Group Since Jul 1, 2005
Drag to set position!
Share
We all have different approaches to critique—both in how we give it and how we receive it.
Some of us prefer direct, unvarnished feedback; others value a more conversational or exploratory tone. Some critiques aim to improve the image; others aim to understand the intent or offer a new way of seeing it.
Some critiques are short and to the point, while others go into detail. Some include visual examples of changes, while others provide links to educational material. Some make declarative statements, while others are expressed as opinions.
What works (or doesn’t work) for you?
- What do you appreciate in a critique?
- What tends to turn you off or feel unhelpful?
- When you write a critique, what are you hoping to offer—or discover?
- How do you strike the right balance between offering honest, constructive critique and recognizing the subjective nature of the critique process?
No right or wrong answers here—just a chance to reflect together on what we value in the feedback we share and receive.
Some of us prefer direct, unvarnished feedback; others value a more conversational or exploratory tone. Some critiques aim to improve the image; others aim to understand the intent or offer a new way of seeing it.
Some critiques are short and to the point, while others go into detail. Some include visual examples of changes, while others provide links to educational material. Some make declarative statements, while others are expressed as opinions.
What works (or doesn’t work) for you?
- What do you appreciate in a critique?
- What tends to turn you off or feel unhelpful?
- When you write a critique, what are you hoping to offer—or discover?
- How do you strike the right balance between offering honest, constructive critique and recognizing the subjective nature of the critique process?
No right or wrong answers here—just a chance to reflect together on what we value in the feedback we share and receive.
So far, what turns me off are two things (so far):
1- When someone says they are going to block me if I ever again point out a specific issue with their photos.
2- When someone claims they are a big shot, famous, etc., and because of their authority, I don't know what I'm talking about.
Either one of those two things means I will never comment on their photos again.
Other than those two things, all of the critiques or criticisms I've endured have been fair enough! Even if I disagree with some of them, it gives me a valuable perspective and allows me to take another look at what I'm trying to do.
1- When someone says they are going to block me if I ever again point out a specific issue with their photos.
2- When someone claims they are a big shot, famous, etc., and because of their authority, I don't know what I'm talking about.
Either one of those two things means I will never comment on their photos again.
Other than those two things, all of the critiques or criticisms I've endured have been fair enough! Even if I disagree with some of them, it gives me a valuable perspective and allows me to take another look at what I'm trying to do.
Sometimes I begin my comment with "I'm not a fan of..." (referring to subjects or themes I'm not into), but nonetheless because of technical qualities (eg, clarity, composition, good color combo, possessing "wow"-factors like macros, or something just beautiful, attractive or appealing), I give the photo a Keeper, without thinking twice, meaning I still try to be objective.
On the other hand, there are photos that I'm attracted to easily, that despite their technical flaws (eg, no high-res available, not sharp, or has some way-ward element, may look uninteresting to some, but somehow resonates positively with me, or having a strong narrative), I still give the photo a pass. That is me, taking a subjective stance.
Hence, when I critique, I strike a balance between objectivity and personal taste. Now when both are absent—technical excellence and a personal appeal, then the photo is likely a Freeflight for me.
This is just a quick response. I've never thought about it that deeply, but after years of participating in this group, I've formed this criterion but nonetheless I'm still open to new approaches as new members come in and show a different style, approach, development or rationalization.
On the other hand, there are photos that I'm attracted to easily, that despite their technical flaws (eg, no high-res available, not sharp, or has some way-ward element, may look uninteresting to some, but somehow resonates positively with me, or having a strong narrative), I still give the photo a pass. That is me, taking a subjective stance.
Hence, when I critique, I strike a balance between objectivity and personal taste. Now when both are absent—technical excellence and a personal appeal, then the photo is likely a Freeflight for me.
This is just a quick response. I've never thought about it that deeply, but after years of participating in this group, I've formed this criterion but nonetheless I'm still open to new approaches as new members come in and show a different style, approach, development or rationalization.
It is no secret that a person who has been facing criticism for a long time can hardly be surprised or offended by anything. He develops "thick skin" and is very good at filtering criticism, drawing the necessary conclusions for himself and letting empty wordplay pass between his ears.
Another thing is how criticism is perceived by a person who has just started and how he criticizes.
There are a lot of "pitfalls" on both sides.
A beginner must understand perfectly well that by publishing his work for viewing, he will inevitably encounter criticism, both adequate and inadequate.
Often a beginner begins to argue, including because of correct criticism, defending his point of view, which is not always correct. All this happens due to simple misunderstanding and inexperience.
