Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/12/17

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Levels of critique
From: leowesson at gmail.com (leo wesson)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:37:32 -0600
References: <9E846867-FC2F-4CB2-8BD3-CFCC333C41EF@mac.com>

i think if you ask for a response with a particular aspect of an
image, ie: tilted horizon or straight or is the composition off
balance, you will get a specific response which may lead to more
discussion.
It helps if you provide, maybe, a comment like, i was trying to show
the cats in the harbor you give the potential commenter some
direction.

Leo Wesson
Photographer/Videographer
817.733.9157
www.leowesson.com



On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 2:22 PM, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com> 
wrote:
> Thinking about the recent thread(s) on photo comments and critiques:
>
> For me,
> While comments such as: "?great, ?like it, ?number 4 is the best one,
> ?doesn't do anything for me, ?WOW! ?looks like you missed the focus ?etc."
> do provide a certain amount of motivation and encouragement (or sometimes
> discouragement),
> they don't really qualify as "very useful critiques."
>
> They simply express rather quick first impressions;
> which I do value;
> because that may be all the time and consideration our photographs receive
> from most viewers.
>
> A detailed analysis (critique) of any given photograph (or body of
> photographs) would need to consider and discuss:
>
> 1) The genre
> ? ? ? ?a) commercial
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?1 - portrait
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?2 - event
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?3 - advertising
> ? ? ? ?b) news
> ? ? ? ?c) editorial / documentary
> ? ? ? ?d) fine art
> ? ? ? ?e) casual / family
> ? ? ? ?f) others
>
> 2) The conceptual context
> ? ? ? ?a) what's the point?
> ? ? ? ?b) what do you wish to communicate?
>
> 3) The aesthetics
> ? ? ? ?a) composition
> ? ? ? ?b) design elements
> ? ? ? ?c) the moment
> ? ? ? ?d) the light
> ? ? ? ?e) feelings
>
> 4) The technicalities
> ? ? ? ?a) exposure
> ? ? ? ?b) focus
> ? ? ? ?c) depth of field (or lack there-of)
> ? ? ? ?d) color and/or tonality
> ? ? ? ?e) noise / grain
> ? ? ? ?f) etc.
>
> 5) How do the above three work (or not) together?
>
> 6) The historical context
> ? ? ? ?a) place in history
> ? ? ? ?b) place in art (or media)
> ? ? ? ?c) from the traditional
> ? ? ? ?d) to the cutting edge
>
> It may be helpful, if we want more than a cursory first impression comment,
> to include information as to the intention and purpose for photographing 
> and
> posting the photograph,
> along with a clear request for advice regarding one or more of the above.
> Some already do this - as in Lawrence's "IMG: Maggie at the helm - opinions
> wanted."
>
> That of course is much different than what most of us tend to do here;
> which amounts to simply sharing photographs (and sometimes stories) of
> where we've been, what we've done, who we've seen, what we tend to look at,
> gear demonstrations, etc.;
> along with the occasional sharing of "actual client and/or published work."
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george at imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Levels of critique)
In reply to: Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Levels of critique)