commenting on others picture

[Splatsworth]

I'm an amateur photographer and I'm not big on typing out lots of words just to have my say, sometimes 'I like it' is all I have to say, I don't think as an amateur I could add much in the way of constructive criticism, so what if someone hasn't obeyed the rule of thirds, so what if an image is badly composed, sometimes you just look at an image and its pleasing to the eye other times its not. I'll leave it to the professionals to say whats technically good/bad about a picture and I'll carry on enjoying what others have taken great pleasure (hopefully) in capturing and if i want to type 'I like it' then I will

[Shadowman]

So what do you think about someone editing a photograph you have submitted for comment? Isn't that a form of critiquing? I see a lot of reworking on someone's photograph and usually the person editing will explain why they did the edit and ask the original poster to comment.

[krispix]

Gregg, Carl and any other Newbie,
Don't let your lack of experience stop you getting involved. Criticism doesn't have to be confined to discussion on technical points of possible improvement. There's nothing to stop you saying, "I love the way you have captured the sun, water, cloud etc. How did you do it?" The author of the image will probably be only to happy to reveal his secrets.
This way you get to be part of the process and you learn stuff. Win - Win.

[Donald]

Rarely do they take the criticism well .

Prompted by the above comment in Robin's post above, I was reminded of an excellent series of three papers that were published on the Nature Photographer's website during 2011. I found that the author (Alain Briot) consistently produces high quality, well thought-out, constructive papers.

Click here and go, firstly, to April 2011, then May, then June.

[Ricco]

Mmmmmm Interesting discussion.

The same photo could be produced by two different photographers and garner two different responses and reactions.

One photographer may be a rank amateur, produce something that they are pretty proud of and the reality is that it isn't quite up scratch. Direct criticism may not be entirely appropriate in this scenario and do more harm than good.

Likewise, a photographer may be aware of their limitations, really keen to learn and post the same quality image in the hope to get some true commentary. In this scenario, a direct criticism may be warranted and wanted.

From personal experience, I have fallen into both categories. I recall posting some photos that I thought were pretty good (reality was that they were very bad), feedback on this site was pretty diplomatic and it probably was the right level of criticism that I required at the time. Im not aure how well i would have coped with some true critisicm at that point. Since then I have progressed (I hope) and would have myself In the second category where I would actually like a little more of the direct criticism.

The trouble is in a lot of cases, it isn't clear whether the poster is from the first or second category. I think I like the ideas expressed in frank's post and that above in that it probably comes down to the poster to be clear in what they want.

[Ricco]

One more thought - in terms of amateurs trepidation to comment (and I am one), the way I've always thought about it is that if I'm posting and hoping others will comment on my photos, I also need to return the favor. Otherwise the burden falls to too few to provide commentary.

I don't post all that often but I try to force myself to respond more than I request, if this extends to everyone then the forum becomes self sustaining.

[IanCD]

Good discussion... I'm in the same boat as a few others, very hesitant - because usually feeling too inexperienced - to offer any constructive criticism, particularly if I don't agree with (those I perceive as) more experienced / knowledgeable members. So I tend to confine my contributions to affirmations, or information / knowledge on the few occasions when I think I can (I'm also a master of equivocation... painfully so, at times..! )

Some of this relates a bit to issues highlighted in the March results thread - e.g. where Arlen suggests people explaining reasons for voting for particular pictures. I looked for the thread Colin referred to where you did that here some time ago...

I didn't find it, but I did come up with a couple of threads from 2010 and last year, where you were exchanging more structured and detailed critique of each others' photos.
I thought those threads were interesting - though they clearly demanded a fair bit of time, thought and effort from those contributing - so here are the links:

• Post one, comment two: Critique chain - post one comment two
• Post one, comment one: Comment one - post one. A practice thread for comment and criticism.

...and now, I'm off to post a link to a set I took recently. I'll include a bit more about what I think of them and what I was trying to achieve... and the questions I have about them.
Ian

[Harpo]

This is a great read. The links from Alain Bariot that Donald posted are excellent. As I read these posts, I started thinking of things I would add to this thread. Then one after another mentions what I was going to share. By the time I got to the end, all my thoughts were explained by someone else. Hence, I feel the same with commenting on some images here. Someone else beats me to the punch in saying what I want, so I feel its redundant to repeat whats already said or the thread just gets longer and longer.

