From dpchallenge.com; "Critique for Dummies - A Practical Guide" by John M. Setzler, Jr:
"What is a Critique?
Critique comes in many forms, but in a nutshell, it’s the opinion of the giver. A critique is a simple description of the photo based on the viewer’s personality and background. This description could include a lot of different topics, which we will discuss in this guide.
Before we can discuss how to critique a photograph, I think it’s important to know how to look at a photograph. It’s important to try to understand what you see in a photo before you try to give feedback on it.
How to Look at a Photograph
It sounds simple enough, but it’s more complex than you might think. Here’s a breakdown of my own workflow for looking at a photograph. I wish I had some flowcharting software to create a graphic for this, but it’s not really that complex.
Do you like the photo?
This part isn’t usually too complicated to figure out. In most cases, you either like what you see or you don’t. The photo will stimulate you visually, emotionally or maybe even both. The stimulation may be good or bad and that will determine whether or not you like what you see. The photographer’s choice of subject may or may not appeal to you. You may or may not like the way they chose to photograph it. There are a lot of smaller elements of the image that will determine whether or not the image appeals to you. Sorting out these elements is what builds your critique.
What is the subject?
What is the photographer trying to show you in the photo? What inspired the photographer to choose this subject? Does the subject interest you in any particular way? Was the photographer successful in showing you the subject?
Is this photo spontaneous or set up?
It’s very important to make this distinction whenever possible. I usually hold the two types of photos to different standards. A spontaneous photo may have certain qualities that make me look less at certain aspects of the image. When a photographer has complete control of the subject environment, I am less forgiving than when the photographer is working in a spontaneous mode. In a set up environment, I look for lighting and other technical aspects that enhance the subject’s appearance. Technical excellence is important when the photographer has complete control. In a spontaneous environment, I look to see how effectively the photographer portrayed the subject, and if it’s as good as it could be in the given circumstances. I also try to note different circumstances that could produce something stronger. I can’t possibly know everything about those circumstances other than what I can see within the image. This brings us to the topic of assumptions, which we will discuss later.
What is the environment?
The subject of the photo may not fill the entire frame. Is the subject’s environment pleasing? Is it supportive of the subject? Are there distractions in the frame? Are there objects that are competing for attention? In a controlled environment, everything seen in the image should have a purpose, whether it is the subject of the photo, or something supportive of the subject. In an uncontrolled environment, extra items in the field of view should not be competing for attention with the subject. Keep in mind that a photo may have multiple subjects or a group of objects that create the subject.
What’s the mood of the photo?
Does the photo stir your senses? Does the photo make you wonder about something? Does it make you ask yourself questions? Does it inspire you? Does it make you feel good? Does it make you feel somber? Does the photo help you to know the subject?
Now we have established a few important bits of information about the photo we are reviewing. We know whether or not we like what we see. We know what the subject is and what the photographer is trying to show us. We know that the photo is either spontaneous or set up. We have also considered the environment in which the photo was made.
Where do we go from here?
There are four more basic areas of critique to observe after we have reached this point. These areas are creativity, composition, post processing, and technical aspects.
Creativity:
Did the photographer take any creative steps to make this photograph interesting to the viewer? Some elements of creativity may include camera angle or perspective, exposure technique, and effective use of lighting. This aspect of the image is usually where good photographers are separated from great ones. We have all seen photos certain subjects, but a great photographer will show it to us in an inspiring way.
Composition:
Is the image composed in an appealing way? Does the eye come to rest on the subject or a specific area of the image? Your personal understanding of composition will dictate what you can and can’t say about it in a critique.
Post Processing:
Post processing of a photograph is a definite target for critique. This is one area where the photographer has total control of everything. In general, photos branch into two categories where post processing is concerned. There are those where you don’t notice the post processing and those where you do. Post processing is quite subjective. Everyone has his own opinion on how it should be done. In a critique, you might want to discuss the “why” questions. Post processing choices are deliberate ones made by the photographer. There is some reason behind it, or there should be. If you can’t determine the reason or don’t agree with it, it’s a good point for critique.
Technicals:
In my opinion, the technical aspects of a photo, such as depth of field, focus, shutter speeds, and exposure don’t come into play until after the viewer has decided whether or not he likes the photo. In most types of photography, the technical items are not what the photographer is trying to show you. They have presented you with a subject or subjects and their technical choices should be supportive of those subjects as much as possible. Some photographers choose to make the technical aspects of their photo the subject in some cases. These photos have to be treated differently. You should just look at those images and see if you can understand what they are showing you and why they chose to do it.
