I can’t help but feel like we should rein in the conversation a bit… going back to what OP asked:
If we are talking about feedback that was requested, I’m not sure how helpful it is to tell a novice photographer that their image should not need an explanation. Sure; maybe this is the ideal we want to strive for as artists, but for someone who is new to the craft, the consensus (at least for the NPN critiques) seems to be that providing some context for your image and describing your intent to fellow commenters will maximize the utility of any feedback they may have to offer you.
As for what to do with the feedback that you do receive, I personally still believe that almost any advice you receive is going to be subjective, but that doesn’t mean that all advice is equivalent or should be given the same consideration. Advice you receive from a respected, experienced, successful (however you define that) photographer should certainly carry more weight (and therefore have more value to you) than unsolicited feedback from a stranger on Instagram.
And if you disagree with well-intended advice that you receive, even if it’s from a photographer you admire or respect, you are, of course, not obligated to heed that advice, but it will pay dividends to approach it with an open mind and take the time to consider why it was given.
I commented on that question earlier. If you scroll upwards you will see that. This is a discussion. Comments were made after that and comments were made on comments. You took my quote out of context and tied to something it had little to do with.
Most good discussions grow and lead from one thing to another. My view is that this is not a question and answer thing. An answer is discussed. The answers to answers can lead to discussions. That’s how I see things. If my comments need to be reined in I feel it should be the moderators to do it.
This^^. The idea that an image should “stand on its own” without explanation is fine for the finished product, so to speak. Early in the process to getting to the finished product, however, it is very helpful for the critiquer (made up that word) to know what was intended - whether it was simply to make an aesthetically pleasing photo or to convey something. The photo might be perfectly wonderful, but if the photographer intended to convey a story or feeling and the aesthetic of the photo doesn’t support that story, in my mind, that is not successful.
I understand Igor’s point that we, as viewers, should look at a photo with an open mind and describe what we see (and why) without being led by the photographer. But in the realm of critiquing, that may or may not be helpful to the photographer, especially if they are less experienced. Also, having to explain one’s thought process is inherently helpful, again especially for the less experienced.
Personally, I look at whether said person is commenting on my colors or a technical aspect like composition. If it is a critique about white balance, saturation, or something similar then I take it with a grain of salt. If someone suggests a crop, focus point, or leveling something out… then I take that as something that I can implement without changing my processing style.
As for my advice, just be sure to not take it personally. You are not asking people to judge you as a human being. You are simply asking for an opinion. You don’t need to heed the advice, but who knows, there my be a kernel of useful thought there. My two cents.
Advice to a novice should be encouraging. As a first step it would be good to ask the novice what they were trying to accomplish when they tripped the shutter. That is, why did they take the picture. Your advice should be directed toward helping them to accomplish their goal. Along the way you can gently make technical suggestions relevant to helping them achieve their goal. This approach will be positive and because of that the novice will be more receptive to your advice.
Hey Igor - My apologies; it wasn’t my intent to take anything you said out of context. And perhaps “rein in” was a poor choice of words; I was just trying to relate the conversation back to the original post. I wasn’t trying to restrict the discussion.
Doesn’t this depend very much on the topic, the type of photography? For instance in landscape photography, especially woodland, the how you take your picture, how you approach your subject, how you separate it from its surroundings is very important. Therefore suggestions, comments on how you shot your photo could be immensely useful. It is actually what I struggle with most. Getting a certain feel/mood afterwards is relatively easy.
I agree. Showing how you feel about the subject is important and not always easy to bring across. What the picture is of is less interesting than what you think it is. However, if you’re shooting for a travel magazine then it’s the azure water of Bora Bora or if it’s one of those climbing magazine then it’s about the cliff itself or how steep it is. We at NPN have moved away from that type of imagery. They do tend to be more clicheish but that’s what sells.
Back to Igor’s original comment, there is a wonderful short story written years ago by Kurt Vonnegut called “Harrison Bergeron”, in which society has become dystopian and no excellence is possible. Weights are placed on ballet dancers to make them all equal, super intellegent people receive ear buds that blast sound whenever they have “intellegent thoughts”, etc. In many of the “other” photo forums, there certainly is a tendency to disparage criticism and it seems to me that this tendency is alive and well in our culture. So, I salute all who criticize kindly and all who ask for criticism.
I don’t think disparaging criticism is altogether a bad thing. I would draw sharp contrast between critique (which I would see as synonymous with Aref’s original use of feedback) and criticism. I would ask what’s the point? If the goal is growth and improvement in one’s imagery, then a focus on constructive feedback/critique is far more effective than criticism. I come at this from a enthusiast perspective. I do photography for my own personal growth, creative edification, and as something that I can share with other folks. From my perspective, critique approaches photography from the “rising tide lifts all boats” mindset while criticism can lead to a hierarchical, competitive mindset. The latter is antithetical to why I do photography. I think supportive critique creates connection and community while criticism ends conversation and drives people apart.
Sorry to be pedantic if you were using critique and criticism synonymously.
Indeed, I was using them synonymously. Subtlety of language has never been my strongpoint…Your point is well taken though. If a critique is not done kindly or constructively, then it is just criticism.
