- This topic is empty.
When it comes to Pictures are we too critical?
-
These periodic threads questioning the nature of critique and comment are useful indicators of the mood of the site-
and at the moment, the mood seems to be in favour of less critique and more flicker type fan clubs-I don’t really mind, I’ve lost the taste for it anyway, and I’ve found myself repeating myself a lot.
There is one qualifier though, which has been suggested numerous times in the past-
perhaps a section could be fenced off where people could post pictures without the expectation of critical comment,
something like the lo-fi section, where people lobbied for that status.However, that section isn’t particularly busy at the best of times,
and the people who were most vociferous in their lobbying have largely disappeared.I know this isn’t a direct reply to the op’s proposition,
but then neither have the comments on many of the preceding posts-I don’t think it’s possible to be too critical,
but just like babies, people become attached to their pictures,
and don’t like to hear anything except how beautiful they are-Regarding Graham’s opening gambit
“the essence of what makes a good photo can be lost by over analysing it”
I don’t think that’s the case at all-
if it actually is a good photo, then the “essence” cannot be lost by careful analysis-
and it should even survive over analysis, whatever that is- perhaps misplaced or incorrect analysis-
in that case, the parent of that picture is within their rights to point out the errors,
and should do so- I know I’ve done it in the past-I think that if people need to hear googoo gaga noises, they should go to flicker,
where posting a pic to enough ‘post one, wet yourself over five more’ groups will get you all the saccharine you need-And if they do decide to post in the critique section, they should do so in the expectation that that’s what they might get-
j
Never thought I’d say this but thank God for the voice of sanity. Superbly put Mr Burns. If I had a twirling star to award you, I would certainly do so.
Alan.
I’ve resigned to more or less just giving people a stamp of approval if I like what they have presented… and if someone doesn’t like that then they are free to stuff it wherever they so choose.
Too much emphasis on people breaking their balls to come up with supposedly ‘constructive’ comments & critisicm. Possibly a reason I just can’t be arsed anymore. I’d rather someone leave a polite “Nice Shot” than say nothing in fear of being classed ‘Flickrish’.
For me a “Nice shot” on PI doesn’t marry up with a “Nice shot” on Flickr because for the most part PI is more of a friendly community where a lot of us are somewhat more familiar with each other, whereas on Flickr Jóse from Argentina likes the pic of your arse.
Besides…. how can you complain about something that you getting for nothing? “Nice shot… is that all you have to say you lazy f-ck?”.
Depending on what skill level you’re at… a pat on the back is sometimes all it takes to confirm that you’re heading in the right direction.
I’ve probably moaned about the “nice shot” syndrome in the past… but the more I think about it, and as time passes, comes a small amount of realisation and sense.
Are we too critical… for the most part the answer is ‘no’. If I was too critical I’d post on every shot that I thought was drab, boring or un-original and tell them as much… but I don’t.
J
“Nice shot” on Flickr = Ooooooo pretty colours ( most of the time )
“Nice shot” on PI = Well done mate, looks good.I’m not the kinda person who posts shot for some sort of ego massage nor do I post shot
expecting every tiny flaw to be highlighted.What I have noticed at times though ( and I do mean at times ) is that some folks on here don’t look
as whole photograph, they simply the rule of thirds has been broken or the lack or detail in the shadow.Here’s what I’m trying to say in a nutshell ( apologies in advance to all take offence ). In every hobby / passion / career whether it be photography, trainspotting or stamp collecting there will be those people who are only interested ( or skilled ) at the technical aspects. They lack a certain degree of flare or passion for what they are doing. They enjoy the numbers of the thing and not the essence of what it really is. I have nothing against these people. They generally know a hell of a lot more than me and can be very helpful at times. They sometimes can’t see the beauty of a shot behind the numbers and rules. that’s all.
Since I started this thread I have less and less to comment on.
Everybodies post seems to make sence and all seem to be
playing the same tune.I would have to agree with NFL with what he says and I find myself
also posting less and less in the Critique’s unless there is something
which really catches my eye.But is that fair to the guys and gals who have just bought their first
DSLR and are good to go? they will be looking at the experienced members for
hints, tios, guidance. I know it is a forum with no obligations other than
etiquitte to critique of dispense advice but everyone here seems to be
100% straight up goot PI citizens and its seems to be a happy little house we have going
(at the moment).Another question to answer I suppose.
I like the idea of posting a pic with no longing for critique so I added a thread
to get people to post their first pic, details here.https://www.photographyireland.net/viewtopic.php?t=25404
Just to promote the idea of a thread to browse other people work but with a theme
similar to what jb7 mentioned.Passionate replies by all so far.
[/url]
Since this thread has started a photo of mine was used on a website to illustrate an article on the rugby match today between Munster and Sale. I have been geting loads of praise for the shot, which was taken two years ago from the back of the terraces at the corresponding fixture. What’s interesting about it is that the image itself is badly exposed, suffers from camera shake, noise and movement blur and would be laughed at by most of the people here. For the readers of the article it is an image of a defining and memorable moment in the game and they don’t care about all it’s technical flaws.
Who cares whether on not it works technically as long as it works.
Who cares whether on not it works technically as long as it works
Well.. if it was a terribly crooked horizon or copious amounts of very noticeably dust spots then I’d care because these two things spoil images for me.
Other people might insist that everything be well focused & sharp… depending on the type of shot it might not necessarily bother me.
Things like coverging verticals, distortion & perspective…. might bug someone who say might be interested in architecture.
