Looking for critiques

[David H. Bebbington]

How could any "critique" be better than any another??

I in turn am stunned to read comments like this. To anyone who has ever been involved in passing opinions on others' work, there can be no doubt whatsoever about the answer to this question - a good critique is one that helps the author of a work (whether a photograph or not) to move along the road towards what the AUTHOR wants to achieve. A bad critique (of which there are more examples in photography than any other field I know, because for some reason in photography there are many amateurs in influential positions) is one in which the work is measured against the CRITIC's aspirations and opinions (which are certain not to be the same as the author's and may be diametrically opposite) and ridiculed for not meeting these (which the work was never meant to do in the first place). The most egregious example of this attitude is the archetypal camera club judge, others include, for example, news photographers sneering at art images, art photographers decrying professional illustrative work, etc.

Regards,

David

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

Good morning Alan,

I took a look at your website, and the APUG Gallery images. Nice to see someone with a strong illustration and design background getting into large format. Other than your Polaroid works (which I also do), the images of Duane stood out to me. I think if you put your drawing and illustration approach to your large format photography, then you should be getting quite a few interesting images. Usually after you have many images, you might be able to pick out a trend or style of your work. At an early stage, it can often be more about process, technique, or technical details than about composition or success of intent.

In the US, there is National Portfolio Day, a multiple city tour of the top thirty or so schools of art in North America. I went to that numerous times, watching others get critiqued and getting some of my work reviewed. When I heard the same comments from at least three reviewers about the same work, then I would consider altering, changing, or replacing that in my portfolio. In a way this also relates back to a body, or volume, of work; when you get more images you will be able to compare them to each other and might end up with a direction. That direction might just become apparent to you through this process of creating images, then reviewing them yourself later.

Your mention of Avedon is interesting. He did quite a variety of work, though sometimes is remembered for his stark evenly lit head on symmetrical portraits. It is tougher to pull off an interesting symmetrical image than an obviously asymmetrical image. Images that are close to symmetrical and not obviously asymmetrical can sometimes appear to some viewers to be somewhat unsettling. You know illustration, so you know composition types; those approaches can also work in portraiture.

Anyway, I am only one voice, so hopefully many more will provide some comments. The only suggestion I have for you now is to do more images, then review and compare to what you have already done.

Ciao!

Gordon

 

[Ed Sukach]

- a good critique is one that helps the author of a work (whether a photograph or not) to move along the road towards what the AUTHOR wants to achieve."

I've seen this answer before... and I appreciate the thought behind the philosophy.

However .. there is a necessary assumption that the critic does have an idea of "what the author (the one critiqued) WANTS to achieve." How CAN the critic know? Is there the necessity of an in-depth interview with the photographer before the critiquing process can begin?

For this to "fit", the photographer MUST have a well-defined "goal". Not that this is in itself a "bad" thing, but I don't think is should be THE supreme consideration of the "goodness" of a photograph.

I can choose to make a photograph of a Pipe (smoker's), in homage (could happen) of Magritte's "Ceci n'est pas une pipe". That is my intent. Perfectly (for the sake of argument) exposed, color balanced, printed --- and - a "good" critique would be ... ? Something like, "Great photograph!!" - You have achieved your goal!" ?

On a more basic level .. Is it necessary to have a well-defined, conscious intent" in the first place? Is it not possible to produce an outstandingly beautiful photograph "accidentally"?

I agree with the photographer who said, "Thirty percent of the world's greatest photographs are the results of fortunate accidents."

I don't want this to be misinterpreted - it is certainly noble to try to help. Unfortunately, far too many critiques are essentially an accounting of all the ciritic's perceived faults in a photograph, and far too few attempts of - say - suggesting gentle modifications to the photographer's vision - emphasis suggesting... wiithout taking the chance of destroying the critique-ee's image of self-worth.

The worst critiques are those intended to "beat down the newbies" in a paraniod attempt at the critic's self preservation - or, closely related, lifiting the critic's status still higher at someone else's expense.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

... How CAN the critic know? ...