Assumptions:
Everyone knows the old saying about assumptions. Making an assumption in a critique is simply a bad idea. One of the most common assumption mistakes I see in critiques is when a different view or camera angle is suggested. We have no way of knowing what a photo would look like from a different perspective, so we should never suggest it. Critique what you see. The only assumption you should ever make in a critique is that everything you see is intentional, whether it actually is or not. If you think something you see isn’t intentional, you should critique it as intentional. Tell the photographer that you do or don’t like his choice. If it is actually a mistake, the photographer will know and learn from it.
Who is qualified to critique?
Everyone is qualified to critique. No matter how much or little you know about photography, you can always tell if you like a photo when you look at it. If you aren’t comfortable with certain aspects of a critique, just leave them out and talk about what you know!
How to receive a critique:
Critiques are opinions and nothing more. They are reflections of the people giving them. You should never argue or complain about a critique. You will either agree with it or you won’t. When you post a photo to a public forum for critique, you must be prepared to hear the worst-case scenarios as well as the educated critiques. If you are sensitive about your photos, posting them online is not a good idea. Don’t expect everyone to share your sentiments about any given photo. Photography is supposed to be fun. Don’t let negative critiques change your own opinion of your work. Have a good time."
Some other thoughts on how to approach critiquing an image from ehow.com:
"Step 1: First look at the composition or content in the photograph. What is the center of interest in the picture? Where did the photographer place it in the frame? Did the photographer get close enough to the subject to include only what is important, or are there wasted parts of the picture with elements that do not add to the message of the photo?
Step 2: Next, observe the background in the photograph. How did the photographer represent the background in regards to focus and depth of field? How does the background add or distract from the message of the photo?
Step 3: Now take a look at the technical camera work involved in the photograph. Is the subjects sharp and clearly in focus? Is the photo exposed properly? A properly exposed photo will have some texture in the shadows. Are details missing because of over or under exposure?
Step 4: Then look at the craftsmanship the photographer exhibits. Does the physical photo have spots, stains, or scratches? Is it placed nicely in a frame or elaborately displayed? Is there evidence that the photograph was made with care in the process?
Step 5: Finally, offer your own personal feelings on the photograph. What do you like about the selected subject? Is it an emotional shot, a story, a statement, a humorous photo? What would you do differently if you had the chance to take the same photograph?"
From dpchallenge.com; "Critique for Dummies - A Practical Guide" by John M. Setzler, Jr:
"What is a Critique?
Critique comes in many forms, but in a nutshell, it’s the opinion of the giver. A critique is a simple description of the photo based on the viewer’s personality and background. This description could include a lot of different topics, which we will discuss in this guide.
Before we can discuss how to critique a photograph, I think it’s important to know how to look at a photograph. It’s important to try to understand what you see in a photo before you try to give feedback on it.
How to Look at a Photograph
It sounds simple enough, but it’s more complex than you might think. Here’s a breakdown of my own workflow for looking at a photograph. I wish I had some flowcharting software to create a graphic for this, but it’s not really that complex.
Do you like the photo?
This part isn’t usually too complicated to figure out. In most cases, you either like what you see or you don’t. The photo will stimulate you visually, emotionally or maybe even both. The stimulation may be good or bad and that will determine whether or not you like what you see. The photographer’s choice of subject may or may not appeal to you. You may or may not like the way they chose to photograph it. There are a lot of smaller elements of the image that will determine whether or not the image appeals to you. Sorting out these elements is what builds your critique.
What is the subject?
What is the photographer trying to show you in the photo? What inspired the photographer to choose this subject? Does the subject interest you in any particular way? Was the photographer successful in showing you the subject?
Is this photo spontaneous or set up?
It’s very important to make this distinction whenever possible. I usually hold the two types of photos to different standards. A spontaneous photo may have certain qualities that make me look less at certain aspects of the image. When a photographer has complete control of the subject environment, I am less forgiving than when the photographer is working in a spontaneous mode. In a set up environment, I look for lighting and other technical aspects that enhance the subject’s appearance. Technical excellence is important when the photographer has complete control. In a spontaneous environment, I look to see how effectively the photographer portrayed the subject, and if it’s as good as it could be in the given circumstances. I also try to note different circumstances that could produce something stronger. I can’t possibly know everything about those circumstances other than what I can see within the image. This brings us to the topic of assumptions, which we will discuss later.
What is the environment?
The subject of the photo may not fill the entire frame. Is the subject’s environment pleasing? Is it supportive of the subject? Are there distractions in the frame? Are there objects that are competing for attention? In a controlled environment, everything seen in the image should have a purpose, whether it is the subject of the photo, or something supportive of the subject. In an uncontrolled environment, extra items in the field of view should not be competing for attention with the subject. Keep in mind that a photo may have multiple subjects or a group of objects that create the subject.
