A proposal

[Richard D]

This has been knocking around my brain for a while. There is so much talent and good heart in this group and I wonder what you'll all think of this idea.

My idea is that someone post a photo once a week or more or less. It could be one of theirs or one that they saw online. My preference would be for "excellent" photos or photos that are approaching excellence but might be not quite there.

Then everyone who chooses can critique the photo. What is good about it and why it's good. If it captures emotion, has excellent composition, exposure, etc. What could maybe make it a better photo. Whatever else comes to mind or is observed.

What do you all think?

[HappyCynic]

1. Good idea...

I think it's a good idea. The only thing I'm a bit hesitant about is the "once a week or more or less". It may become a bit restrictive (or at least seem that way to some). I wonder if it might be a good idea to have a standard way to flag threads that are asking for critiques. I'm thinking that we have the "SUBMISSION THREAD" and "COMMENT THREAD" for the monthly and seasonal contests. We all (with the possible exception of newcomers to this group, although they learn very quickly) know what to expect from these threads without even reading it. So, if we standardize something like "CRITIQUE REQUEST: my landscape photo", then it'll be more obvious to that anyone, at any time, can request a critique.

I know this scheme would technically run the risk of flooding the board with requests but I think we'll be able to show enough restraint for it to work out.

What do you think?

[qnr]

2. I don't feel qualified to offer a critique or constructive comments on an "excellent"" or almost so

photograph. Obviously, they're already doing things right. Personally, I'd feel more at home discussing photos that could benefit from my meager store of knowledge. Note that I'd have no problem discussing excellent photos and what the person did to make them so.

Anyway, notwithstanding my personal reservations, it's probably a great idea, and I hope it comes along.

[Richard D]

7. Part of my idea . . .

. . . is the looking at great photographs and analyzing what made them great. I know that would help me improve my work.

[qnr]

11. OK, I agree (as mentioned) with that aspect of it, and I think that would be

useful.

[HappyCynic]

3. Side proposal...

Your idea has given me an idea that might be fun as well. I hope you don't mind if I post it here in the reply to yours.
Anatomy of a photo:
Every few weeks, we could have a submissions thread of up to 10 photos by different people. A quick poll (2-3 days) could be taken to select the photo people want to know more about. The photographer could then discuss the factors that went into the photo, the set-up they used, how they framed the shot (and what they excluded), what they tried that didn't work, etc.

Edit: Incidentally, I don't mean for this to replace your proposal, as I think your idea is a good one.

[Mira]

5. Yours came in while I typed mine, and I like it.

We can do a number of things, yours being another one, to breathe a little life into our mutual admiration clique which is wonderful, but could be more instructive.

[Richard D]

8. I like it too.

There would need to be some way to select the photos so that there aren't dozens posted a day. I think then the analysis would become diluted. My idea is really more to study what makes a photo a great photo. I'm often so emotionally hit by the great ones that I don't intellectually know why it has affected me so.

[apaflo]

13. Expanding on that idea.

HappyCynic said:

Every few weeks, we could have a submissions thread of up to 10 photos by different people. A quick poll (2-3 days) could be taken to select the photo people want to know more about. The photographer could then discuss the factors that went into the photo, the set-up they used, how they framed the shot (and what they excluded), what they tried that didn't work, etc.

This idea has value as a learning device.

"Comment and Critique" where many people discuss someone else's photograph is where for every 100 people there will certainly be 100 different ideas of what defines a "good picture". It is fun for many folks, but we learn a lot about human nature, perhaps not so much about photography.

What is important about any given photograph is whether it does what the photographer wanted to accomplish. That is what "style" is all about, and skill is the ability to repeatedly implement a style at will. It may be the photographer is only interested in satisfying one specific person, often the photographer themselves! Or, for example, a customer that has contracted a given image. When that is the case, the uniquely valid definition of what is a "good picture" is extremely restricted, and certainly it is irrelevant to how 100 C&C commenters define "good".

For that reason I personally do not post C&C of photographs; what I will happily post though are comments about techniques for accomplishing specific effects. Post a picture and ask if it is "good", and I'm not going to be part of the conversation; but post a picture and say you think it would be better if the background was more (or less) isolated, and I'll be very happy to join a discussion of the techniques involved. It isn't my place to decide if the techniques make the image better.

