The Art of Self-Criticism

[Noisegate]

At what point, do you stop focusing on self-criticism and let an image stand on it’s own? I have a very nasty habit of going way overboard in terms of picking my photos a part. When I get that perfect print, I am overjoyed and think to myself that this is by far the greatest photo ever to be captured (at least for me)! Then, slowly and over a period of a day or two, the picture becomes a total piece of sludge. I’m not sure how to make this stop at a healthy point in the evaluation process. Then again, perhaps I do stop at the correct point in which the photo turns into sludge. Just curious what others may or may not do when it comes to judging their own work.

Thanks for sharing your wisdom!

 

[jimjm]

I am definitely a perfectionist when it comes to my final prints, and there's nothing wrong with being self-critical about your own. I look at the process of analog photography as a craft, and if I'm not constantly improving my skills and learning, there's not as much satisfaction in it. Sometimes it takes time to look at and "live with" an image before you can fully realize what you want from it, and then how to produce that on the print.

I have some prints that I am perfectly happy with as-is, and don't feel the need to change anything. I enjoy these images for what they are and just like to look at them.

There are others that I feel the need to reprint and I have a gnawing feeling that they just have more potential than I have been able to produce, given my current skills in the darkroom. Reading Bruce Barnbaum's book "The Art of Photography" really helped me to recognize this. When I see what a really skilled printer can do, even with a difficult negative, it makes me eager to improve on some of these techniques.

I like Ansel's analogy that the negative is the score and the print is the performance. It takes a lot of practice to become an accomplished anything, and what would be the point if you were able to churn out perfect prints without any effort?

 

[pdeeh]

I never bother with self-criticism as my photographs are unimprovable

 

[blansky]

I never bother with self-criticism as my photographs are unimprovable

Nirvana.

 

[blansky]

At what point, do you stop focusing on self-criticism andlet an image stand on it’s own? I have avery nasty habit of going way overboard in terms of picking my photos apart. When I get that perfect print, I am overjoyedand think to myself that this is by far the greatest photo ever to be captured(at least for me)! Then, slowly and overa period of a day or two, the picture becomes a total piece of sludge. I’m not sure how to make this stop at ahealthy point in the evaluation process. Then again, perhaps I do stop at the correctpoint in which the photo turns into sludge. Just curious what others may or may not do when it comes to judgingtheir own work.
Thanks for sharing your wisdom!

Don't forget there are 2 issues at play here.

One is the print and the other is the subject matter.

Making a perfect print of a less than great subject is a great exercise in printing but tends to leave a hollow feeling.

A great subject and a less than great print, is better because you can always achieve a better print.

So the goal is obviously both. And we have to be critical to achieve them or else we don't grow.

 

[snapguy]

Quick and dirty

In the news photography business we used to use the saying "quick and dirty." That meant a print good enough for the moment. If you didn't get a photo print done by a certain time you would miss the deadline so you would make as good a print as you could in the time available, and not worry if it is perfect. You can make the perfect print tomorrow. Or 70 years from now.

 

[frank]

Don't forget there are 2 issues at play here.

One is the print and the other is the subject matter.

Making a perfect print of a less than great subject is a great exercise in printing but tends to leave a hollow feeling.

A great subject and a less than great print, is better because you can always achieve a better print.

So the goal is obviously both. And we have to be critical to achieve them or else we don't grow.

But, there is greater accomplishment in an extraordinary print of an ordinary subject, than in an ordinary print of an extraordinary subject. One can rightfully take more credit for the former, no? The extraordinary subject is there through no effort of yours.

 

[Noisegate]

Argh. I just realized my space bar on my keyboard is apparently not working correctly as I have just re-read my original post. Sorry for the "difficult" read. Perhaps I should have been more "critical" in reviewing my original post.

The nattering in my head is related to both composition and print quality....there is always something I could have done better and even though the "original" print/composition is of good quality, the whole thing is ruined because it's not perfect. It goes from "good" to "trash" within 24 hours. I guess I'm just frustrating by my lack of acceptance for anything that is not close to my idea of perfection. Not necessarily a bad thing as long as I continue to push forward.

Thankfully, this thought process does not extend to everything in my life....well, wait....let me think about that....

 

[SuzanneR]

Perfection is overrated.

Sometimes, I find it helps to allow some time between taking a picture, and printing it. A little emotional distance can change your perspective about how you view your own work. After some time, I like the idea of quickly made work prints tacked up on, say a bulletin board in the kitchen or someplace where you can glance at the work over time is another way to allow for an image to work its magic on you without overthinking things.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The extraordinary subject is there through no effort of yours.

Maybe. Going to a picturesque, interesting, or new (to you) area - that in itself may inspire an extraordinary photo. But to observe and discover an extraordinary photo in a common environment you've seen everyday for the last 15 years requires some effort.

 

[Noisegate]

I just realized I can edit my original post....at least now I look a bit more intelligent.

"Overthinking" is my biggest "problem."

 

[dpurdy]

I am an obsessive perfectionist which is different from being self critical. I get tunnel vision with whatever aspect of the printing I am not satisfied with so that is all I can see. I find that after time goes by and different projects have come and gone I can re encounter a print I wasn't happy with before but without the tunnel vision for the problem and I find value in it I couldn't see before.
Dennis

 

[gone]

If its a printed photo, turn it toward the wall for a month or more. The longer the better though, 3 to 6 months is prime. Then you can look at it w/o being all caught up in it. But it's OK to want to get it right. Just like w/ writing: edit, edit, edit!

