Nice, Darin. Could you send me the rest?
Just to play devil's advocate (As is my wont)
I find it interesting that:
"I don't like this picture" is unacceptable as it is personal subjectivity
But "There's too little depth of field" is fine because it's hiding behind a technical term.
Surely that's also a personal opinion?
Isn't "There's a little too much space to the right" subjective?
I've heard seasoned pros arguing over such things.
Isn't ALL criticism just personal opinion?
Herschel
> Hi everyone!
>
> For
those of you who wanted a glimpse at my critique process... well, you
> asked for it!
>
> This is one part (loosely
transcripted) the seminar I conducted recently
> regarding the
process of the critique. Its application naturally includes,
>
and maybe even reaches beyond, the scope of the PhotoForum Gallery. I
> apologize for its length, but I believe all points expressed are
relevant;
> I
> would wholeheartedly appreciate your
taking the time to read it in its
> entirety.
>
> Type II Critique: General Photography
>
>
"Criticism" is a term which has developed negative connotations
in our
> society, but in the context and scope of this document
and associated
> exercise, it is necessary to dismiss this aspect
in favor of its most
> rudimentary meaning, which is "the
act of evaluating the qualities of [an
> artistic] work."
Criticism is a good thing!
>
> The "critique"
which follows, therefore, is a written (or verbal)
> evaluation
> of the qualities of a photograph from concentrated observation,
and is as
> objective as possible from a singular viewpoint. For
you, as the "critic"
> (again, no negative connotation
intended) to simply say "I like the
> photograph" does
nothing but reaffirm your own personal tastes and give
> the
> photographer the solace that the work would be rated highly, if
only an
> entire jury panel were made up of your clones.
>
> It is important to point out that there are no flaws in
a photograph, only
> areas for improvement. Similarly, there is
no such thing as a "perfect"
> photograph, just as the
"perfect automobile" doesn't exist, which explains
>
why there are so many different models on the road.
>
>
The critique's process is an invaluable tool for enhancing the work of
> viewer and critic alike. Looking for areas of improvement in a
photograph
> and devising their solutions for future reference
aids the critic in his
> or
> her own problem-solving
abilities in the field, just as much as it does
> for
>
the photographer who chooses to accept those suggestions.
>
> The very first step for conducting a critique of work viewed online
should
> be to calibrate your monitor. Next, get comfortable. If
you're sitting on
> a
> cactus, your discomfort will
probably come through in the text.
>
> Before a critique
can be done, all personal biases must be pushed aside;
> likes
and dislikes in the construct of personal taste really have no place
> in the finished critique. For example, I cannot stand spiders, but
I could
> give (and have given) a favorable review to a
photograph of one. It's
> difficult to do, but when looking at
quantifiable variables, opinions
> naturally fall aside.
>
> It goes without saying that the relationship between
photographer and
> critic
> is a delicate balance marked
by an inherent mutual trust. The photographer
> must remember
that the critic is simply that, and to take the advice with
> a
> "grain of salt." The critic has a tremendous
responsibility, as well;
> suggestions should be constructive and
relevant, and there should be some
> feeling that the critic
appreciates being given the opportunity to provide
> those
suggestions. It does no good to either party to only disapprove of
> certain points. What looks great? What looks good? What might need
a
> little
> work? Say it.
>
> This
outlines what I call the "Type II" Critique: that of general
> photography; it is appropriate for a forum like ours here, as we
have
> submissions from people of different cultures, of varying
levels of
> experience and methodology, who create photographs in
all categories.
> Other
> critique "Types"
incorporate more specific and stringent criteria for
>
evaluation, and are not covered here. As such, the "Type II"
critique
> should
> mainly emphasize technical and
aesthetic aspects, and answer the following
> questions:
>
> 1) Technical analysis. Examples:
> - Is the
photograph properly exposed?
> - Is the contrast/saturation too
high or too low?
> - How sharp is the focus? Is the focal plane
in the right place? Is
> Depth-of-Field too shallow? Too deep?
> - Was a proper shutter speed used? Is there any blur from
camera
> shake?
> - ...etc.
>
> 2)
Composition and aesthetic qualities. Examples:
> - Is there
unnecessary empty space?
> - Could the camera have been zoomed in
or out, panned left or right
> and/or raised or lowered to
improve composition within the frame?
> - Is the image
simplified? Is the intended subject obvious?
> - Any
dismemberment going on? Chopped-off heads, feet, etc.? If so,
>
does it work for the overall image?
> - Is there undue background
noise/clutter?
> - What about distracting elements (tree growing
out of someone's
> head,
> for example)?
> -
...etc.
>
> When writing a critique, remember there are
no hard-and-fast rules. You
> want
> to be helpful,
courteous, and insightful. You can start off by talking
> about
> the first thing you noticed in the image, then move on to
technical
> aspects
> if you like, then to the
aesthetic. Mix it up a little. Leave the less
> important points
(the "nits to pick") for the end, or if they're really
> immaterial, omit them entirely.
>
> It is
absolutely imperative that for each area of improvement, at least
> one
> suggestion be offered which could be done in-camera.
Try to avoid
> recommendations which involve the use of editing
software to "fix" what
> could have been avoided in the
field. Digital solutions are also largely
> out
> of the
reach of some photographers (like me!) who are shooting and
>
presenting straight-film photographs. In-camera workarounds apply to
> everyone. It also helps to be familiar with several different
methods to
> achieve the same desired effect.
>
> Practicing the critique in everyday life helps. The Internet,
magazines,
> newspapers, and books are vast resources for
photographic images. Pick up
> a
> magazine the next
time you're in a waiting room somewhere, or waiting to
> buy
> groceries. Conduct a quick mental critique of a photograph that
someone
> was
> paid a lot of money to produce. What
makes the photo so spectacular? What
> would you have done
differently? The more you do this, the easier it will
> be
> to review others' work; more importantly, you will be able to pick
up on
> areas of improvement in your own photographs, as well.
Try it and see!
>
> Yours very truly,
> Darin
Heinz
> Melbourne, Florida USA
>
>
>
See my photographs online at http://www.darinheinz.com
>
>