Sometimes I see an image that I think is WOW! I cant explain why, it just moves my soul. You mention asking a photographer WHY they took that image, and when they cant come up with a good reason, you are befuddled. Sometimes I cant explain why, but to me it just pushed some emotional buttons.

Ive read about Art Critics, photography judges, or those who say they have alot of experience- state that if you cannot tell why you took a picture, you have no business taking pictures at a serious level. Really? I guess Ill never get there and might as well sell my stuff and give up. I just think they are full of themselves and try to keep learning and enjoy myself with a bunch of others who kinda think alike on CiC.

The best thing about CiC is… people are civil, respectful, helpful and nice… sometimes to a fault. I can see those who have thick skin may not like it here because its their personality to be brash, in your face, tell it as it is… all in the name thinking they are being honest and really think they are trying to help someone.

[Fredrikfw]

Hi Leo,
Got your point. I am a "looker" Next time I come a cross a photgrapher asking for comments I Shall sharpen up.
But it will be politly.
Reg Fredrik

[DanK]

I'll add my two cents. I look for something in the middle. I have posted on a bunch of sites where the typical responses are either silence or something along the lines of "awesome." I stopped posting. Silence is fine--lots of times, I find I don't have anything particularly useful to add, or a photo just doesn't interest me, and I assume that lots of people will have the same reactions to mine. The "awesome" comments, however, were useless. There didn't seem to be much correlation between the comments and the quality of the image, and since people did not say what they liked, I did not know how to take it. (E.g., lots of people love oversaturated landscapes. I try not to oversaturate, so someone who tells me that a photo is awesome might be responding to something that I don't want to repeat). And there were very, very few constructive criticisms.

On the other hand, I don't want to be on a site where people seem to enjoy tearing each other's work apart, and I think we should be particularly careful with people who are new to this.

What I want is a happy medium, where people do express praise for images they really like, but they also offer suggestions for improvement. Sometimes, the photographer will just disagree. No problem. But sometimes, you learn something.

I post on a website of a local camera club to which I belong. The members of the club are very supportive of each other, and one way they do that is they offer serious criticisms. We will sometimes have exchanges that go on for while, e.g., arguing about ways of cropping an image to change its composition, and often the photographer will post additional trials in response. Sometimes, I disagree with the suggestions, but I have learned a lot.

So, my suggestions:
--don't comment unless you want to.
--praise is great. We all love it. Even better is praise where you point out one or more aspects of the image that make it particularly attractive.
--positively worded suggestions and criticisms are fine too, and they can be very helpful. Just be nice, and remember that since it is all a matter of taste (really, the rule of thirds was not handed down on Mount Sinai), the other person may simply disagree with you. E.g., lots of people really do love overcooked HDR. I don't understand that, but so it goes. I often suggest that people who use HDR check out exposure blending because it produces much more natural renderings. If they end up liking HDR better, that's great. I'm not trying to convert them--just letting them know that there is an alternative they can compare.

We could use a convention used on some other sites. If you really would like people to comment with a critique if they have one, just write "C&C welcome" with your image.

Just my two cents.

Dan

[flashback]

I certainly am in agreement with the majority here, but let's look at the flip side for a minute.

If a person takes the time to write, "Awesome" it means they like the photo and that one word sums it up for them. I certainly wouldn't dismiss such a compliment. But...the flip side here being, if someone bothers to compliment your work, it would behoove you to take an equal amount of time to say, "Thank you." I would no more expect a person to be necessarily effusive in their thanks than I do in their compliment. 'Great pic.' 'Thank you.'

Same goes for the competition winners. Many a comp has gone by without any acknowledgment from the winners, even when others have posted praising comments and congratulations. Failure to respond in kind suggests that the winners simply knew they had the best photos and we are all just acknowledging that along with them.

So be nice, be considerate, be polite, be constructive and above all, be appreciative that others have taken the time -whether to offer suggestions or compliments- to comment on your work.

