Critiques on gallery images

[john crossley]

Why is it that when people ask for critiques on photos they post in the galleries they get the hump when the comment is anything other than "Good Shot"

Surley the point of a critique is to say what you dont like about the picture and more imortantly to explain how to improve the image. That way we all learn.

At the end of the day it is a personal thing and what one person likes another will hate.

Thats Life!

[john20d]

Couldn't agree with you more John, we all have the option not to tick the critique box and you should understand that if you do you should accept that not everyone will like your work or at least think it could be improved.

John

[greenbunion]

I think John is being a little disingenuous here. He is referring to a black and white shot of mine in the gallery and I can certainly confirm that I don't have "the hump".
1. I always tick the comments welcome box- why else do I post photos here. There are dozens of web-sites where I can get a "oohh, thats nice" reaction. I like to hear what people think GOOD or BAD. I do admit though, that I only post images that I have spent considerable time working on.
2. My reaction to John's post was to suggest he ask about my technique first, and then criticise when the facts are available as he was suggesting something I had already done.
3. I wanted John's attention to my answer and didn't think he would re-visit the image, so I posted a minor criticism to one of his own shots (asking if the shot could be straightened slightly - a not uncommon critique to lots of shots). I thought this preferable to a PM as this is meant to be an open forum.
4. If I have offended John in any way - sorry (and I still don't have the hump!
5. The shot in question was taken using a D200 in RAW mode - opened in Aperture with some sharpening and saturation and a tiny crop. Then exported to CS3 where I converted to b/w using the new black and white mixer (which is fantastic!). I applied a red filter and then some selective burning and dodging. A little unsharp mask and then back to aperture. Back once more to photoshop as a jpeg and conversion to greyscale to make it smaller to upload to this forum - phewww!

[jamieZ740]

good point here. at the end of the day it should be a basic "YES" or a simple "NO", not a choosy "comments or suggestions only" or "constructive but dont make me cry" i think there needs to be a drop down box added, simple yes or no..

[john crossley]

First of all can I say this is nothing personal against any specific member. When I started this thread it was meant as a generalisation and was not aimed specifically at any one member or photo.

Originally Posted by greenbunion

2. My reaction to John's post was to suggest he ask about my technique first, and then criticise when the facts are available as he was suggesting something I had already done.


5. The shot in question was taken using a D200 in RAW mode - opened in Aperture with some sharpening and saturation and a tiny crop. Then exported to CS3 where I converted to b/w using the new black and white mixer (which is fantastic!). I applied a red filter and then some selective burning and dodging. A little unsharp mask and then back to aperture. Back once more to photoshop as a jpeg and conversion to greyscale to make it smaller to upload to this forum - phewww!

With all due respect you have to comment on the image you see at the time you see it. Asking how an image was achieved before you comment defeats the object of the exercise, especially as some members only visit the site once a week if that. Surely it is the final image that counts, not how you arrived at it.

I take onboard your comments as to the process you went through to create the image, but as I don’t use “Aperture” nor for that matter have I actually seen it, I don’t know what its capabilities are or how it achieves them. Likewise I don’t use “CS3”.

Because of that I cannot comment on your post processing technique because I don’t use the applications involved. I can only comment on the image I see at the time I see it.

The suggestion that you do a full Black and White conversion is purely my own personal preference, i.e. it is what I would have done. That doesn’t mean to say it is right, what it means is that in my opinion Whiter whites’ and Blacker blacks’ would improve the image.

The picture itself is a good picture, it’s just that personally I would have emphasised the black and white more.

But at the end of the day it is down to personal choice. There is no right or wrong in this.

[Tannin]

Originally Posted by john crossley

Why is it that when people ask for critiques on photos they post in the galleries they get the hump when the comment is anything other than "Good Shot"

I agree, John. In fact, chances are that if I've uploaded something to the gallery I already know (or at least fondly believe) that it's a "good shot" ... and if we are going to get right down to the bald truth here, I think I'm a better judge of what makes a "good shot" than most (but not all) others here - with the proviso that we are talking about my specialty, bird photography. Chances are, if I took it and I think it's a "good shot" then it's a bird!

I imagine that most of us, each within our own particular fields, are similar.

But that doesn't mean we can't nevertheless learn from one another! Saying "good shot" achieves little. Saying why you think it's a "good shot" achieves a bit more, especially if it's not the commonplace and obvious "great feather detail" or "golly, what a big bill!" but instead something more thoughtful and individual. Even more so, criticism can be very instructive. Again, saying "I don't like this shot" isn't much help, but "I don't like the cluttered background" (for example) could be useful. And so on.

Anyway, I'll read and ponder any comments, especially critical ones, carefully. I may or may not end up agreeing with them, but I will at least consider them, and promise not to throw my toys out of the pram. Much.

[jamieZ740]

Originally Posted by Tannin

I think I'm a better judge of what makes a "good shot" than most (but not all) others here -

expand smarty pants.

drop and gimme 10 judgments of a good shot

[lesleyr]

Hmmmm ..... have to agree with Jamie here.

My idea of a good bird shot may not be yours - you see I have a thing about faces ..... not really interested in the rest of a bird, person, insect etc etc - so who is wrong and who is right? And more importantly, who's in a better position to judge?

Personal preference is the key - no wrongs, no rights. Art, not too much science.

Lesley

[Craftysnapper]

Mmmm as to being a better judge of a bird photograph that would depend if you were looking at it as a natural history image or a pictorial image..a good natural history shot can be very boring

[Leif]

Originally Posted by Craftysnapper

Mmmm as to being a better judge of a bird photograph that would depend if you were looking at it as a natural history image or a pictorial image..a good natural history shot can be very boring

That is an excellent point. Some of my favourite shots are of rare and interesting fungi. But they send most people to sleep. But get a bee on a thistle, and you'll have them clapping in the aisles.

Tastes change too. Some people like to isolate a subject against a smooth background. But others find it artificial, and out of context. Some while back there was a craze for showing movement in a photograph in the form of blurring. Some would just find it blurry. It is not uncommon for the winner of a major natural history photo competitions to do nothing for me. In part judges will look for originality, and have probably seem look-a-likes of most images many times before.

I don't usually like giving critical feedback as I do not know what the other person wanted to achieve. But if someone says "Does this work" or "Can this be improved" I might post a comment.

I noticed many years ago when I read photo magazines, that photo journalists were often very scathing about readers pictures. And yet when a real photographer was asked to comment, they were usually complimentary, or made positive comments about improving the image. My take on that is that a working photographer knows how hard it is to get a good image, and has no reason to put down someone else.

Anyway, I agree with John's original posting. (What a lot of words just to get to that conclusion ... )