From what I have heard – Blown highlights along with the choice of colour you decide to mount your photographs on, might irritate an IPF judge.
I suppose everyone is entitled to their opinion… and nothing works for everyone.
J
There seems to be quite a few who might be content with
‘That’s grand’
‘that’s good enough’
‘you’d easily get away with that’
‘sure nobody would know the difference’
‘a blind man on a galloping horse mightn’t ever spot that’However, since this is a Photography site,
and not really another special interest site,
I hope nobody minds if I sometimes make a comment based on the photographic aspects of a picture-If ever I write anything like the comments above,
you can be quite sure I’m taking the piss,
and telling somebody what they quite obviously want to hear-Different pictures will have different audiences,
and I would imagine the average rugby fan would be hard pressed to tell the difference between a photograph and the actual event,
and instead, would be hugely critical of the play and the performances of everyone involved, from the coach down to the groundsman.If you’re content with taking your critique from people who are hugely ignorant of photography,
then there are plenty other places to post pictures-j
Whaddya think of
‘if thine eyes offend thee, pluck them out’
for my new sig?‘That’s grand’
‘that’s good enough’
‘you’d easily get away with that’
‘sure nobody would know the difference’
‘a blind man on a galloping horse mightn’t ever spot that’That’s a good list Joseph… any chance you could make up 5 more so we’d have 10 and could start a thread in the General Doss Chat place?
J
nfl-fan wrote:
‘That’s grand’
‘that’s good enough’
‘you’d easily get away with that’
‘sure nobody would know the difference’
‘a blind man on a galloping horse mightn’t ever spot that’That’s a good list Joseph… any chance you could make up 5 more so we’d have 10 and could start a thread in the General Doss Chat place?
Jyummy
delicious
oooooojb7 wrote:
If you’re content with taking your critique from people who are hugely ignorant of photography,
then there are plenty other places to post pictures-Isn’t that a bit like saying the movie is the biggest box office success of the year, but the critics hated it?
I visit this site to improve my photography and to learn where improvements can be made.
Does an image need to be technically perfect to work?Are the critics always right? Do I need to listen to them?
Maybe not always, but most of the time yes, if I want to improve my photography.I guess the point I was making in my previous post was that an image the I would now consign to the recycle bin has an audience that appreciates it for other than it’s technical qualities – go figure.
jb7 wrote:
I would imagine the average rugby fan would be hard pressed to tell the difference between a photograph and the actual event,
That seems to be a well reasoned insight.
Perhaps the statement about the rugby fan was a bit of a sweeping generalization,
but it certainly wouldn’t be the first to be posted in this thread.If you think that the average punter, for whatever special interest group, is more interested in the medium of photography
than the message it conveys, then I think that’s seriously misguided.Publishers of photographs know picture of Brad and Angelina will sell copies-
do you think they care about the quality?A 1/100 sec snapshot of Brian Cowen looking at his shoes will be used to illustrate a story saying that he’s exhausted already-
A picture of a starlet getting out of a car will have more value if the knickers are showing-
the snapper and the starlet know that-People involved in the making and publishing and distribution of photographs
in general
have a more sophisticated view of the medium than those who consume it.And movie makers know their audience too,
and a big hit is a big hit no matter what the critics say.Perhaps that’s less disagreeable, at the cost of having to spell it out.
Comments passed on this site, I’ll repeat myself here, are for the most part just that- comments-
If anyone is interested in finding out more about critique, and critical thinking
a good start might be ‘How to Read a Novel – A Users Guide’ by John Sutherland- among others.Are the critics right?
of course not- but if you can choose to ignore them, and listen to whoever makes you happy instead-your choice-
j
I guess I was reading this thread as being one about photographers in general being too critical of photographs and perhaps not enjoying the image for what it is rather than a commentary on the critique style of this site. Based on this assumption then most special interest groups will not see the major flaws in an image and as this is the audience for the image then I say let them enjoy it.
As a photographer then I will be critical and maybe this spoils some of the enjoyment of the image for what it is. I keep seeing the flare or the blown highlights or whatever and not taking notice of the good things in the shot.
This site, as a photography forum should be critical, in a constructive way and if the thread is about the quality of the critique on this site then I think the critique usually takes the percieved intention of the images author into account (perhaps sub-conciously) when reviewing. For example if someone says I took this great shot yesterday, here it is the you get a whole pile of “great shot” etc but if someone says I like this shot but something is not quite working for me then they usually get some very constructive suggestions outlining the good and the areas for improvement in an image.
I’m sure I will have a lot more to say on the subject – but got to rush as I have to head for Thomond Park to join the rest of the great unwashed at a rugby match.
Photographers will always be critical of other peoples photographs,
just as myself as a horse rider will be more critical of other peoples horseriding,
and so it goes with all hobbies / activities.But with photographs sometimes an image works even if it is not technically
right. If the photo as a whole looks nice then that is OK.Here is an example:
I was trying to get an action shot of my horse, but it went badly wrong and is
terribly blurred, but I really like the image and am going to put it up on my wall.
I don’t care that it is technically wrong because I like it.
You can never please all people all of the time – what is a good photo to
someone will be pants to someone else. But isn’t it good that we don’t all
take and like the same photos, as life would be pretty boring.If someone posts a photo in the critique section, then they are obviously
going to get critiqued, but as long as the comments are constructive, then
that is the best way to learn how to take better photos.Mitch
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
