Is Critique A Requirement to Learning Photography?

[Sirius Glass]

There is a kind of second-half to the question of critiques, which is: Do you have, or have you had, a mentor in photography or art?

Yes, I learned a lot from my father's camera club. Then over time they got into really petty squabbles and I stopped attending.

 

[dpurdy]

When I was young and just learning to print, a very trusted and accomplished photographer friend gave me an un-asked for opinion on a print I was working on. He said "you are printing too dark but that is good. Beginners who print too dark become good printers. Beginners who print too light don't." 30 years later I still like that critique.

I only care for critique from people who can see positives along with the negatives. If I show you my work it is because there is something about it that is successful for me and I want to see if that comes across.

I show my spouse my work on a rare occasion and if she likes it I figure it is too cliche'. There are a couple of people in my life who's opinion I value, however I usually already know what I think of my work.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

The "camera club" stories are amusing. I feel fortunate to have had a good experience with one. Possibly just the right mix of people, good leadership, and a general disdain for the sort of regimental ideas of the PSA. (Impact! Impact! Impact!)

I have visited some others though, which after a visit or two, I knew would not be my cup of tea. In a general sense, "clubs" have a tendency to be all about clubiness: charters, bylaws, officers, committees, and the like.

 

[blockend]

The problem with expecting objective feedback on a public forum, is no one can agree what a good photograph is. They can tell you if something is sharp or lacks contrast or the subject is too far away, but those things have very little to do with whether the photograph has quality.

For example I cannot sing the praises of Bertien van Manen too highly: http://blakeandrews.blogspot.com/2016/03/q-with-bertien-van-manen.html The same goes for Stephen Gill: Dead Link Removed I can guarantee that the qualities of both those excellent photographers will go over most people's heads, and can name numerous equally exceptional photographers whose work is complete lost on popular taste. I've looked at photographers of every genre for as long as I've been taking pictures, which is more than 40 years, and can cite much better known photographers who are more widely admired, and a substantial proportion of respondents will say meh and a greater number will claim they're complete junk. Not all opinions are born equal but everybody has one.

 

[Bob Carnie]

There is a kind of second-half to the question of critiques, which is: Do you have, or have you had, a mentor in photography or art?

I think a mentor is absolutely essential , and to answer your original question , constructive critiques are a valuable exercise... but I think nothing is as important as actually hanging ones work and seeing how a large
cross-section of people evaluate it.

 

[BrianShaw]

Fotgot to quote: “The problem with expecting objective feedback on a public forum, is no one can agree what a good photograph is. ”

If I may... often it seems the only way to get consistent critique is to only ask a single critic. That applies to all things being critiqued including topics where there are well-established standards.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

The problem with expecting objective feedback on a public forum, is no one can agree what a good photograph is.

I agree.

Which is why useful critique ought to begin with the objectives and goals of the photographer, without which only opinion exists. Critique is not about opinions per se, it is about helping the photographer advance their own personal vision. Ergo, a "good photograph" is one which advances the creator's ideas.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

Another thought about "public opinion."

It's not always worth anything. If Joe is writing a scholarly work on an obscure (but important) economist, the public's opinion will be close to useless. Many photographic pursuits are likewise specialized, academic, arcane, unusual, or narrowly focused in ways that would not capture public interest sufficiently wide to have meaning. Maybe a better example than writing would be film making. The public is interested in Marvel Superheroes, not "art films" made in Spain, or in a garage in Los Angeles. Exhibiting your work is still important, but the audience of interest might be the 1 unique visitor not so much the general public.

And from another angle, publican opinion can be downright dangerous to a photographer who is out on some narrow limb, let's say. A crushing public opinion could easily sew doubt where none is really due.

 

[eddie]

... but I think nothing is as important as actually hanging ones work and seeing how a large cross-section of people evaluate it.

I agree. As someone who sells my work, the reaction of the public is important. The idea that non-photographers are unqualified to form an opinion on our work is foolish. When I'm in my booth, non-photographers will talk about color and composition. Photographers will talk about f-stops and equipment. I'll take the general public any day.

 

[blockend]

If I may... often it seems the only way to get consistent critique is to only ask a single critic. That applies to all things being critiqued including topics where there are well-established standards.

The most useful thing anyone can learn is how to curate their work, but that has nothing to do with technique. I have a high tolerance of flare, fogging, colour imbalance, unusual flatness or contrast, lack of focus and shortcomings a typical camera club judge would have his red pen all over, but have no tolerance to visual cliché of any kind. Someone expecting another nodding dog to appraise their work would hate me, on the other hand a photographer who was trying to push him/herself would find an advocate even if the work didn't always come off. My biases are against more work to add to the mountain of identikit stuff already out there. Most critics want to confirm the value of existing memes.

edit: I should add that all my opinions are based on an individual's love of the photographic medium and the desire to build a body of work that reflects their vision. That's the complete opposite to commercial work where success is measured in how well an image conforms to popular taste, and thus financial reward. There's some interesting commercial work that breaks boundaries, but it usually comes down to a visually literate art director who gives the photographer the freedom to inform, rather than conform to pre-existing ideas.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

Body of Work

This is another important consideration in good critique. A single photo is a bit like examining a single sentence from a novel. A strong critique gets stronger when a body of work is evaluated. From this a progression can be seen. From this a style can emerge. And from this a bigger message or theme can be seen.

