs to be a balance between poster and commentor...one that I believe can be achieved without stringent rules and regulations, but with some attention to what is offered, by whom it is offered, and what they are looking to learn.

And yes, compliments are fun, too.

Best-
Noni

[O/confusion]

Noni and O/Confusion,

Interesting comments here. Something which both of you agree upon is that perhaps we're not asking the right questions. I hadn't considered that.

Bloo and Noni--

Yes, I think this is really the nub of it. And it goes for the initial posters as well as for the respondents.

As I see it, there are two different scenarios that we're typically faced with in the Forum--the first is, as I've suggested above, the kind which is provided when people are dissatisfied in some particular way with their images and desire some concrete technical information or other suggestions which might help them to get closer to their goals in future; in this case the respondents should expect to be given as much information and context with respect to the creation of the images as may be required in order to be able to give the matter serious consideration.

The second would be the case where the creators display their images without any mediation, and wish to let their work speak for itself (which is analogous to an art gallery viewing situation) either because they are quite satisfied with their results, have no intention of changing them in any way, and just wish to share them and hear what others have to say about them; or else because they really are not sure at all how their work might play and desire some honest feedback unbiased by information not already supplied by the images.

In this second scenario, it seems to me that there is ample room for the kind of free-ranging, in-depth critical analysis that Bloo is looking for, and the potential for interesting discourse should be high due to the fact that the creators of the works under scrutiny are actually available to us; while their creative intentions are unknown to us initially, and can therefore play no part in the original response, they can certainly become a matter for extended debate thereafter--if the poster so wishes.

And of course it's O.K. to express your liking (or otherwise) of someone's work--as long at it is understood that this does not constitute criticism, and that your personal preferences don't really carry much weight with anyone else unless they happen to coincide with their own!

regards,
Terry