Can I have a critique please?

[Pioneer]

You've got a lot of good advice here, and kudos to you for asking for honest feedback. Most people's egos can't stand real critique but it is the fastest way to grow, IMHO. Very painful, but effective.

Anyway, there are technical issues that people have covered, e.g. under-exposure. That's easy to fix because it's mere craft, i.e. learning how to accurately measure the light to get the result you want is a mechanical process that anyone can learn, it requires no originality or synthesis on your part. You get a light meter, you learn what the film can and cannot record and you learn to make good exposures. For this I think a digital camera is an excellent tool because of the instant feedback; getting a roll of variably bad images back a week or month later will teach you very little. Get a cheap old DSLR, put it in M mode, do your metering and make an exposure. If it's wrong, learn why it was wrong and don't make that mistake again. You should be able to learn this very quickly, though you'll probably have the occasional slip-up every now and then on a difficult scene.

Once you've got better control of your materials, you need an understanding of light. This one is harder, but not real hard because you can still get it all from textbooks. You need to know about how light provides shape, texture, contrast, subtlety or drama. You need to know about the differences between hard light, soft light, specular light, ambient light, collimated light, etc... both the technical differences in terms of how the light is propagating and how to either make or find that kind of light but more importantly, why and when to use the different kinds of light to (de)emphasise various aspects of the physical items in your scene. How is the light different on a clear or cloudy day? Why is the golden hour pretty? Lots and lots of concepts to soak up here, most of which interact interestingly with the film's behaviour, but it's all well-understood and not particularly difficult to apply. You have much semi-technical reading ahead of you here, and there is a huge amount of good information and advice on the internet as to how to analyse and control light. It's a couple years of learning and diligent experience trying out the concepts for yourself but again, anyone can do this part after enough practice.

The hardest part, and the most important thing that I think you're missing here, is the critical step between taking and making a photograph, the process of synthesising a new artefact (the photograph) from the real world. You've shown us a bunch of pictures with things in them, but those things don't mean anything to us as viewers even if they mean something to you. A good photograph is IMHO not a record of the world, it's a story or an illustration of a concept, using bits of the world as brush strokes. This is not something you can learn from a textbook, but you can absorb a fair bit of it by looking at the best of other people's work. When you see an image that speaks to you, think very carefully about why it does so; is it the lighting, the subject, some emotion, does it represent something that you see in yourself? By looking at shitloads of excellent photography, you can learn a lot and can begin to emulate, but more importantly, you need a clear concept in mind before you even think about picking up the camera, otherwise you end up with mere pictures of stuff.

Photography requires you to have skill in the following layers, each layer being dependent on mastery of the previous:
- craft, i.e. an understanding of how your materials respond,
- managing and synthesising light,
- arranging stuff in the frame to make a composition, and
- synthesising an artwork, i.e. getting a concept or story out of your head and into the photograph.

If you want brutally honest, you haven't even started on any of those but that's OK because you're a self-acknowledged beginner. It's time to start thinking about those concepts, and finding out exactly what it is that you don't yet know.

Go shoot 10,000 individual and carefully-considered photographs. Not 10,000 exposures, but 10,000 different compositions - by that time you should have mastered the first three steps. The last one takes forever.

Thank you Polyglot. I can't speak for the OP but I found this incredibly useful for myself.

 

[trythis]

I disagree that silence is critical, it just means the viewer hasn't the skills, nerve, desire or eneryy to say positive or negative. Criticism is also not negative in most situations. If one doesn't want to be criticised they do not want to improve or do not care about audience response. Making something artistic or anything really without wanting some form of reward is kind of a lie and if one ever wants to be recognized by their peers, one must improve. Getting a worthless compliment makes me feel worse than honest berating when it comes to something I care about doing.

I can't stand it when people are falsely kind about art criticism it wastes the artist's time. Criticism of the person making the word is worthless of course.

sent from phone. excuse my typing.

 

[LifeIn35mm]

You've got a lot of good advice here, and kudos to you for asking for honest feedback. Most people's egos can't stand real critique but it is the fastest way to grow, IMHO. Very painful, but effective.

