Singing Swan

You know, there was a valid point about Oh, seven or eight pages back that would have been worth sharing a thought and opinion, maybe even offering suggestions....but when an important topic like this does come up where problems could be addressed and solutions offered, somebody has to come and make it bad for everyone. I facetiously suggested winterrose take over the section, but too many would be there to throw mud at him and nothing would ever be accomplished. Which, all in all, wouldn't be a drastic change, really, would it??

Not much is ever accomplished in that section anyway. Even the example given......doing laundry....I looked at that one. Nothing but suggestions on how to crop and make the photo better. That is NOT what critique is. Everyone there still gets too caught up in how they would change the photo...not to judge what the photographer already has up. Post processing is the place for changes and should not even be suggested to the poster of a photograph in this critique section. Just like this one, there is no way for him to go back and do this again. It is what it is and was put up for critique, not for suggestions for post processing!!!!!!!!!

Clyde141

Singing Swan, I appreciate your comments, but I’m afraid this thread is so long that anything worthwhile will never be found. A critique can produce disagreement without name calling and blaming. I wish this were so and it isn’t in this particular thread on UHH.

To comment on your comments: You said about the photo “doing laundry in the Photo Critique and Analysis section that there are “Nothing but suggestions on how to crop and make the photo better.” Isn’t that the purpose of a critique – to point out how to make the photo better? If you like a photo, why do you like it? If you don’t like a photo, then why don’t you like it and what might be done to improve it? Both of those are part of a good critique. To me, they aren’t saying what is there is bad. Maybe it’s already what the photographer wanted to get his or her message across.

I’ve looked at the “doing laundry photo”. Like it or not there are general rules about what makes a good photograph. One is that you usually don’t put the main subject of the photo in the center. In this case I think the photo would have been better if the photo could have been cropped so that the subject was on the left, more of the river was on the right. That would have given us the feeling of what the child was looking at because she seems to be looking at something.

You also wrote, “It is what it is and was put up for critique, not for suggestions for post processing!!!!!!!!!” Critiques aren’t always just to say change this or that in this photo. An important purpose is to get the photographer to think about how to improve future photographs he or she may take. This photo is what it is, it is the next one that matters. Next time the photographer might well remember to compose the photograph so that there is more of the river showing to the right of the child.

Here are a couple of websites to look at to see different styles of critiques by professional photographers.
The first shows really in depth critiques of several photographs. Not what anyone would usually do on the PQ&A section of UHH but it is an example of what a professional who makes his living selling his photos might say. http://www.michaelfrye.com/landscape-photography-blog/?s=photo+critique+series Another example is this: http://www.donpaulson.com/learning/sample-online-critique/

A website I get a lot of information from is theWellsPoint at http://thewellspoint.com/ This site is by long-time Professional photographer David H. Wells and is written more for those who really want to improve their photos or who are already professional photographers. (You may have to register to see full contents of his site but it is worth it.) I like what he wrote about where he learned the most about photographing.

http://thewellspoint.com/2009/01/16/where-i-learned-the-most-about-photographing/ He said It was in the hall outside the darkroom of the Los Angeles Times where the “old guys” gave him critiques that cut to the bone. Thy told him “in no uncertain terms what was wrong and how to make it right. Precisely, exactly and with no sugar coating.”

I don’t think there are many photographers on UHH that are looking for those kinds of critiques. There are some really good, even great, photographers here, but those people don’t post many photos for critiques from people who, since most of us on UHH are still learning, know less than they do. Here on UHH we can make suggestions, offer encouragement and work to improve our own skills.

If someone has something worthwhile to add here, those comments are welcome. If you don’t like what I’ve written you can critique it, but be courteous and nice about it. Or just move on.

Photographer Jim Loc: Rio Vista, CA

One of the biggest problems with attempting to have a critique section on an Internet forum site, is that a great many of those who visit that section (probably a majority) have little experience with formal critiques, neither in a classroom nor in large competition settings. For those who have had training or extensive experience, the comments that are offered may not be of the quality they are used to. There will invariably be a percentage of "atta boy" comments, the same as there will be a number of comments that in the name of "honesty" will be harsh criticisms offered with such rudeness that they would never be allowed in a formal critique setting. Add into the mix the fact that the section moderators cannot hope to be able to monitor every post on every thread, and respond with appropriate guidance in a timely fashion when needed. The bottom line is that few, if any, online critique forums will live up to the quality and usefulness of formal, real time critiques.