I often will print several versions of something. That helps. And there was the time I photographed a dead tree in New Mexico for 4 years trying to get the right shot. I never did of course, but I DID get a few keepers that I'm relatively happy with. I have much better versions than this one, but I can't find them right now.

The people at the museum/gallery that was in front of this probably thought I was nuts going out there time and time again w/ different cameras and shooting the same thing all that time.

 

[RobC]

The extraordinary subject is there through no effort of yours.

Not entirely correct. Photographing what is not there, at least to the casual observer, is an art in itself. Learning to see and being able to find and select the subject can be everything in an image and turn the subject into what appears to be an extraordinary subject even though the casual observer may not have noticed it.

 

[cliveh]

At what point, do you stop focusing on self-criticism and let an image stand on it’s own?

When you view the negative.

 

[blansky]

But, there is greater accomplishment in an extraordinary print of an ordinary subject, than in an ordinary print of an extraordinary subject. One can rightfully take more credit for the former, no? The extraordinary subject is there through no effort of yours.

I would probably argue the opposite.

But it depends on the subject. In reality we create the subject, whether of people or places. We organize, the elements.

In my opinion the extraordinary subject is almost always our making.

I get the whole craftsman argument in printmaking but I would still maintain the subject is the most important part of the two processes.

Remember we are communicating our vision with photography, we are visually connecting to another person, and while a great print is a beautiful thing to behold, I would argue that a great subject trumps it every time.

But ideally both are extremely important but I'd take great visual communication over great printmaking, even though the printmaking has a lot to do with the communication.

In iPhone shot of an amazing subject is better than a magnificent print of a mundane subject.

 

[blansky]

Another thing we have to take into account is the OP may not be that accomplished a photographer/ printer yet and there is a lot of room for improvement. I don't know.

But as we grow in the craft/art we have to be self critical and it also helps to get critiques, because other people see things we may have missed.

I don't know how many "morning afters" I've had where I go back and look what I printed yesterday and tossed it in the garbage and started over.

Even the very best photographers/printers have probably looked at their own work of a few years ago and would correct or improve something. We are rarely satisfied. Nor should we be.

 

[tkamiya]

For my images, self-criticism continues and I expect it to continue as long as I take photographs. I don't think there ever will be an image that could not be improved.

On practical side, I stop at 90% satisfied. That is not to say, "good enough" is good enough. I reach a point where going further will only be academic, and really not add to the overall image. For example, sometimes I obsess over looking at a good image and think, if I dodge this area just a second more.... then I stop there. I am pretty sure, if I view this and other near perfect image the next day, I will be hard pressed to tell them apart. (and I'm usually right)

On image taking side, I often think, if I moved to the right a little, left a little, maybe get closer and use wider lens, etc, etc, etc. Then sometimes I realize, that was not even possible. I do go back to the same site when possible, too. For one image, I did that 5 times. Others, it's not possible, so I have to live with what I have. I think, this is more of a learning process that will never end. Learn from mistakes and possible improvements, and apply it to the next. Wash, rinse, and dry. Next!

 

[Noisegate]

Thank you everyone for your comments. I am just a few years back into film photography so no real accomplishments to speak of.

I think tkamiya may have hit it on the nail for me....regarding how the process can become academic. I need to be aware of that point when it suddenly becomes a math problem of little consequence.

I also think that removing myself from the process is also great advice. A friend of mine once told me that only I see the imperfections...nobody else focuses that intently - a well intended comment that was a bit damaging to my fragile ego but, nonetheless, sound advice.

 

[Bill Burk]

For my images, self-criticism continues and I expect it to continue as long as I take photographs. I don't think there ever will be an image that could not be improved.

On practical side, I stop at 90% satisfied. That is not to say, "good enough" is good enough. I reach a point where going further will only be academic... Next!

tkamiya,

It's good to hear you say this, because I remember when you worked on the beach scene (that I thought was fine the first time) until it seemed it was never going to end!

 

[Bill Burk]

Sometimes I will make thirty something versions. The record for me is 52 versions.

Wow!

I pull the plug at three.

But I have an icy waterfall, a twisted abandoned shack, a first dance of bride and groom (my best friend)... where I have to claim temporary insanity in the darkroom. Those three will NEVER be printed to my satisfaction.

 

[Bill Burk]

I really wanted to inject some humor:

If the negative is no good it's the camera's fault, you need a better camera. *You can't claim this if your camera was 35mm Nikon F or Leica.

If it was a Nikon or Leica, then it must be the film size. Must shoot larger film next time. *You can't claim this if your film was 120 and the camera was Rollei or Hasselblad with Zeiss lenses (inside joke for RobC - I am sure you only shoot Zeiss, right?).

If the issue was in the print, then you need to make sure you are using an APO lens on the enlarger. *Note: This is why Edward Weston was a success: He only made contact prints. So it must be the enlarger lens that causes all our problems.

 

[Bill Burk]

Noisegate,

In a more sensitive and meaningful response to your original post...

I recently made over a dozen prints to satisfy an intense desire to say something in this thread.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

It was almost like I put together a show.

In the end, I put one print on the wall... for me to enjoy.

View attachment 108298
River Scene

High Resolution Close-Up

So if you try a similar exercise, you will certainly find a print that makes you happy.

And you can move on from that success.

 

[dpurdy]

Obsessive perfectionist...that is why you use an 8x10. Just like the MP chasers. If you want to lose the obsession take up street photography.

No thanks.

 

[Peltigera]

I never stop being critical of my own work. Sometimes it can take me years to see a flaw - and sometimes years to appreciate something good in a picture that I have been missing. The thing is, knowing the flaws in a picture does not stop me from enjoying what I have produced. I do not want perfection, merely excellence.