Ahhh, the turbulent waters of opinion on photo critiques.. and I suppose I am going to copycat some existing blog entries by Greg Lato, who refers to an entry on the top 10 annoyances by Jim Goldstein. Many of Jim’s top 10 are some of my pet peeves as well. But these ‘pitfalls’ aren’t unique to internet forums, you will find them existing in camera club competitions, art galleries, and even gatherings among other photographers where discussion of this image or that one comes up. The internet has just given a lot more people the opportunity to stick their 2 cents in. Brooks Jensen’s essay “Some comments on Print Commentaries” appears in the latest Lenswork magazine where he gives his insightful take on the matter.
I have a lot of mixed feelings about the subject of critique and judging. You will find a lot of ‘ada boys and hero worship in internet forums to downright slash-and-burn fests. Some images will loose ’2 points automatically’ if not sharp, exposed to someone’s liking or some other technical flaw. On the other end, you have some that spend some quality time in analyzing an image, like Craig over at the Radiant Vista. Interesting enough, a thread was created over there because some felt that Craig was setting the standard of critique quite high! I do like his style of commentary. Ted Byrne has a thought provoking post on that thread. The amount of discussion about this can be absolutely dizzying – from those that don’t feel ‘qualified’ to critique an image, to the one word hit and run bandits, to reducing the worth of an image to a camera club score number.
Brooks says in his essay after hearing comments about his work from three well known fine art photographers.. “I had learned a valuable lesson: Show your work to a hundred different people and you will get a hundred different opinions, none of them correct and all of them valid.” And he ultimately concludes that the best commentary about a photograph should come in a manner like a docent at a museum – and to “Say what the photograph means to you and what it communicates to you” rather than expressing one’s personal likes or dislikes. “A docent talks about the work as it is, not as it could be or should be.”
I suppose a lot of this is why I have given up posting images in various forums for critiques. I still enjoy looking through them from time to time just to look at some of the great work posted there. By analyzing what does or doesn’t appeal to me in other images, I have perhaps learned more about progressing my own work versus any particular comment I have ever received. Ultimately, I think it helps to take it all with a grain of salt, and be light hearted about it. Don’t let a score, portfolio review, or a particular comment dictate your own feelings toward your work. Take little bits of the negatives and details of the positives, consider them – use them or perhaps throw them all away! 
You can always ask someone else.
What is really annoying is when someone wins a photo contest, when there photo is not infocus and the tail and ear is cut of. Some of the photos that I see that have won contests need to be trashed. Better yet….I think the judges need to learn about photography first.
Mike, your post made me think hard. I’ve received harsh critique at one photo place where I’ve uploaded a few photos. They offer all kinds of reasons why my work “speaks” to them, but about 70% don’t like the frames I use. I began using those just for display purposes at Photo Buffet, because I wanted a different look from most photoblogs. I received a lot of positive feedback about the frames, and a week rarely passes without someone commenting on how they appreciate the extra touch. In the end, though, I like this statement from your post: “Don’t let a score, portfolio review, or a particular comment dictate your own feelings toward your work.”
I changed one of my frames at that other photo site, and it generated a lot of attagirls. Then I thought, What am I doing, and why? So I changed it back. If I can’t please myself, then who cares about scores and attagirls? I’m all for critique that makes me think about technique, but in the end, the presentation is an individual call.
I am in total agreement with your thoughts on this Mark- I still remember the day I received umpteen negative comments on a scarlet tanager I posted at ‘you know where’. Keep in mind I sat out for **3 hours** to get what shots I did get. Tanagers are canopy dwellers and you usually see just a brief glimpse of red wayyy up in the treetops. I was happy with what I got- but most of the comments said ‘too bad about the tree limb in the background!’ I spoke out and said hey guys, they live in trees.. my home is surrounded by trees.. and when one of the avian moderators visited my home, I spread my arms wide and said (tounge in cheek) see why there are TREE LIMBS in my bird shots?