I would suggest - by asking (in a face-to-face situation). If a critic has to work blind (which is the case, more or less, with pictures posted on a website), then it is necessary to make some assumptions, which should be stated clearly (e.g. "You seem to be aiming at X (but please tell me if I'm wrong). On this basis, you might like to consider A, B and C. I feel D and E have worked in this picture, but F hasn't," etc.).
I think there's quite a difference between this approach and the apochryphal camera-club judge approach where the said judge takes one look at a picture and says "The photographer is obviously trying to do A. Everyone knows that the right way to do A is B, C and D." and then goes on to either openly state or imply that because the photographer has not conformed to the judge's prejudices, his/her work is a failure.

Regards,

David

 

[Roger Hicks]

I would suggest - by asking
David

Quite. Otherwise, it's a bit like trying to answer the question, "How should I cook?" Do you like spicy food or bland? How do you feel about olive oil? Garlic? Onions? Barbecues?

Any attempt at a critique without knowing the photographer's hopes, ambitions, plans, intentions, etc., can only be the critic saying "Well, I like this..." or the camera club judge pronouncing, as you say, "He was clearly trying to do this, and the only way to to this is..."

Increasingly I suspect that the purpose of a critique is to help the photographer clarify his or her goals or ambitions, questions to which he or she already knows the answer but has not analyzed sufficiently to realize this. That was why I wrote the critiques module I did in the Photo School, and why I suggested it. This offended Jorge for some reason -- he seemed to be upset that I should suggest that anyone might care to read something free, by someone with experience of giving critiques -- but I stand by it.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

 

[Ed Sukach]

I would suggest - by asking (in a face-to-face situation). If a critic has to work blind (which is the case, more or less, with pictures posted on a website), then it is necessary to make some assumptions, which should be stated clearly (e.g. "You seem to be aiming at X (but please tell me if I'm wrong). On this basis, you might like to consider A, B and C. I feel D and E have worked in this picture, but E hasn't," etc.)

I agree. We in accord here (hidden conditioned response here - I am now the proud owner of a new (!!) Honda Accord).

I'll only comment of the inherent folly of "assuming" anything. My assumptions have, when weighted by the severity of the error, been disastrous. Enough so that the potential consequences of future assumptions are NOT worth the risk.

One thing I have learned in teaching photography: The neophyte is invariably FAR too severely critical of their own work. I have never yet met a student where I haven't had to say, "What?? This photograph (image) is `no good'? The energy, the emotion expressed in it is wonderful!! Let's enlarge this one to 11" x 14", mat and frame it. Definitely in our next exhibition."

I really don't critique photographs - at least not in the empirical sense of "critiquing". If I can provide, or add something to an inspiration ... if I can add to the joy in photography ... I will.

Am I afraid of offending someone? Quite frankly, yes, I am. More often than not that "offending" is only another name for having a negative effect on their self-image. It has proven to drive many wonderfully gifted artists away from their art altogether. How can we, in good conscience justify that? By saying "I was only trying to help", or "They didn't have the right stuff, anyway"? And said over their bleeding artistic bodies?

My advice: Keep going. Your work may be "odd". It may not garner critical acclaim. Persevere ... polish it! Strive for work that is "good" in YOUR OWN EYES - no one else really matters.

You just may give the art world an inestimable gift... a whole new school of art.

 

[Ed Sukach]

Hmmm....

The work is the 'tree' the photographer is trying to grow.

Critiquing should be like the watering -

It should be nurturous ... fertilizing and encouraging future growth. Some - most - is acidic ... on the idea that if - and only if - the work, and photographer, survives are they worthy of existence.

Strange image ... but, that is what I am trying to say.

It fits.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The neophyte is invariably FAR too severely critical of their own work. I have never yet met a student where I haven't had to say, "What?? This photograph (image) is `no good'? The energy, the emotion expressed in it is wonderful!! Let's enlarge this one to 11" x 14", mat and frame it. Definitely in our next exhibition."