I do not know if there are materials that tell in detail about criticism in photography? Having studied them, this will help a beginner get used to all this faster.
Many beginners are afraid to criticize others, limiting themselves to only words - I like it, avoiding a detailed analysis.
Everything is very simple. The beginner does not know yet and is unsure of the correctness of his words.
Here there is a need for another material that would be useful for study. This is material about the benefits of criticism and discussion of other people's work.
Visualization. This is another method to increase your level of visualization. Both by criticizing and receiving criticism.
I think that having understood all this, all questions will disappear by themselves.
What repels me and seems useless in criticism?
It is difficult for me to answer this question. Perhaps rudeness. Unconstructive rude criticism. At first it was very offensive, but then I realized that this should not be given any attention and not to engage in useless disputes, and in severe cases, simply block such useless critics.
What do I like in criticism?
This is an opportunity to analyze your work from someone else's point of view. And the point of an inexperienced photographer, the point of an ordinary viewer, and the point of an experienced, trustworthy critic. in one case, you begin to understand better what the viewer likes and what they don't. in another case, you learn about your technical mistakes and how to try to correct them.
When I write criticism, I hope to both offer and open up.
There is always something to offer to participants who are less experienced than me. In principle, you share your experience, point out the mistakes you made yourself in your time, and try to explain where the beginner is mistaken. Open up - By criticizing the work of experienced participants, as I already wrote, you increase your level of the same insight. Here it is important to compare your criticism with the criticism of other experienced participants, analyze them and your own, and try not to allow in your work what you criticized in others.
At the very least, this way you increase your level of skill.
Yes. The saying works here - You learn from other people's mistakes )
Find the right balance between honest, constructive criticism and recognizing the subjective nature of the criticism process? Here I think everything comes with experience and study.
First, you need to listen to criticism from people you have studied, studied their work, to whom you trust, those you already know a little, but the main thing is that they should be a good level more experienced than you. And another important factor - you should like the work of these critics, you should see that you are listening to the opinion of a person whose work you like, and you would like to do the same and better.
Having understood all the issues raised here together, all this will help you quickly find these balances and understand all this and perceive everything for yourself with benefit and not harm.
Another thing is how criticism is perceived by a person who has just started and how he criticizes.
There are a lot of "pitfalls" on both sides.
A beginner must understand perfectly well that by publishing his work for viewing, he will inevitably encounter criticism, both adequate and inadequate.
Often a beginner begins to argue, including because of correct criticism, defending his point of view, which is not always correct. All this happens due to simple misunderstanding and inexperience.
I do not know if there are materials that tell in detail about criticism in photography? Having studied them, this will help a beginner get used to all this faster.
Many beginners are afraid to criticize others, limiting themselves to only words - I like it, avoiding a detailed analysis.
Everything is very simple. The beginner does not know yet and is unsure of the correctness of his words.
Here there is a need for another material that would be useful for study. This is material about the benefits of criticism and discussion of other people's work.
Visualization. This is another method to increase your level of visualization. Both by criticizing and receiving criticism.
I think that having understood all this, all questions will disappear by themselves.
What repels me and seems useless in criticism?
It is difficult for me to answer this question. Perhaps rudeness. Unconstructive rude criticism. At first it was very offensive, but then I realized that this should not be given any attention and not to engage in useless disputes, and in severe cases, simply block such useless critics.
What do I like in criticism?
This is an opportunity to analyze your work from someone else's point of view. And the point of an inexperienced photographer, the point of an ordinary viewer, and the point of an experienced, trustworthy critic. in one case, you begin to understand better what the viewer likes and what they don't. in another case, you learn about your technical mistakes and how to try to correct them.
When I write criticism, I hope to both offer and open up.
There is always something to offer to participants who are less experienced than me. In principle, you share your experience, point out the mistakes you made yourself in your time, and try to explain where the beginner is mistaken. Open up - By criticizing the work of experienced participants, as I already wrote, you increase your level of the same insight. Here it is important to compare your criticism with the criticism of other experienced participants, analyze them and your own, and try not to allow in your work what you criticized in others.
At the very least, this way you increase your level of skill.
Yes. The saying works here - You learn from other people's mistakes )
Find the right balance between honest, constructive criticism and recognizing the subjective nature of the criticism process? Here I think everything comes with experience and study.
First, you need to listen to criticism from people you have studied, studied their work, to whom you trust, those you already know a little, but the main thing is that they should be a good level more experienced than you. And another important factor - you should like the work of these critics, you should see that you are listening to the opinion of a person whose work you like, and you would like to do the same and better.