A useful corollary is that a great learning tool is finding images I like that also have detailed descriptions of what the photographer was intending and how the image was actually produced in light of the intent. Ideally these are images where I can detect the photgrapher's typical style, because that indicates pre-awareness and intentional application of the techniques used. I love to read Ansel Adams, Alfred Eisenstadt, and Dorothea Lange for just those reasons. And it should be noted that those three have very different styles, very different concepts of a "good" photograph, and very similar techniques to get such different results. (Consider this too... Adams' favorite subjects are objects I have no interest in, the same is about half true with Eisenstadt and half of his descriptions of what he sees in a photograph drive me up a tree, and Lange's arrogance is mind boggling: but all three were exceedingly able to implement their unique style, they were all extremely skilled in technique, and they understood and could describe how each photograph came to be what it was.)

The gist of it is that I don't want to hear 100 random photographers give 100 random ideas about what makes 1 photographer's image better or worse. I want to hear from the photographer who made the image. Why and How! And I want to hear all of that about an image both the photographer and I think is a good example of the photographer's style or an image that has some characteristic that I think is or should be part of my style.

Hence, yes... line up photographers to tell us what makes a photograph what it is, rather than we all tell the photographer why we aren't them.

Indeed, I would like it if the monthly contest required a short essay about each photograph. Or at least if the winning entry then required a long essay! I would most like to see each entry accompanied by an essay, simply because while it is interesting to see which image is the favorite, that one is never everybody's favorite. And I would hope that part of the choice of which image to vote for would come from deciding how well an image actually accomplished what the photographer (as opposed to the viewer) thinks it should be.

Of course changing the existing contest may or may not be acceptable, so an equally productive project would be to set up a whole new "contest" with an entirely different perspective.

[HappyCynic]

14. Complementary types

I think having both types of threads would be useful. The times I've asked for input on a photo, some have pointed out things they liked that I hadn't thought of. It also opened up new aspects to explore. If someone says they like the sense of movement in a photo, it gives me some new things to explore: playing with shutter speed to change the amount of movement, dominance of the movement in the photo, implied/actual movement, etc. Some of these might be skipped over if this isn't the main focus (pardon the pun) of the photographer when taking the picture.
I think the two types of threads would complement each other. One can be applied when taking the photos and the other can be applied when selecting photos you want to keep/post. Some may be interested in what makes the finished photo interesting and good to others, some may be interested in how to achieve specific effects, and some will be interested in both. I haven't been doing photography very long (a bit a long time ago and less than a year more recently) so I'd personally be interested in and think I would benefit from both threads.
I think having the existing contest remain the same would be the way to go. In my opinion, having a write-up on the photos would complicate things in a few ways. It would make entering the contest more intimidating. Also, I'm not sure most of the voters in GD want or really care about a lot of the behind the scenes details of the photographs. For some of the entries, the photo is taken from the photographer's archives and he or she may not remember all the details surrounding the photo. There are also those photos which weren't planned but were a split second decision on the part of the photographer. In these cases, there wouldn't be much to describe. (eg. "I was photographing this, then that happened so I quickly took a photo.")

[Mira]

4. What! Such a good idea, and 10 views other than mine, and no acknowledgement of it?

I've been off for many hours reading a manuscript of a book a friend wrote. First reader. First request for critique. Whether I'm a writer or not (NOT)
my opinion is valuable because I am a reader.

In the photo group it's not that different, it incorporates an invitation to all interested in photography, lovers/amateurs/professionals I think we are falling short of progressing together as we could. Our responses to each other's work are not very critical, mostly they are ego massages.
Unless of course we are specifically called upon for ciritque, and even then it is tentative in its arrival.

Not everything we post is intended to show prize winners in abeyance. We show lots of stuff, as we should, and we participate in each others lives by seeing what the other person saw that day.
Sometimes though we show things because we think they are beautiful, and we want to know if they really are, and if not WHY not in a discussion where from the honesty of others we can look through their eyes and evaluate alternatives, or, of course, celebrate a winner.

I have totally enjoyed the whimsical, thoroughly personal and critical-eyed observations KittyWampus took the time to do on our 3 submission threads.I knew two things, her experience is solid, and her observations could, if she expanded them to take a risk of nudging an ego, teach us a lot.

And we can do this for each other easily, but we don't.

That's why this is such a great idea.

[Richard D]

9. Thank you!

[Mz Pip]

6. Sounds like a good idea

We kind of do that already but it is kind of random. If we had a special read just for that purpose it might attract more attention.

[Richard D]

10. Here's a site that gave me in part the inspiration for this idea

http://www.bagnewsnotes.com/

[Tindalos]

12. Critiques would be helpful

I've asked for critiques in the past and found the responses educational. However I'm not sure I know enough to critique anyone else's work and usually refrain from doing so. It's an interesting idea though.


--------------------------------