This photos is here for no other reason than to have a photo at the top of the post.
Be warned, you'll be reading the word, "critique" until you're sick of it...
Critique is something that is woven into the fabric of learning photography. Simply put, if you are learning photography, at some point you will encounter critique. In this blog, I'll discuss my opinions on both giving and getting it.
What is critique? The dictionary definition according to a Google search is: "a detailed analysis and assessment of something, especially a literary, philosophical, or political theory". To put it in a photographic context and in more simple terms, it's looking at someone's photographs and telling them what you think works and what you think doesn't.
Critique is one of those things that has mixed connotations. On one hand, it can be a valuable learning tool and on the other, you have to let others judge and comment on all the little (or not so little) mistakes you made and that can be hard to listen to.
At college, critique time was always a nerve wracking experience. Essentially, the way our blocks worked was that we had a given subject. Let's say portraiture. You would have 6 weeks to get that done. On week 3, we would bring in what he had so far so the class could critique them and then you could go out for the next few weeks to either use the feedback you got or completely ignore it. I found it very useful and on a few occasions, the critique given, made me change the direction I had been going in. I think a lot of people found that as well.
But everyone hated it! Well most people. I quite enjoyed it and would have fun with the idea that I was going to 'tear something apart'. I never did, of course (some of my former classmates may disagree) but I would always try be helpful. I think the reason I had a bit of a reputation in the class (aside from hysteria, of course) was that I wasn't afraid to stick my hand up and give an opinion. My approach is that if I see something that I think might not be working the way the person wanted, I could throw out my thoughts and suggestions and if they agree, they can go with it and if they don't they can completely ignore me. It's their photo, after all. They'll do it their way. It might turn out that a suggestion they don't particularly like might spark a different thought in them that they do like. So even if you haven't been the source of the suggestion, you might have helped in a roundabout way. So it's often worth it to speak up. But speak up with something useful.
"That's good/bad" is completely useless as critique. Good critique is as much about making suggestions or even just throwing out ideas related to the photograph as it is about finding things the photographer did 'wrong'. And, regardless of circumstance, you give the critique without being a dick about it. It's very easy to come across as a dickhead when you're pointing out the 'flaws' in someone else's photos. Even when you're being helpful.
You see, as photographers, we're used to people telling us how wonderful we are. If I stick a photograph up on Facebook or wherever to let people see it, any comments I get will be complimentary. I'm not famous so don't have 'haters'. Only friends, family and associates who wouldn't dream of questioning my abilities. It's easy to get used to that. To think that maybe you are wonderful. Critique from peers will bring you back to earth with a bump. That's why there's an unwritten rule that you don't critique an image unless the person specifically asks for it. Sometimes you just need the applause.
At college there was a mix of skill/interest level. Some were more motivated than others (that's what happens with higher education). When it came to critique time, I thought it was telling how people would react. Those who wanted to learn and improve would often encourage people to engage with their photos while the less interested in the class would shy away from speaking up in case it encouraged others to do the same when it came to their turn. But that wouldn't tell you the whole story. Even some of the best and most motivated in the class at times would keep their heads down when the photographs were being examined by the class.
That's because it can be difficult to hear people tearing down something you are proud of. As photographers, our photographs are personal to us. They are our vision of the world. Maybe to get this photograph you climbed a mountain, or drove for 6 hours, or stood soaking in the rain, or narrowly avoid getting mugged, or researched something for weeks or any number of other hardships. Maybe it's the last photograph of your dying grandmother. For someone to look at it for faults and dismiss all that effort to point out that the focus is lightly off or that, "that lamp post is sticking out of that person's head" can be upsetting.
But the truth is, if you want to improve (at least when you're starting out), you need fresh eyes on your work. I've often said that if you take 5 photographs and rank them best to worst and then ask a photographer to pick their favourite, they'll pick the one you put 2nd. A non-photographer will pick the one you put last. The reason the photographer will pick the one you put 2nd, is that they won't have the same emotional connection to it that you do. That mountain you climbed up means nothing to anybody else. Other Photographers can look at the final result without taking into consideration the work/hardships that went into it. Something that you as the photographer are incapable of doing.