Having understood all the issues raised here together, all this will help you quickly find these balances and understand all this and perceive everything for yourself with benefit and not harm.
I post in the hope of eliciting an emotional response - it's very subjective.
When you - a respected and competent bunch - comment mainly on technical, objective issues, then my 'message' was weak. When you comment mainly on it's emotional, artistic issues - I'm warmer. Almost all comments influence my future images - thank you.
An "I don't like..." without explaining why is less than helpful.
Available time allows me to comment on only a limited number of your WEEKLY images. The selection process involves not only visual hooks but my ability to express my subjectivity in objective terms - that's what takes the time.
When you - a respected and competent bunch - comment mainly on technical, objective issues, then my 'message' was weak. When you comment mainly on it's emotional, artistic issues - I'm warmer. Almost all comments influence my future images - thank you.
An "I don't like..." without explaining why is less than helpful.
Available time allows me to comment on only a limited number of your WEEKLY images. The selection process involves not only visual hooks but my ability to express my subjectivity in objective terms - that's what takes the time.
Interview style:
- What do you appreciate in a critique?
Straight shooters. Have something to say: and get to the point quickly. Simply.
We can't make everybody happy with a pic: why we didn't, this is what interests me. I want Your perspective
I'm making an average. I find that pics with mixed reviews tend to be more interesting than pics with straight keepers. Well... the straight - FF normally, they are for a reason! But if you make everybody happy, maybe you are banal, or cliche'. Hey, maybe you just nailed it!
- What tends to turn you off or feel unhelpful?
When the reviewer talks about him/herself. It's about the picture, not about you!!
GPT-like pompous rumblings ( that are just a variant of the above).
If you are using more than 50 words, better you really have somenthing to say! ;-)
- When you write a critique, what are you hoping to offer—or discover?
A different point of view? Maybe a tip? Why I see differently from you?
I tend to be short in the keepers (we are seeing the same thing) and more articulated in the FF.
If the only thing I have to say is "I don't like it", I learned it's better to skip.
- How do you strike the right balance between offering honest, constructive critique and recognizing the subjective nature of the critique process?
I'm trying to get a balance between being useful and articulate my thoughts, and keeping to the point. I'm terrified about looking condescending, or arrogant, that happens when you're too brief, and short and to the point. I try to add a pinch of humor: hey, it's a game!
- What do you appreciate in a critique?
Straight shooters. Have something to say: and get to the point quickly. Simply.
We can't make everybody happy with a pic: why we didn't, this is what interests me. I want Your perspective
I'm making an average. I find that pics with mixed reviews tend to be more interesting than pics with straight keepers. Well... the straight - FF normally, they are for a reason! But if you make everybody happy, maybe you are banal, or cliche'. Hey, maybe you just nailed it!
- What tends to turn you off or feel unhelpful?
When the reviewer talks about him/herself. It's about the picture, not about you!!
GPT-like pompous rumblings ( that are just a variant of the above).
If you are using more than 50 words, better you really have somenthing to say! ;-)
- When you write a critique, what are you hoping to offer—or discover?
A different point of view? Maybe a tip? Why I see differently from you?
I tend to be short in the keepers (we are seeing the same thing) and more articulated in the FF.
If the only thing I have to say is "I don't like it", I learned it's better to skip.
- How do you strike the right balance between offering honest, constructive critique and recognizing the subjective nature of the critique process?
I'm trying to get a balance between being useful and articulate my thoughts, and keeping to the point. I'm terrified about looking condescending, or arrogant, that happens when you're too brief, and short and to the point. I try to add a pinch of humor: hey, it's a game!
For me, the model for Weekly is more like a formal juried art show that is evaluated “in-camera”, than an informal photo-club, where friends chat with friends at a personal level. Most of the time, I compose my comment without knowing who the artist is (sometimes it is obvious though), and before reading the title or description, because I feel that a visual art should stand on its own and communicate without words. When I write my comments on a piece, I am not trying to educate or correct the artist, in fact, I am not even thinking about or addressing the artist at all.
I think of these comments as “judge’s notes” and I am simply musing to myself, and exploring the reasons, technical and otherwise, for why I feel the way that I do. I post these comments because maybe these feelings of mine might inspire one of the other 8-billion people on the planet (which may or may not include the artist) to think more closely about how they feel about this piece of art. The people who read my comment might agree with me, or they might disagree with me, but the important and valuable thing for all of us is the “thinking about it” part, whatever conclusion is reached.