Anyway, there are technical issues that people have covered, e.g. under-exposure. That's easy to fix because it's mere craft, i.e. learning how to accurately measure the light to get the result you want is a mechanical process that anyone can learn, it requires no originality or synthesis on your part. You get a light meter, you learn what the film can and cannot record and you learn to make good exposures. For this I think a digital camera is an excellent tool because of the instant feedback; getting a roll of variably bad images back a week or month later will teach you very little. Get a cheap old DSLR, put it in M mode, do your metering and make an exposure. If it's wrong, learn why it was wrong and don't make that mistake again. You should be able to learn this very quickly, though you'll probably have the occasional slip-up every now and then on a difficult scene.

Once you've got better control of your materials, you need an understanding of light. This one is harder, but not real hard because you can still get it all from textbooks. You need to know about how light provides shape, texture, contrast, subtlety or drama. You need to know about the differences between hard light, soft light, specular light, ambient light, collimated light, etc... both the technical differences in terms of how the light is propagating and how to either make or find that kind of light but more importantly, why and when to use the different kinds of light to (de)emphasise various aspects of the physical items in your scene. How is the light different on a clear or cloudy day? Why is the golden hour pretty? Lots and lots of concepts to soak up here, most of which interact interestingly with the film's behaviour, but it's all well-understood and not particularly difficult to apply. You have much semi-technical reading ahead of you here, and there is a huge amount of good information and advice on the internet as to how to analyse and control light. It's a couple years of learning and diligent experience trying out the concepts for yourself but again, anyone can do this part after enough practice.

The hardest part, and the most important thing that I think you're missing here, is the critical step between taking and making a photograph, the process of synthesising a new artefact (the photograph) from the real world. You've shown us a bunch of pictures with things in them, but those things don't mean anything to us as viewers even if they mean something to you. A good photograph is IMHO not a record of the world, it's a story or an illustration of a concept, using bits of the world as brush strokes. This is not something you can learn from a textbook, but you can absorb a fair bit of it by looking at the best of other people's work. When you see an image that speaks to you, think very carefully about why it does so; is it the lighting, the subject, some emotion, does it represent something that you see in yourself? By looking at shitloads of excellent photography, you can learn a lot and can begin to emulate, but more importantly, you need a clear concept in mind before you even think about picking up the camera, otherwise you end up with mere pictures of stuff.

Photography requires you to have skill in the following layers, each layer being dependent on mastery of the previous:
- craft, i.e. an understanding of how your materials respond,
- managing and synthesising light,
- arranging stuff in the frame to make a composition, and
- synthesising an artwork, i.e. getting a concept or story out of your head and into the photograph.

If you want brutally honest, you haven't even started on any of those but that's OK because you're a self-acknowledged beginner. It's time to start thinking about those concepts, and finding out exactly what it is that you don't yet know.

Go shoot 10,000 individual and carefully-considered photographs. Not 10,000 exposures, but 10,000 different compositions - by that time you should have mastered the first three steps. The last one takes forever.

Great advice. I hope that you all continue to give me advise on my future critiques. I just love how on this form others genuinely want to help each other. I was not expecting that I would get this much awesome advice. I will continue to shoot and use all of the great advice I was given. I will study different types of light types and photographers. Again, I hope that you all will continue to help me become a good photographer.

 

[LifeIn35mm]

As an art educator:
I do not like the idea of telling people what you are thinking in front of a critique. The work should stand on its own even if we the audience completely miss your intention. If you front load a critique that way, you will not get true answers.

That was in response to the people requesting more info.

To be blunt as requested: They look like snapshots or pictures taken with the intention of looking artsy without copying other photographers' styles.

Mine look like that a lot too! I teach sculpture, so photography is pretty new to me.
Just keep shooting, you'll get better!

Sorry I only read the first page...no time.

sent from phone. excuse my typing.

My photo teacher actually did critiques the way you recommend to do them. I hope that you find a way to capture that perfect picture!