First try to find something good to say right off the bat. No matter how small, a little bit of encouragement goes a long way and they don't feel everything is awful, even if you never use that term.
Instead of being the one doing the critique, I turn that around. Instead of it being my ideas with statements, I GUIDE them to my ideas with questions. It they agree it becomes their ideas. If they don't, its not as threatening. Example I find this tree in the background distracting. Maybe totally true and a statement of fact. Better Would this photo be improved if that tree wasn't in the background? What can you do to remove it now? Could you have taken the photo from a slightly different location and still got the original photo? The better teachers teach more with questions than answers.
Finally try to end on something positive. I usually pick my starting and ending good before I ever utter the first word. Ending on a positive is the sugar that makes the medicine go down. Just like Julie Andrews sings, it only takes a spoonful. With it the help is often accepted "in the most delightful way". Without it as often as not you just listened to yourself talk or wasted your time writing.
herschel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
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 subjectivityBut "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
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
