Curiosity question (Page 4): It depends on whether I am looking at my own photograph or someone else's. I don't perform a detailed inspection of someone else's photo, and I don't judge...

goldenyears Loc: Lake Osewgo

It depends on whether I am looking at my own photograph or someone else's. I don't perform a detailed inspection of someone else's photo, and I don't judge it. For my own photos, I inspect it to see if there is a "hidden treasure" I didn't notice in the viewfinder that I can pull out of the RAW image and work with.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

User ID wrote:

Uh huh. It’s never derogatory to say that a photograph could be improved by better lighting, a more interesting subject, and a more competent photographer. Those are just a few *possible* improvements.

EVERYone has an opinion of how they would have shot it or how it would be made better in their eyes.
Constructive criticism is mostly relative to the person providing it.
More complete in who's mind?

So, what constructive criticism would one give van Gogh?

Toment Loc: FL, IL

grandpaw wrote:

When you look at a photograph, do you look for the positive things in the photo first or do you look for things you think need corrected? I guess this is a glass half full or half empty question. Again, just curios.

Positive, of course. I’m not that critical…😀

Sidwalkastronomy Loc: New Jersey Shore

Manglesphoto wrote:

I don't look at photos for the purpose of finding things wrong! but some things stand out like a sore thumb, because of being called over critical I will no longer comment images that are Out of focus, over processed, have appendages "amputated", slanted horizon, crooked buildings Or just plain crap.
However I will make suggestions to the OP in a PM. if I see a potentially good image or good work.
I WILL NOT make "feel good" comments on any image!

I hate over processed images

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Sidwalkastronomy wrote:

I hate over processed images

You mean the ones that look like they were painted with poster colors?

uhaas2009

I hope We can change your mind. What do you see first when you look a pics? Why did it draw attention to- whatever it is. Composition, light......

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

uhaas2009 wrote:

I hope We can change your mind. What do you see first when you look a pics? Why did it draw attention to- whatever it is. Composition, light......

For me, the subject (of interest to me) first, then I look at composition, then possibly light.
I'll either like it or not. (Could love it if it was done that well.)

User ID

Manglesphoto wrote:

I look at the old masters Art to study the lighting and then I ponder did the light really come from that direction or did the artist make it come from that direction with his choice of paints.

It really came from that direction.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

grandpaw wrote:

When you look at a photograph, do you look for the positive things in the photo first or do you look for things you think need corrected? I guess this is a glass half full or half empty question. Again, just curios.

I look at it as a whole and decide if I like it.
NO pixel peeping or correcting as I do NOT know the intent and others might, what I find "Needs correcting", like that part.
ALL is subjective.
Some photos people gush over I find worthless and visa versa.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Architect1776 wrote:

I look at it as a whole and decide if I like it.
NO pixel peeping or correcting as I do NOT know the intent and others might, what I find "Needs correcting", like that part.
ALL is subjective.
Some photos people gush over I find worthless and visa versa.

Everyone has their own interpretation of what is appealing.
(Unfortunately there are some who have to "correct" a shot to make it more appealing to them.)

Some of my shots that I think are eh, people love.
Perception.......

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Longshadow wrote:

Everyone has their own interpretation of what is appealing.
(Unfortunately there are some who have to "correct" a shot to make it more appealing to them.)

Some of my shots that I think are eh, people love.
Perception.......

Yes, even the most perfect photo in your eyes can be picked apart by any other observer.
Here is a perfect photo.
But to others it most likely sucks technically.
Eye of the beholder.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Architect1776 wrote:

Yes, even the most perfect photo in your eyes can be picked apart by any other observer.
Here is a perfect photo.
But to others it most likely sucks technically.
Eye of the beholder.

Great photo!
(Yea, I'm sure some will find a fault.)

Horseart Loc: Alabama

Architect1776 wrote:

Yes, even the most perfect photo in your eyes can be picked apart by any other observer.
Here is a perfect photo.
But to others it most likely sucks technically.
Eye of the beholder.

Perfect. One of those "precious memories" photos. The kind we'd hate to ever lose!

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Longshadow wrote:

Great photo!
(Yea, I'm sure some will find a fault.)

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Horseart wrote:

Perfect. One of those "precious memories" photos. The kind we'd hate to ever lose!

Exactly.
But we all, hopefully, have hundreds of technically bad photos that are perfect. I do going back to mid 1800s of family members.
Yes, we do try to make excellent presentation photos and put them out for critique.
There are snarky ones and there are others giving perspectives we might have not thought of.
Photography, outside of technical, is very subjective including advertising, some of those are big failures as has been seen over time.