Hi Darin, Well stated advice. I'll do my best to apply it next time. Please continue. Cheers, Paul -----Original Message----- From: owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Darin Heinz Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 10:18 PM To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students Subject: Photo Critique Guidelines (excerpt) 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