Although I know that I sometimes fail at this, my objective in a comment is to clearly list; 1) what I like and why, 2) what I don’t like and why, and 3) what I would have done differently. Don’t care what I think? That’s OK. Mine is just one opinion out of 8-billion, and all are welcome to ignore me. My goal is to make the comment detailed and clear enough so that I can recall the image I’m reacting to by reading my own words.
Whether Keeper or Freefight, I think that it is the why we feel the way we do that is the most important and useful part of any comment for all of us, even if that “why” is also the hardest part to articulate.
I think of these comments as “judge’s notes” and I am simply musing to myself, and exploring the reasons, technical and otherwise, for why I feel the way that I do. I post these comments because maybe these feelings of mine might inspire one of the other 8-billion people on the planet (which may or may not include the artist) to think more closely about how they feel about this piece of art. The people who read my comment might agree with me, or they might disagree with me, but the important and valuable thing for all of us is the “thinking about it” part, whatever conclusion is reached.
Although I know that I sometimes fail at this, my objective in a comment is to clearly list; 1) what I like and why, 2) what I don’t like and why, and 3) what I would have done differently. Don’t care what I think? That’s OK. Mine is just one opinion out of 8-billion, and all are welcome to ignore me. My goal is to make the comment detailed and clear enough so that I can recall the image I’m reacting to by reading my own words.
Whether Keeper or Freefight, I think that it is the why we feel the way we do that is the most important and useful part of any comment for all of us, even if that “why” is also the hardest part to articulate.
Some thoughtful comments so far—appreciate the shared effort to focus on the positives. I’m also enjoying the different takes on what each of you looks for, and what you aim to do, when giving a critique.
Teddy Alfrey:
Endured? Are we really that bad, Teddy ;-)
Teddy Alfrey:all of the critiques or criticisms I've endured
Endured? Are we really that bad, Teddy ;-)
ski 9:Never has my photographic integrity been so ruthlessly besmirched, while dragged through the mud and mire! (paraphrasing Oliver Hardy)
You guys are just plain mean!
Hi everyone. I'll chime in with a few thoughts.
I most appreciate critiques that are, in fact, critiques: there is engagement with the posted image and feedback relating to the subject as well as the technique in capturing the image. I've benefitted greatly when people's feedback also includes constructive criticism and suggestions that help me to improve my skills (or raise my awareness) on aspects of exposure and composition. I try to do provide similar feedback in my own comments on others' images.
I do not find feedback that is more along the lines of an opinion about whether a viewer likes or dislikes an image, without any specific reference to components of the composition or approach all that helpful, and rarely instructive. These kinds of comments are often dismissive and don't always show that much engagement with the image at all.
I quite like when people include questions or ask about particular aspects of an image, including "why the heck did you take this", as it is an opportunity to learn more about how people see and imagine the images they shoot, and the discussion often comes richer when various people add their own perspectives.
One thing I also try to do, particularly if I am a bit late in the week in contributing my comments, is to look for images that have not had much feedback yet, and give them preference, to ensure that everyone gets some responses to their images.
I've gained a lot of great tips and useful feedback from the group, so I am not all that fussed when a comment is less than useful, as it is still less common for that to be the case with this particular community. I love that there are so many long-contributing members here, as there is generally a good rapport, patience for new people, and a sense of community that is evident in the feedback.
I most appreciate critiques that are, in fact, critiques: there is engagement with the posted image and feedback relating to the subject as well as the technique in capturing the image. I've benefitted greatly when people's feedback also includes constructive criticism and suggestions that help me to improve my skills (or raise my awareness) on aspects of exposure and composition. I try to do provide similar feedback in my own comments on others' images.
I do not find feedback that is more along the lines of an opinion about whether a viewer likes or dislikes an image, without any specific reference to components of the composition or approach all that helpful, and rarely instructive. These kinds of comments are often dismissive and don't always show that much engagement with the image at all.
I quite like when people include questions or ask about particular aspects of an image, including "why the heck did you take this", as it is an opportunity to learn more about how people see and imagine the images they shoot, and the discussion often comes richer when various people add their own perspectives.
One thing I also try to do, particularly if I am a bit late in the week in contributing my comments, is to look for images that have not had much feedback yet, and give them preference, to ensure that everyone gets some responses to their images.
I've gained a lot of great tips and useful feedback from the group, so I am not all that fussed when a comment is less than useful, as it is still less common for that to be the case with this particular community. I love that there are so many long-contributing members here, as there is generally a good rapport, patience for new people, and a sense of community that is evident in the feedback.
