- This topic is empty.
Technical perfection vs emotional buy-in
-
There’s now’t personal Andy and never should there be. :wink:
Debate is only healthy when there are mixed views and opinions. I’m sure if we all met face to face we’d just laugh and go for a pint.
I picked up on what Mick was saying in the wrong way. Now that this has been established as a mistake on my behalf there’s no real disagreement anymore.
This is a very interesting thread and has made for good reading. Cheers Mr.H for posting the question. There is so much to be taken from constructive threads like this.
I certainly think that it is easier to critique from a technical point of view on a forum. Critique based on an emotional response requires much thought and effort on the poster’s part to articulate their view in a constructive way. And it is often misconstrued, such are the limitations of this medium. Which I suppose can leave them wondering why they bothered.
A technical critique is arguably easier. Technical flaws are usually clear and quantifiable – better exposure, a little more ‘punch’, some more shadow detail, a little cloning here and there. These changes may certainly improve the image, and we will almost definitely agree on these things. But this sort of critique does not begin to uncover the why of the picture.
And I guess we can get caught up in the attainable pursuit of creating a technically perfect photograph. No-one can justifiably say it is bad. And no-one can point out something that is wrong in it. But it leaves the viewer cold, and it passes by as just another photograph. Which I’m sure we have all seen.
At this point in my development as a photographer, I have a fair grasp on the technical. I am aware of the limitations of a camera, and the ways to work with and around that. But the most difficult thing is making a meaningful picture; creating a photograph that evokes an emotional response in the viewer. A photograph that says something, and shows something. The worst feeling is making a picture and when people look at it, they say,’Wow, good photo!’, but are disinterested in it. Why do we photograph what we photograph?
The interesting thing is that this is the most considered post I have ever written, yet I feel like I have said very little. And it took a lot of thought, and searching for words, because it is subjective, and not easily quantifiable. And it is inevitable that not everyone will agree. However, great thread. Let’s have some more of this stuff.
Enjoying reading this, just like everyone else. Firstly just let me say that I am not as good at articulating an argument (or a point of view) with the same eloquence as some people here. :lol:
Anyways, I was just thinking that a lot of people are saying how much easier it is to critique on the technical aspects of a picture than the aesthetic (I think thats the correct word) of a picture. I think for a goodlittle experiement, people should try commenting utside of their comfort zone. Basically what I mean is that people should have a go at commenting on images in different threads that they don’t usually tend to enter. ie. Landscape photographers comment on portraiture work, or street photographers comment on abstract work or whatever. I find that when I am commenting on Portraiture work or Nature work (and this is by no means me trying to state that I consider myself a qualified Landscape photographer :lol:) that I do not find it very easy to comment because I have no experience of the process that was used so I can only end up commenting on which aspects attract me the image as an “outsider” for want of a better word. Obviously my comments in this section will not carry as much weight as people who have actual experience in portraiture work but I think it results in your comments usually picking up on different parts (and usually the more subjective parts) of he image which maybe other people have not commented on.
Anyways I’m starting to forget what I’m talking about as usual so I think i’ll shoot this post dead but I think its worth a bash. Obviosuly there are some people that post in every thread but there are some (myself included) who do their best to stay within their comfort zone, and I will endeavour to change this.
Anyways, eh, bye
BrianBrian –
I think that’s a great idea. It will give people exposure to photography they don’t normally look at and flex those critical muscles. And who knows – some good insights will probably result!Cheers,
PeterNFL, the last comments were an attempt at humour to illustrate the point Andy’s just made in his reply*.
I got bored making reasoned observations and thought an obviously unreasonable one might bring some levity to the thread.
So much for humour.
^shrug^*This is not always a good thing of course if confidence leads to arrogance.
Andy’s right of course, I wouldn’t want things to get to the point where awarding marks out of ten was the sole response; that’s kinda cold.
I just threw it out there as maybe as something people might use if their comment was going to be something like: that’s nice / does nothing for me.is that if you took the timeout to post some structured C&C for people then that would speak volumes.
