AuntiPode Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
ben egbert wrote:
There is already a post processing and printing forum.
But, the post processing forum isn't a critique forum, as such. When an image with real potential is let down by post processing, criticism of PP is appropriate here. Sometimes PP is the low-hanging fruit of criticism. I suppose if we wanted to be pedantic, it could be argued that if we criticize PP, folks should repost to the post processing forum to ask how to accomplish what a critique suggests. However, in practice that would be a burden on folks posting images for critique. Also, showing a modified version of the original image is is easiest way to explain a critique. That doesn't necessarily mean the suggestion is to change post processing. For example, when I critique a composition, I may suggest more negative space or re-positioning the camera. I can illustrate the different that would make by building more space on one or more edges of an image or re-positioning an element. When I do that I am NOT recommending the poster do this in post processing. I am suggesting the poster should do that in-camera. My synthetic image is simply intended to illustrate my suggestion because "a picture is worth a thousand words".
1. I have found that you never get credit for how hard the shot was to get. Travel, hiking, weather etc does not count. Neither does experience level. Not saying it should be this way, just saying this is how I find it.
That is how it is and, as I see it, how it ought be. An image is critiqued as an image, not as a process. How much work was needed is not relevant. We may respect the work. We may honor it. We may admire it. But as I understand the nature of traditional critique, such notions are not critique. They would be appropriate on the content forums such as landscapes and black and white where process is more legitimately a part of the subject.
2. FM is a world wide forum and attracts some of the world’s best. Even a person who takes home all the prizes at the local camera club is probably a rank beginner here.
Nah. You don't have to be a renown master to offer a critique. More importantly, folks who seek a critique can accept or reject critique suggestions as they wish. We are just folks trying to help folks improve there images and better achieve their visions. A novice may post a critique and may offer good insights and are welcome to do so in my book.
3. If you want to build participation, we need to find ways to avoid slamming the door in this persons face. Critique needs to allow for different levels. Not just of the place they are now, but the place they could ever be. There are only a few Ansel Adams and you cannot create them just with tutorials and practice. Anyone can grow, but not all will arrive at the top.
Obviously. However, your point suggests this forum isn't that way now and I disagree.
1. We need to find ways to comment on stuff outside our taste or interests.
Disagree. We all don't need to critique any/all images. For example, I don't comment much on run-down buildings, rusted cars and a few other tired cliches, to me, because I doubt I could be fair or encouraging. If you can't be helpful, it's much better to be silent. Some photographic sub-specialties have specialized conventions and expectations. If someone offers such an image, I can only critique the general and basic image execution issues, if/as appropriate. I can't critique them as specialist in the field would. If an image is outside our limits of taste or knowledge, I'd suggest the best response is to leave the image for critique by someone better suited.
3. Post processing is part of the total package so we can’t ignore it in critique, but it ought not be the prominent thing.
Critiques are about how to improve an image. If an image is otherwise good but could benefit from improved PP, then PP critique would be all that's appropriate. And, for some images the folks offering a critique may only WANT to offer PP critique for various legitimate reasons. For example, a critique of a family portrait might be offered by someone who doesn't know much about posing and composing portraits but who knows his PP. It would be fair and proper that he only offers PP criticism.
4. When a comment is made about a problem, some justification should be given as well. It appears over processed because I see too much shadow recovery is an example.
Impractical. We generally don't know what the scene looked like or what the camera capture was like or how an image was processed. Sometimes I know an image was over-processed or wrongly processed. I can comment on what I see, but not on how it went wrong.
5. Critique should always include what works as well as what does not work.
Disagree. There can be many proper reasons to not comment about more than a subset of what works or doesn't work, including only comments about what works or only comments about what doesn't work.
6. Speak about what the image evokes, what do you see, how much impact did it have?
Sometimes appropriate. Sometimes not. For example, if an image is about a graphic design, it's intent would be obvious, it's emotional impact a non-issue. Whether it's a strong graphic would be about all one can suggest. For many images, I know folks who'd be very offended if I wrote their image had no emotional impact or meaning. Kindness demand some issue be addressed delicately, if at all. I don't post here intending to offend people. I may accidentally and unintentionally offend someone, but that's not my intention. There are times I don't post full critique comments because I feel it likely I'd hurt feelings or offend.
7. Personal taste should be respected not a target for change.
Too subjective. Too easy to label short-coming out-of-bounds as personal "taste". More importantly, critiques are not intended just for the person who posts an image for critique. I know MY critique suggestions are intended for the audience of all the folks who read them on the forum. An offered image critique may help others who don't share the tastes of the photographer who posted the image for critique. For example, if someone's taste is to always center a subject in a frame, beginners who read the critique forum need to understand that most folks will find it poor composition, despite the fact the poster believes it's a matter of his personal taste. Such a critique isn't intended to change the poster's taste but to help other readers achieve better compositions. Posters need to understand that all comments on a thread are not intended solely for the poster.
|