“Choose your gurus, wisely”
So make sure if you are looking for critique that you get it from people who know what they're talking about. The unwritten rule that you don't critique work unless asked isn't the only reason that the comments on my Facebook page are so glowing. It's because they're coming from people who aren't really in a position to find faults. This isn't a criticism of your friends and family, by the way. They're being supportive and good on them for doing it. But if you want to learn from critique, you need to make sure that the right people are the ones giving it. Find people who's opinions you value and get it from them. I got that at college but camera clubs or certain places online might get you similar results if you don't have someone you can go to already. Looking at larger sites, there are lots of places that will give you critique on your photos but the problem there is that it often comes from people who are only learning themselves or aren't very good at passing on useful information. I've seen critique on Reddit where people have said, this "should be cropped tighter" or, that "should be higher up in the frame". That kind of black and white thinking just doesn't work for photography. It's worth remembering that most critiques are just people suggesting you make your photos look more like their photos because that's what they think looks good. I think it's actually quite damaging to hear why your photographs should become more conventional. Because that's essentially what these people are suggesting. They've seen a thing somewhere that told them about the rule of thirds or where you should and shouldn't cut people out with the frame and decided that that's law and any photograph failing to adhere to these standards should be corrected. A beginner may well hear this and take it onboard. It would be hard to come back from that without some considerable effort, I think. So choose your gurus, wisely. That is easier said than done, mind you.
It's important to tailor your critique to the person on the receiving end. Sometimes it's quite hard to do because you're not entirely familiar with the standard of the photographer so you might have to get extra information to go along with the photograph. But it's worth doing. There's no point in asking a complete beginner what the photograph means. Chances are they just saw a cool/interesting scene and photographed it. Just as it's not particularly helpful to point out to an experienced photographer struggling to get something to work that their photograph doesn't follow the rule of thirds. Chances are they know and the decision was a deliberate one.
But to be honest, there reaches a stage where you won't really be looking for critique any more. I couldn't tell you the last time I asked someone to look at my photographs with the purpose of getting feedback. It's not something that I look for these days. I take photographs the way I take them and there's not much that anyone else is going to change about that. I look for help with other things (websites, collections etc) and might seek help from someone if there was something I actually needed help doing or if I was trying something completely new to me but other than that, there's not much I can learn from people talking about the lighting or the composition etc. I know about the lighting and the composition etc. It's like that because I chose to have it like that. I'm certainly not claiming to know everything and like most people I learn things with almost every shoot but there comes a stage when you have to leave the nest and do your own thing.
I'm guessing, at some point in the future I'll have some existential crisis that has me questioning myself and how I'm "stuck in a rut". I've seen it online a hundred times. I can just picture it and I'm already fed up listening to myself despite this happening years in the future. Maybe then I'll go seeking critique from a trusted few but until then, I'm happy that I know what I'm doing and that putting photos up to be critiqued and then sifting through bad critique to find the good isn't worth the time.
So there's a life cycle to critique. At first you need it but can't tell good from bad so it sometimes helps and sometimes hinders. Then you need it and can identify good critique and it helps you. Then you don't need it and (hopefully) you use your experience to pass on the knowledge to someone else. And then maybe you need it again when you get a bit fed up.
If you take anything away from this rambling nonsense it should probably be that if you're starting out and looking for critique, learn quickly to identify good critique from bad. My rule of thumb is that people using absolutes like the word "should" as in "that should be further over" should be roundly ignored. It'll do you no good to get into that mindset. And learn to embrace the good critique when you find it. It's more pleasant to be told something is great than told it needs work but it won't help you in the long run. We all take crap photos when we start out, so don't be shocked when someone doesn't proclaim you to be the next big thing two months after discovering your new hobby. But fear not, as one day you'll (hopefully) be good enough and confident enough to not have to rely on someone else's opinion of your photographs.
It was sometime in my late twenties that I stopped caring what others thought of me. I didn't care what people thought of my hair (which is handy as I have none) or my shoes, or my car, or my personality or any other number of things. It was a great freedom and it really did change my approach to life. Can you imagine how your photography would fare if you had no consideration about the reaction it would receive? Photographing purely for oneself and not for others. The absolute lack of fear of failure would be a powerful asset. I'm not at that stage and while people are paying me to take photos for them, I won't be as I have a professional duty of care to make sure clients are happy with the photos they get. But even taking the professional aspect out of things and looking purely at my personal work, I haven't managed to break away from it. There's still a part of me that wonders how the photographs will be received when they go public or at least looks forward to the inevitable praise from my small band of Facebook followers. And that will affect how I take the photographs one way or another to some degree. But moving away from looking for critique is definitely a step in the right direction. When you get critique, one of the things that you're looking for is reassurance that you're doing okay. Someone pointing out the more minute things in your photographs means there are no big things to point out (and there are always going to be small things to point out/suggest). Doing your own thing without that reassurance is like cycling without stabilisers or swimming without arm bands. Scary at first but ultimately more rewarding.
If you read all of that, you read the word, ‘critique‘ 34 times.