If I may be equally controversial all it would point out is that the vast majority of images, including my own (I have no illusions about my competency), are, at best, mediocre and that I’ve got an opinion. I’ve taken about 7000 images since April when I got the 5D. Of those I’ve just about 100 posted on Flickr which I would consider to be the best I have to offer. Without batting an eyelid I could easily dismiss half of those again, the ones I’ve posted for the sake of having something to post – Flickritis. That’s pretty much a 70 to 1 against wrt my own stuff getting past my own critical eye. And that’s being easy on myself, if I were to be brutally honest with myself I could probably narrow that down to 10 or so and even then I probably still wouldn’t be that confident in their merit. So, do I apply the same level of criticism and judgement to others as I do to myself or do I water it down to the point of me trying to maintain some semblence of likeability; merely appearing to give an honest opinion when in fact what I’m attempting to say is that the image is devoid of any creative/emotional/documentary/technical merit whatsoever, but at least horizon is straight.
is that if you took the timeout to post some structured C&C for people then that would speak volumes.
I take it that’s a ‘No’ then?
Gentlemen! Please, let’s keep this civil lest this thread devolve into a total flame war.
Peter
It’s not a no, it’s not a yes, NFL.
If anything it means I’ll do a lot of thinking about how I approach commenting on images.
I certainly don’t think it would be good for the forum if I posted comments on every image with the same harsh rule of thumb as I filter my own work, but I would like to get to the point where I can make a meaningful contribution to the critique section without resorting to obvious technical aspects or mundane posivitity.Interesting to see the ebb and flow of the discussion – must admit I am struggling to keep up with you all. Things have moved on a bit from the original question… however it is an interesteng read all the same.
Going back to the scoring thing. I don’t necessarily think it is a good idea for general critique – it could very easily descend into, or be taken as, destructive criticism rather than constructive. I believe constructive criticism is the intention of the section and in general the spirit of site. I think scoring of this nature would scare off a lot of posters and make things exclusive rather than inclusive.
However I would have no problem of trying to score an image if the user explicitly asked for it to be scored upon a certain criteria as mentioned above.
Gary
I agree with you, Gary, and it wasn’t thrown out as a fully polished idea.
I would think I’ll use something like that as a basis for structured commenting – not to give scores on those points (dumb idea, who the hell thought that one up!!!) but use them as reference points for any comments I make. Example:Overall Image Impact:
Generally I like the initial impact of the image because photos of fat-headed destitute mice really do it for me. I think you’ve captured a unique expression of boredom, especially seeing as how he’s slumped over the bar with ciggie in his face, his face in the ashtray and a glazed look in his bloodshot eye. The pole dancing Meer cats in the background are a nice touch, as are the obviously love struck bats canoodling in the shadows of the rafters. I don’t usually visit the wildlife section, but will certainly do so in future.Visual Awareness
I never see stuff like this, you’ve opened my eyes to a new world.Technical Expertise
Um, not sure a Polaroid SX70 and expired film was the best way to go, or that having your finger blocking part of the view was an intentional comment on censorship. While the expired polaroid gives the image a certain nostaglic vibe and creates a genuine atmosphere it lacks the high resolution definition I wish I could view this unique scene with. Next time it might be worth considering using some expired Kodachrome 64 sheet film and cross processing it.Artistic Merit
It’s certainly different, a visually appealing curiosity with plenty to think about.Originality
I’m not sure how original it is as I specialise primarily in portraits of base jumping squid, I generally hang out in the sports section, but I like your style.This was a great thread to read. Kept me entertained to no end.
It is, as with all art I suppose, an issue of taste. For example, there are people in the artistic world who cannot stand the works of the impressionists, who despite lacking technical ability, in some cases (where others just defied it), captured emotions spectacularly. Van Gough’s ‘first steps’, is my favourite example of this. A friend questioned the horizon, the angles and facial features, etc, but failed to see the captured delight of child and parents.
I personally would rather see a technically flawed but emotive picture than a technically strong one. Wih photoshop anyway, almost any fix is possible.
I was just thinking what you all make about badly taken ‘abstract’ photography? Theres no emotions, per se, in it, and some were horribly taken, but I’ve seen some praised that I couldn’t make head nor tail of. Is there too wide a wide an artistic licence now?
Don’t think there can be such a thing as too wide an artistic license. If someone is producing an image that they saw in their head then they are probably going to be happy with it. Even if no-one else likes it, it is still an accomplishment for that person. A lot of the time people take pictures with other peoples reactions in mind. I’ve seen a few people on here state that they should be their own harshest critic and that is something I would very much believe in. Especially when you talk of the Abstract section, these images tend to prtray emotions or tell story’s that are not instantly accessible to other people and may not even be grasped by other people at all but if you are happy with it then it has artistic value to you.
Of course it is great to get praise or acceptance from other people but at the end of the day an image that you created and like is nothing less than that even if all 1500 members (or whatever it at now) on this site say that they don’t like it or its not their cup of tea or whatever.
Brian
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