I’m not a stock shooter, don’t even want to be.. but it seems if someone posts something ‘different’ everyone wants them to conform to what THEY think the photo should look like.. and that’s just not my bag, it never will be. I’ve learned alot on the ONE photography forum I visit, but I’ve also learned that so many photographers are stuck in their ‘it’s gotta look like this or it’s not worth looking at’ mindset that I take all critiques with a grain of salt.. and ultimately if *I* like the shot, that’s all that matters. I never set out with ‘will this sell’ in the back of my mind. That would take away my inner vision and I plan on holding on to that, thank you very much
Thanks for all the comments, I can relate to what each one of you have written here. I think it can be a real double edged sword for someone just starting out and trying to learn. After all, someone wants to learn to develop a critical eye and sort out the ‘good’ from the ‘bad.’ The problem is many groups/forums/clubs already have a paradigm defined of what is and isn’t. So someone learning in that environment can develop the same creative and mental barriers. When someone tries something a little different, it is often frowned upon, scored poorly, or doesn’t receive the ‘comment applause’ as the more conforming images.
Mark, I’m not a big fan of critiquing. It’s not that I fear it, but it’s because I feel that it is pretty worthless. You summed it up yourself: “You can always ask someone else.”
I would also agree with you that I like Craig Tanner’s method of critique. I know first hand what it is like. I’ve had several of my photographs critiqued by him at the 2 workshops that I’ve attended. He’s very positive in his critiques and doesn’t adhere slavishly to the ‘rules’. He ‘gets it’ that things don’t always have to be on thirds, that sometimes putting the subject smack in the middle is the thing to do, that sometimes an out of focus image is what you intended, etc.
Critiques are well meaning, I suppose, but not necessary. They can be a way to learn as long as they are well thought out and offer constructive criticism.
Hey Mark, I post a lot of images on the nature sites and don’t ask for critiques and really don’t pay any mind to someone that might give advice about one of my images. I do feel that they may be trying to help me with a image, but my images are shot as I intended them to be, and I’m happy as they are. I don’t critique others images unless they would ask for it, and even then, I would point out its only my opinion. I do believe in the rules of composition, even though I break the rules from time to time, I do think critiques can help new photographers with offering some advice from the rules of composition, but only if their asking for that help.
In my experience, the slash and burn fests are in the minority depending on the site you are posting at. I am sure many responses to posted images are very well intended. More often than not, I think people use it as a social exchange versus a learning environment.
Hey Mark, I agree with the social exchange comment.
I find this discussion VERY interesting. Coming from an art background, I am amazed at how I’ve come to find that in the “photography world” it’s all about the technical aspect rather than the feeling aspect of images. When I first started posting images on my blog, I had to look up photography terms to even know what people were talking about. I even had one person go so far to take my posted image, crop it for me and send it via email telling me it looked better his way.
What about how an image makes one FEEL? Does it move you? Does it make you look at your world differently? Does it make you laugh? cry? wonder?
Yes, one has to be technically skilled to be able to communicate via a photograph but perhaps images should also be judged on the emotive rather than just the technical.
Diane perfectly expressed what I’ve felt for the past few months. Comments become useless if they’re strictly technical. I mean, most photographers know whether their lighting was on target, and if they’re pleased with the overall exposure.
What a great conversation this has turned into!
I’d much rather hear about how a photo stirs someone’s mind & soul…or how they were surprised by their emotional response. I’ve tried to do that lately, as I’ve run into exceptional photos (like Diane’s amazing “duck” photo recently) that bring to mind a deeper thought than the obvious.
This isn’t to say that I don’t appreciate comments; not at all! It’s just that I treasure the comments that let me know a photo has done more than offer eye candy.
Diane and Bonnie – I agree with you 110%. I wonder if it is because some gravitate so easily toward the technical side and find it difficult to write how the image makes them feel.
I could not agree with you more. I host a blog for critiquing armature photography (www.DigaPixBlog.com) and have judged at camera clubs for 18 years. I give this explanation about judging: Suppose you are showing your work at a gallery and there is a jerk in front of you giving their opinion about the photography being shown and he does not know you are the artist. I am that jerk.