Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
hi group
the group has been going for a few weeks now and we seem to have a mix of approaches going on, with some decent critiques, which is all good.
Just thought I'd open a thread about possible "tweaks" to the group - have you got any ideas or gremlins you'd like to change so that you'd be more active within it.
One thing that I think would help us with a critique and particularly making "relevent" comments, is a small description of the "context" or "intended audience" for a photo in the description section.
For example...
if a shot is very "literal" and not "creative", then if the intended audience is a documentary project or journal, we probably need to critique it in a different way to the art or creative media sector.
If you don't have an intended audience, as is the case with most hobbists, then still try to add in what audience you think it would appeal to.
Why?
Well styles differ hugely for different audiences. The portrait and wedding business looks very similar, but the results are very different - portrait tends to be "fine art" whereas weddings are more "documentary" (mainly due to time constraints).
Or architecture and cityscape - architecture is about the building whereas cityscape is equally about the environment around a building as the building itself.
Hope I explained that well...
Any other ideas, just add them in, lets try and keep the group ticking over as I think it's doing a good job so far
Usually i place critique on the images which i personally feel interesting to discuss, and also i try to avoid placing critique on technical aspects rather i try to give emphasis on the philosophy and composition of the shot and critique accordingly,
each and every images uploaded to this group do not attract me, so in that cases i avoid placing critiques,
a thoroughly discussion/debate about composition, light and other aspects can give a lot of help to every one, and in this cases only a selected few images which are worthy of discussion, can be given much more emphasis to discuss and share the views (not necessarily picking faults but elaborate discussion regarding those aspects), i prefer active participation in this way according to the own time schedule and expect that kind of participation from the fellow members rather being silent...
I agree with Rahul. Too often the emphasis is on fixing perceived technical flaws at the expense of a discussion on aesthetic factors. I know it's easier simply to point out what's wrong with the exposure or the processing but I feel a discussion about whether the photograph succeeds in putting its message across would also be useful.
So, ermm, I think I agree with Ade......
....must be time for my medication. 
Quote: bloody hell Jools
what's going on!
It's all right. I just disagreed with one of your crits. I feel much better now.
I also disagree with the terse, one-liner style. It comes over as dismissive, cursory and lacking in any real thought. Like a politician's soundbites, in fact.
Quote: Just thought I'd open a thread about possible "tweaks" to the group
I would not mind seeing a little more debate on images, its not the critique gallery so I can`t see it doing any harm 
I`ve been a bit quite of late, sacked from my job, then almost loosing the wife, she`s on the mend now but I`m spending a lot of time playing nurse maid 
I think the lengthy debate thing has its place, but I'd not enforce it as part of the group.
I for one have very little to say on many images, and more on a few. I'd really struggle to go into detail on the former I must admit!
I can see one critique Julian has placed on one of my images ,
probably i can not express properly in English, that is the main fault working against me, what i have said in this thread before, i am making it far more clear by giving an example,
in another site, i can not name it, they select an image for a week for critique and discussion through out the week, i am not very active member there but taken part in a few, that was interesting, you can do the same thing here in this group daily, that was my point...
Feels like deja vu this, I know Ade's very protective of the bullet point concept but I think it's important to be able to qualify critiques, and also discuss and defend your work if you feel it's misinterpreted. That's what I've been doing under an image of mine in the group, and it's much more interesting than taking bullet points stated as fact and having to accept them. I think the group will be stronger if this approach is encouraged, and generate better and more honest critique. It doesn't make it the CG gallery, and doesn't dilute the 'tell it like it is' concept - a longer, more considered dialogue can still be completely honest and forthright, and discussing an image properly can be much more useful than just 'here's whats wrong - bang, bang, bang'.
Usually I think if an image needs an explanation, its already failed.
If I post an image I'd like to know what peole make of it before telling them anything abut it.
However there are images that would really work best illustrating a story - very few people would know the significance without any explanation, and the background information makes the image much more interesting.
So I think its really a matter of individual circumstances.
It has been said for many a year that "A picture is worth a thousand words" so I agree with Keith to a great extent, that explanations should not be necessary, but I guess there will be exceptions.
However, I never post an image with an explanation either, perhaps I do not have my head in the clouds attempting to emulate the Hooray Henry's of the art world, I keep my feet firmly on the ground and take pictures for the picture's sake, rather than some dreamy, imaginable and intangible theme.
Explanations of the circumstances surrounding the picture are most welcome. It is always nice to know the location and any pertinent details surrounding the history for example.
Decicion wise I an easy either way, I just thought I would add my pension's worth to the discussion.
Quote: in another site, i can not name it, they select an image for a week for critique and discussion through out the week, i am not very active member there but taken part in a few, that was interesting, you can do the same thing here in this group daily, that was my point...
I think I might know which site & group you are referring to, and I really like that idea. I haven't taken part myself but have read quite a few of the discussions. Maybe it's something to start a new group for, 'discussion image of the week'. I find it much more interesting to discuss the approach, purpose, aesthetics etc., and to question opinions of others, have a dialogue, than to see very black & white statements that say 'this is good, this is bad'. That's what's missing from this site in general I think, critique is so technically biased and there's no real discussion about each others' work. (Feel free to show me if it is happening somewhere and I haven't seen it).
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Related Content
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
Olympus 'Portraiture' Competition - Win £1000 Worth Of Gear!
30th April 2013 - 31st May 2013
This month, to celebrate the launch of Olympus' new micro site Olympus Image Space, Olympus are giving you the chance to win £1000 worth of Olympus gear!...
Featured e2 Photo
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