 

[eddie]

And from another angle, publican opinion can be downright dangerous to a photographer who is out on some narrow limb, let's say. A crushing public opinion could easily sew doubt where none is really due.

If the photographers believe in the work they're doing, a few negative opinions shouldn't sway them. I've been getting a lot of jury rejections of my cliché verres. It also doesn't sell as well as my more traditional hand-painted work. Still, the work is something I believe in, so I move forward. If art is something to which your work aspires, you need patience and a thick skin.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Body of Work

This is another important consideration in good critique. A single photo is a bit like examining a single sentence from a novel. A strong critique gets stronger when a body of work is evaluated. From this a progression can be seen. From this a style can emerge. And from this a bigger message or theme can be seen.

A mature body of work , as Sasha Wolf would say is what I strive for.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

I agree. As someone who sells my work, the reaction of the public is important. The idea that non-photographers are unqualified to form an opinion on our work is foolish. When I'm in my booth, non-photographers will talk about color and composition. Photographers will talk about f-stops and equipment. I'll take the general public any day.

Great example. In this kind of circumstance, the critique should be all about the general public. And experts from galleries who sell to the public would be very likely offering good critique. As would any potential buyer. Anything other than a focus on public tastes and desires would be somewhat less useful.

I was involved once in a formal discussion with a group of co-op artists discussing what sells and what stays behind, and the answers were very specific, very focused and easy to understand. Although they weren't there to critique anyone's work, it could have easily been a critique for someone trying to get into that space of selling to the public.

 

[Bob Carnie]

If the photographers believe in the work they're doing, a few negative opinions shouldn't sway them. I've been getting a lot of jury rejections of my cliché verres. It also doesn't sell as well as my more traditional hand-painted work. Still, the work is something I believe in, so I move forward. If art is something to which your work aspires, you need patience and a thick skin.

Thick skin is important, as many will try to knock you down, for reasons unknown it seems to be our nature.

 

[eddie]

Body of Work

A strong critique gets stronger when a body of work is evaluated.

Agreed, but I always work in series.

 

[BrianShaw]

Body of Work

This is another important consideration in good critique. A single photo is a bit like examining a single sentence from a novel. A strong critique gets stronger when a body of work is evaluated. From this a progression can be seen. From this a style can emerge. And from this a bigger message or theme can be seen.

I would contend that this is the only real application of critique beyond technical and compositional assessment.

 

[BrianShaw]

Thick skin is important, as many will try to knock you down, for reasons unknown it seems to be our nature.

Understatement!

 

[ReginaldSMith]

Thought on Judging.

I don't believe in it. I think the whole PSA thing leads to a kind of conformity that is very obvious. I think the idea of competition is useful only in a very narrow way in perhaps a few genres. I do believe in participating in exhibitions as a very vital part of the art and craft, but the "judged" results are not meaningful beyond the judge.

Being in exhibitions confers a commitment on one's part to pursue the vision or goal. It's standing up and behind your work and builds confidence.

 

[faberryman]

Someone is always judging. Be it the gallery owner deciding whether to represent a photographer or give the photographer a show, or the public viewing the show, or the curator of a group show, or the mentor, or the photographer himself.

 

[eddie]

... the "judged" results are not meaningful beyond the judge.

They're meaningful if you want your work to be selected. Jurying is necessary to ensure that the exhibit is of high quality. In fact, if I see a call for entries listing the juror(s), I'll search out the juror(s) work, which will give me an idea of the kind of images they like.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

Someone is always judging. Be it the gallery owner deciding whether to represent a photographer or give the photographer a show, or the public viewing the show, or the curator of a group show, or the mentor, or the photographer himself.

True of course.

In my previous mentions, I was using "judging" in the sense of handing out ribbons and awards to winners. And of course I only meant "my opinion."

 

[Bill Burk]

I agree a bit about a body of work, one photo or a few random unrelated photos will be hard to offer advice against.

A series of three or more which represent your style and direction would be better as a basis for discussion.

You could even offer three different prints of the same shot and ask which is the preferred... Bob Carnie and I talk about how we'll typically do a few prints in a session and then pick from them. You could offer us the same choice.

 

[faberryman]

True of course. In my previous mentions, I was using "judging" in the sense of handing out ribbons and awards to winners. And of course I only meant "my opinion."

I only see ribbons and awards at camera clubs or the state fair, places that reward the happy accident rather than the body of work.

 

[BrianShaw]

Judges, critics, mentors, patrons, buyers, or self... at some point one needs to decide who the “consumer“ of our photography is... which can be very circumstantial... or even a complex multi-variate problem to solve.