@CHPhotography
Posted 4 months ago
When starting in WEEKLY May last year, I had only just joined FLICKR and had little idea of what might come my way, having never been with Insta and co. Some of my initial reactions were “why can’t some of these folk try to put themselves in the contributing photographers shoes?” And for me Andrius’ comment “Visualisation” implies what, for me, is often sorely lacking – by visualisation I also understand trying to understand the contributor’s message and why did s/he submit that post.
A few contributors – as Jeffrey D writes – present “I like ...” or “I don’t like ...” opinions which I doubt are seldom of interest to the individual who created the photo. When made frequently they offer little more than an image of the person making those comments. It’s fine to recommend how one might frame, crop, have shot in b/w, added more contrast or boosted saturation, especially for those still trying to improve their work and/or style. But for many competent WEEKLY contributors, s/he will have considered such aspects either when shooting or in post. Increasingly, for me, the questions posed and answers reveal a lot about the contributors intentions that I would have seldom guessed.
Having neither used multiple-composite, CGI nor AI, recent comments about Kai’s photos have been most illuminating and tempt me to look at AI as way to enhance my photos as opposed to creating artificial images. Purism is one thing, but as long as photography has existed there was montage, PS and et alia, so embracing new avenues should be an option but not take over the human input. “What will the future of photography be?” – perhaps a topic for another discussion, if not already touched on.
What do you appreciate in a critique?
When the writer takes the time to step back and be as objective as possible.
The interactive Qs and As.
What tends to turn you off or feel unhelpful?
Those who Freeflight because a photo is not their style – for me this lacks open-mindedness
Repetitive comments every week
Comments quickly fired off because writing five or 10 is a group stipulation
Lack of sensitivity
A few contributors – as Jeffrey D writes – present “I like ...” or “I don’t like ...” opinions which I doubt are seldom of interest to the individual who created the photo. When made frequently they offer little more than an image of the person making those comments. It’s fine to recommend how one might frame, crop, have shot in b/w, added more contrast or boosted saturation, especially for those still trying to improve their work and/or style. But for many competent WEEKLY contributors, s/he will have considered such aspects either when shooting or in post. Increasingly, for me, the questions posed and answers reveal a lot about the contributors intentions that I would have seldom guessed.
Having neither used multiple-composite, CGI nor AI, recent comments about Kai’s photos have been most illuminating and tempt me to look at AI as way to enhance my photos as opposed to creating artificial images. Purism is one thing, but as long as photography has existed there was montage, PS and et alia, so embracing new avenues should be an option but not take over the human input. “What will the future of photography be?” – perhaps a topic for another discussion, if not already touched on.
What do you appreciate in a critique?
When the writer takes the time to step back and be as objective as possible.
The interactive Qs and As.
What tends to turn you off or feel unhelpful?
Those who Freeflight because a photo is not their style – for me this lacks open-mindedness
Repetitive comments every week
Comments quickly fired off because writing five or 10 is a group stipulation
Lack of sensitivity
1. Serious critique, many times by serious photographers. I don't always agree with the critiques, but many times its often good to hear other points of view
2. develop a thick skin. Sometimes your favorite photo just doesn't work in other people's eyes.
3. Seeing works of other, serious, photographers. You get to appreciate the unique styles of others. As always with art. Be a fan, before you are a creator. Photography is mostly culling and editing, so you get to see others works and other critique you can greatly expand your language on photography as well as the style of other artists.
2. develop a thick skin. Sometimes your favorite photo just doesn't work in other people's eyes.
3. Seeing works of other, serious, photographers. You get to appreciate the unique styles of others. As always with art. Be a fan, before you are a creator. Photography is mostly culling and editing, so you get to see others works and other critique you can greatly expand your language on photography as well as the style of other artists.
4. Using weekly as a sounding board for photos I'm not quite sure about. Especially if its a type that isn't my strong suit.
Weely helps me to gain perspective from others, which in returns helps me to see passed my own biases towards my image.
1. What do you actually think of this? Do other people think this is a good shot, or just me.
This helps keep you grounded
2. What elements did I get right, what elements did I miss.
A shoot a lot of the same subject matter. If this subject is on my own internal shot list, might just shoot it again. There can always be a next time if I really need to nail the shot.
No one is "good enough" ever. I'd like to be consistently nailing top tier bangers.
This helps keep you grounded
2. What elements did I get right, what elements did I miss.
A shoot a lot of the same subject matter. If this subject is on my own internal shot list, might just shoot it again. There can always be a next time if I really need to nail the shot.
No one is "good enough" ever. I'd like to be consistently nailing top tier bangers.