That said, what should be done about it? Should we eliminate such sections altogether because they will seldom live up to the quality of more formal critique settings? Should we set standards or tests that one must meet or pass in order to take part? Should the moderator be somehow elected after first proving their qualifying credentials?

Ultimately, the strength of the section will rest on how seriously the participating members educate themselves on critique technique and convention. It may never reach to level found in more formal settings, but hopefully, with time, and participant effort, it can be a useful place to go. Those who feel the section needs improvement will always have two options: lead by example, offering thoughtful and comprehensive critiques, or move on to where they feel their needs can be better met.

Nightski

Thank you, Clyde and Jim for bringing up these very important points. Jim hit on something that came to my mind as I read Clyde's post. This is the internet. The Critique Section will never be like a photography club that runs competitions and conducts formal critique. So what can be done?

I would like to post the profiles of the people at UHH who are qualified to give formal critique. I have asked a few people, but only one person has said yes. The reason for this is that the people posting and image for critique would know who give special attention to when they are given feedback. This would help shape the feedback given in the section. My PM box is always open, so if you would like to volunteer, PM me and I will send you an interview. You may remain anonymous,if you don't want to reveal your identity, but you will have to provide credentials to me.

From the beginning, I wanted to set up a monthly competition in which we would have a panel of competent judges critique the submissions. I'm not sure this is possible. Again, I would need people that are willing to offer their time to do this. It could even be a bi-monthly or quarterly competition.

Should we restrict membership? No. The whole purpose of this section is to help photographers learn to use their equipment to get the results they want. Why would we turn anyone away that wants to work and learn. People that just want to share and socialize will not post in the critique section.

Should only certain people be allowed to critique. No. Not in the general critique section. The competitions should be critiqued by qualified people, but I believe that the work of critiquing an image is an amazing learning tool. I have learned to really look at photographs past the first impact point. It has helped me immensely when I am out in the field framing up an image. I have looked at and evaluated so many photographs, it has taught me what works and what doesn't and why. I have also learned to appreciate different veiwpoints on an image. While good sound composition is important, there are so many ways to come to that good sound composition. I wouldn't have looked that carefully if I hadn't had to provide feedback.

The PP Advice: I wish that there was a little more "how to get it right in the camera" advice. You can't turn a crappy snapshot into a great shot with PP. But, I think most people here would agree that all images need some editing. Here is a link that makes me think most of you would agree on this point.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-194339-1.html

That being said, wouldn't most of you agree that you learn something about getting it right in the camera when you edit a photo? I do. It goes like this... Darn, I wish I would have seen that sign post in my frame. I could have taken that from a different angle. Or Geez, why am I so overexposed on this one! I've lost some valuable detail. You learn when you do PP.

Jim, I think if there was a photographer of your caliber that wanted to put the time and energy it takes to heard a bunch of UHH'rs into compliance with the rules, he/she would have done so before I did. I don't need to be an expert to monitor. I do need people like you to be a leader. I always enjoy your input and your images in the Critique Section. I learn something every time you participate. I would be honored to have you as a featured photographer in the section.

Clyde, I apologize again for my rudeness when this thread started. You are a thoughtful, even tempered, and logical man. I appreciate your input. You are right. Many people who join UHH are not here to participate in a Critique section. Some come here to discuss photography equipment, some come to socialize, some just like to share their photos. There are many different reasons for being here.

Should we have sections. Yes. It is up to each individual to choose the section that best suits them. The individual sections are nice for those seeking special help. The posts don't get lost in the very fast moving threads of the forum. People get more specialized attention. I think all the individual sections are very helpful.

Have I addressed everything? Are there any questions or thoughts?

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

My thoughts are this was an excellent post, glad I made it this far to read it.
Well said.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Wow, I feel honored...didn't think my thread would get reposted and make it to the big time.

And yes, one should strive to get it as accurate as possible in the camera, but know that there are tools out there that can take what you shot, and likely make it better, with not much effort.

jgordon Loc: Boulder CO

I am not so sure that "getting it right in the camera" is the only gold standard. I think a valid objective might be to produce an image that reflects the idea the photographer wants to convey.

"Getting it right in the camera" means doing what can be done when taking the photo to make the end result possible. Post processing means doing whatever more needs to be done to get to the pre-visualized objective of the photographer.

A critique should be about whether the final product conveys something of value -- and perhaps what might have been done to make it better. When we look at a final image I don't think it matters all that much what part of it was produced with the technology of the camera and which part produced by the technology of the post processing computer. It is the quality and communicative power of the image in its final form that matters.