As a general rule I'd agree but surely you have also met those who think that they have nothing to learn, ever, about technique or aesthetics, and that the only thing that stops National Geographic putting them under immediate contract is a conspiracy of Freemasons or some such.

All I'm saying is that for every 9 people to whom you need to say "Stay at it!" there is one to whom you need to say, "Sorry, National Geographic is unlikely to buy fuzzy snapshots processed at the local mini-lab. Spend some time learning the craft; looking at others' good pictures; and taking more pictures of your own."

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Jorge]

That was why I wrote the critiques module I did in the Photo School, and why I suggested it. This offended Jorge for some reason -- he seemed to be upset that I should suggest that anyone might care to read something free, by someone with experience of giving critiques -- but I stand by it.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

Plueeassee...dont flatter yourself, there is little you can say or do that will "upset" me. I am simply tired of "experts" going on and on about themsleves and failing to answer a simple question. After being proded you wrote to Alan, "well, looks like you can take portraits." Is this the quality of critiques we can expect from the exalted Hicks school of photography?.....well jeez...thanks but no thanks.

I am sure Alan did not want a 5 paragraph critique, but a few simple pointers, even your so called critique was useless, so please do us all a favor and stop being the expert in all things photographic, you are simply not....

 

[Jorge]

I will flatter you by responding to your sniping and complaining

LOL....here once again you are flattering yourself, seems you cannot stop huh? For you to flatter me I would have to give a rat's ass about what you have to say...trust me, I dont!.

First, when was the last time you tried to say something helpful instead of attacking someone else?

Well, if you had read carefully, in this thread. Unlike you I tried to offer what little help and encouragement I could to Alan, and I managed to do that without trying to sell my "school" or pretending to be an "expert". Imagine that, help for the sake of help...a rare concept for you I guess.

So far today I've had three letters from people who have found my advice helpful. Plus one attack: your customary whinge.

Am I supposed to be impressed by this? LOL....I get them every week from people whom I have helped, the difference is I am glad to do it and have no need to advertise it. So once again you are nothing special.....

Where I have some knowledge, I try to share it.

You mean like you "shared" your critique, where instead of writing a simple adivce you went on and on about you and how critiques should not be done unless they are done at the Hicks photo shcool?.....do us all a favor and spare us your wisdom, I am sure we can manage without it.

Yes, I've had 50-odd books published. Yes, I have a weekly column in one of the better-regarded magazines. Yes, I've written for a lot of other magazines. I am not completely ignorant on the subject of photography, and I get paid for not being completely ignorant. If this makes you jealous, it's your problem. But why not do something constructive -- such as setting up a web-site with a lot of free information -- instead of attacking someone who actually does things?

Like I said before, never seen one of your books. Given that I lived in the US for 24 years, visited the books store about twice or 3 times a week and never not only saw one of your books, but if I saw it it did not stick with me....seems to me there is not much to be jealous about. As to a free web site, why dont you work for free bubba? Why dont you give us the "benefit" of your "school" for free?....

Why have you a problem with free advice?

I have no problem with free advice, when it is so, not when it is a thinly diguised self promotion offered as advice. Go back on this thread and tell us where your "advice" was useful and feeley given? You did not offer a "critique" until I goaded you into it, and even so it was an incoherent useless pìece of advice....I sure hope you wrote your books better than you did that "critique".

 

[Ed Sukach]

As a general rule I'd agree but surely you have also met those who think that they have nothing to learn, ever, about technique or aesthetics, ...

Possibly I am too well insulated from the "Arts" community, but no, I never have met anyone who HONESTLY believed that. I have encountered those who have lied about it ... but as always, lies are really transparent.

I have met posturing blowhards and simply put, phonies (to the extent of actually BRIBING juried show judges) -- but NONE have been neophytes - those just starting out in photography. Come to think of it ... those who do that have been the authors of "bad" critiques.

Come to think of it ... One of the most memorable - and encouraging influences in my photography WAS, in fact, a photographer who did a great deal of work for National Geographic. He was the last one in the world I'd expect to beat down a beginner.

 

[Donald Miller]

Jorge,

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.