[WJT]

Leo, you need to work on your spelling, it terrible. Just kidding there were only two mistakes, but seriously my point is this. Only the photographer knows what they are trying to capture and for someone to assume that they have got it all wrong can be a little presumptuous and sometimes arrogant. This is where the conversation comes into play.

I for one appreciate a bit of subtlety and good manners rather than just the straight facts, because I may well have put aside the techniques which I have learnt in order to experiment. To make my point I will give you a quote from Albert Einstein "My education was a serious interruption to my learning".

[Maritimer1]

If people had not "kindly" critiqued by first postings (and continue to do so, thank you!), I would have just slunk off, never to have learned very much at all. I am very much a wall flower when it comes to making critical suggestions, and have only begun trying to be a bit more of a coach in the past few months.

It's my opinion that a comment of how something can be helped should be paired with a comment about what works. Leo, maybe you could post one of your photos and critique it in the way you would like others to critique? That way, we will know what style you are looking for and, perhaps, that can be kept in mind when you post?

[Geoff F]

I have noticed a few members who joined relatively recently that started by posting rather third rate images.

But with a little help and friendly advice for improvement they are now regularly posting excellent work, instead of just disappearing; as Myra mentioned.

If anybody wants to see some of the work that Leo has posted recently for help/C&C etc, there are several examples if you do a little search.

And one other slight point which also needs remembering about some posts. We have members here who don't use English as their first language, like Leo for example, so sometimes, comments may need to be written/read with a little care and understanding.

[Shadowman]

Not one comment about editing another photographers submission, a subtle form of criticism and learning technique that I feel is vastly overlooked.

[dan marchant]

Only the photographer knows what they are trying to capture and for someone to assume that they have got it all wrong can be a little presumptuous and sometimes arrogant. This is where the conversation comes into play.

Agreed but in such cases where a photographer has chosen to set aside the rules (or rather guidelines) in behoves them to say something to that effect when posting their images.

[Colin Southern]

Personally, I try to make responses polite, diplomatic (but honest), and reasonably concise. The degree of "pickiness" being proportional to the standard of the image (ie "if they have the basics sorted then lets move onto more subtle issues").

Try to encourage. Try not to overload with too many things.

[altopiet]

As a newbie on this forum and still learning about photography, would the solution to the Op's problem not be to have a dedicated Photo Critique Section where you can get genuine critique if you want it, knowing that if you post there, no punches will be pulled? (if there is one that I've missed, not being here that long, please correct me)

[UKDivemaster]

It is interesting that we seem to be seeing some people expressing concern about the quality of criticism being offered on CiC.

I think the common thread amongst the couple of posts that I've seen is the suggestion that somehow criticism has to be critical. The idea that criticism can be framed in positive tones, based on the knowledge of what works in terms of the principles of adult learning, seems to be absent.

If some people think that critical appraisal has to be couched in the negative, in terms in telling people what is wrong as opposed to what is right, then they learned the art of criticism in a different place than me.

The other point is, of course, that maybe those who speak positively about an image actually think it's good and don't share the analysis suggested that it is 'wrong'. And of course, it's perfectly open to everyone to post up their constructive comment and criticism and not wait for others to do it for them.

Art is subjective. Which means that there can never be a 'right' exposure in photography, or 'correct' depth of field or any of the other myriad of technical issues we as photographer-artists struggle with to create a mood, inspire a reaction, confuse or even create a 'pleasing picture'.

Criticism is therefore full of danger, especially if the intention of the photographer is unclear or unknown. Comments should therefore provide helpful advice designed to improve the image as you see it. Always with the caveat that this is personal, subjective opinion.

I am relatively new to this forum and have been amazed at responses to my mini-competition entries. Images I thought were great received very few votes and those I thought were a 'bit boring or predictable' did quite well. So: what do I know?

[Letrow]

We do have a rather polite forum. I like that, but I can also understand that for some people the comments are sometimes too cautious. Especially for those who want to learn and feel that they do not receive enough feedback.

For me it is a thin line. I don't want to discourage people that post their shots, so I comment cautiously and try to keep the critique focused on those details that I feel confident enough about to comment on.

When people ask for critiscism specifically I will go beyond my usual approach, but I always try to remember that taste is a subjective thing.