[An aside: At a photo club meeting the other day a guest speaker suggested that camera technology of the future will have us focusing, adjusting lighting and framing images all in the post processing stage. "Getting it right in the camera" may cease to have much meaning, according to him. His prediction that all our current and precious digital cameras will become obsolete was met by groans from those in attendance.]

And ...

I'm not convinced that only "qualified" people should provide critiques and feedback. After all, most of us don't make our photos for an audience of only qualified people. (To use an analogy, as a musician I play for audiences -- not for music critics.) Besides, if only qualified people could provide critiques, I would be precluded from giving my feedback. That doesn't sound like very much fun.

Nightski

JGordon is a thoughtful critic that frequents the PC&A Section and I highly value his unique insights. He posted some comments on W/R's Hogger Dilemma Thread, and I would like to address them here.



While I believe that you have to get it right in the camera, or you will have nothing to work with, I do agree that it is not the only thing that counts in a finished image. It is the first step in creating a valuable image.



This is true. However, if the image has problems it is helpful to articulate exactly what went wrong and at one stage. Therefore the editing and presentation must be discussed. All the steps in getting an image right are listed in the Elements of Critique at the top of the PC&A Section. Please read them before you critique, and then read them occasionally to refresh yourself on the elements.



I hope not. It is the time that I spend before I press that button that makes photography special to me.



JGordon, once again, you have done a much better job of putting my exact feelings into words than I would have done. Most of us do not create images for critics. We create them for ourselves and for the general audience. We want to share an idea, feeling, or memory. We may have a statement to make or a story to tell. I want to know how it effects everyone, not just the critics. I do value the opinions of the general audience.

It is essential to have experienced critics in the section. Because they have viewed thousands of photographs and had years of experience, they have valuable insights that the general audience does not have. As I said before, anyone who has formal critique experience, and would be willing to be a featured photographer in the PC&A Section should pm me so I can send you an interview and get you set up.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

I kept playing the three stooges until all the sensible and intelligent members were disgusted with their deliberate disruptions as a demonstration to all.

They put up a valiant effort and for me at least it was agonizing to watch them try so hard to come up with something remotely intelligent to counter me with.

Is it not interesting however that as soon as I slammed the door on them and they realized that their taunts were no longer acknowledged, meaningful comments and ideas returned to the thread.

Perhaps it could be worthy of consideration that when next, not if, they infect threads with their trolling, members unite in drumming them off the thread.

Rob.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

You still live in a fantasy world. It is YOU that should go.

We didn't try anything, except ask you some common questions that you refuse to answer simply because you want to live in a fantasy world. Do you not realize that no one "likes" you?

And we are not trolls, we just don't let you bully freely.

In any case, you are a lost case, I'd get more response out of talking to a wall.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Or maybe next time you post your deliberately inflammatory vindictive posts and threads, the members could unite and drum your hateful spite off the site altogether.
You really are an insignificant bully.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

+100!

christofras Loc: Gold Coast Australia

Take your high heels off "you little man" , then take a good look in the mirror!

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Nightski, that you have shown your willingness and intent to overhaul the section is a ray of hope for it as it was undeniably drifting away from both the expectations of general members and your intent as you outlined it when still in the section's infancy.

You recognize that both the quality and consistency of the critique was under scrutiny and quite naturally deduce that the solution is to “recruit” people who are “qualified”.

Some immediate questions that spring to mind….

Qualifications:-

You require people making application to have formal critique experience.

What does that mean? Professionally? Having successfully completed training? As a judge or critic for a competition?

If so, singularly or as part of a panel? Of what level of competition? Would having done that on only one occasion suffice? If not how many is the minimum?

Your “interview”.

How will that operate? Will there be a number of set questions? If so, who will pose them? Are you intending to post the list of questions? Will prospective applicants have to travel in order to attend? Will you be the interviewee or will you be one of a number of people on an applicants’ evaluation board? What are the required qualifications for people sitting on such a board? If you are a part of the selection team, what are your qualifications? What are the minimum requirements for prospective applicants? Will you be lowering those minimum requirements if insufficient interest is demonstrated? If so, to what level will you relax your standards? How many critics are you requiring? Will one be enough? What if that is all that you can attract? Will you be advertising your minimum qualifications?

I have obviously not digested or considered your new policy to anywhere near the extent that you have, however, I am sure you will answer these and all other questions which will come to my humbly informed mind at such time as when your full plan is released.

Rob.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

The three stooges are back!