What’s the mood of the photo?
Does the photo stir your senses? Does the photo make you wonder about something? Does it make you ask yourself questions? Does it inspire you? Does it make you feel good? Does it make you feel somber? Does the photo help you to know the subject?
Now we have established a few important bits of information about the photo we are reviewing. We know whether or not we like what we see. We know what the subject is and what the photographer is trying to show us. We know that the photo is either spontaneous or set up. We have also considered the environment in which the photo was made.
Where do we go from here?
There are four more basic areas of critique to observe after we have reached this point. These areas are creativity, composition, post processing, and technical aspects.
Creativity:
Did the photographer take any creative steps to make this photograph interesting to the viewer? Some elements of creativity may include camera angle or perspective, exposure technique, and effective use of lighting. This aspect of the image is usually where good photographers are separated from great ones. We have all seen photos certain subjects, but a great photographer will show it to us in an inspiring way.
Composition:
Is the image composed in an appealing way? Does the eye come to rest on the subject or a specific area of the image? Your personal understanding of composition will dictate what you can and can’t say about it in a critique.
Post Processing:
Post processing of a photograph is a definite target for critique. This is one area where the photographer has total control of everything. In general, photos branch into two categories where post processing is concerned. There are those where you don’t notice the post processing and those where you do. Post processing is quite subjective. Everyone has his own opinion on how it should be done. In a critique, you might want to discuss the “why” questions. Post processing choices are deliberate ones made by the photographer. There is some reason behind it, or there should be. If you can’t determine the reason or don’t agree with it, it’s a good point for critique.
Technicals:
In my opinion, the technical aspects of a photo, such as depth of field, focus, shutter speeds, and exposure don’t come into play until after the viewer has decided whether or not he likes the photo. In most types of photography, the technical items are not what the photographer is trying to show you. They have presented you with a subject or subjects and their technical choices should be supportive of those subjects as much as possible. Some photographers choose to make the technical aspects of their photo the subject in some cases. These photos have to be treated differently. You should just look at those images and see if you can understand what they are showing you and why they chose to do it.
Assumptions:
Everyone knows the old saying about assumptions. Making an assumption in a critique is simply a bad idea. One of the most common assumption mistakes I see in critiques is when a different view or camera angle is suggested. We have no way of knowing what a photo would look like from a different perspective, so we should never suggest it. Critique what you see. The only assumption you should ever make in a critique is that everything you see is intentional, whether it actually is or not. If you think something you see isn’t intentional, you should critique it as intentional. Tell the photographer that you do or don’t like his choice. If it is actually a mistake, the photographer will know and learn from it.
Who is qualified to critique?
Everyone is qualified to critique. No matter how much or little you know about photography, you can always tell if you like a photo when you look at it. If you aren’t comfortable with certain aspects of a critique, just leave them out and talk about what you know!
How to receive a critique:
Critiques are opinions and nothing more. They are reflections of the people giving them. You should never argue or complain about a critique. You will either agree with it or you won’t. When you post a photo to a public forum for critique, you must be prepared to hear the worst-case scenarios as well as the educated critiques. If you are sensitive about your photos, posting them online is not a good idea. Don’t expect everyone to share your sentiments about any given photo. Photography is supposed to be fun. Don’t let negative critiques change your own opinion of your work. Have a good time."
Some other thoughts on how to approach critiquing an image from ehow.com:
"Step 1: First look at the composition or content in the photograph. What is the center of interest in the picture? Where did the photographer place it in the frame? Did the photographer get close enough to the subject to include only what is important, or are there wasted parts of the picture with elements that do not add to the message of the photo?
Step 2: Next, observe the background in the photograph. How did the photographer represent the background in regards to focus and depth of field? How does the background add or distract from the message of the photo?
Step 3: Now take a look at the technical camera work involved in the photograph. Is the subjects sharp and clearly in focus? Is the photo exposed properly? A properly exposed photo will have some texture in the shadows. Are details missing because of over or under exposure?
Step 4: Then look at the craftsmanship the photographer exhibits. Does the physical photo have spots, stains, or scratches? Is it placed nicely in a frame or elaborately displayed? Is there evidence that the photograph was made with care in the process?
Step 5: Finally, offer your own personal feelings on the photograph. What do you like about the selected subject? Is it an emotional shot, a story, a statement, a humorous photo? What would you do differently if you had the chance to take the same photograph?"
Practical examples and some follow-up edits:
Post-Standard staff photographer Jennifer Meyers critiqued some of the photos submitted in the "Celebrate the Seasons" photo contest sponsored by "The Good Life, Central New York" magazine.
"Honest photo critiques designed to help people learn better photo skills" by Scott Bourne of scottcritiques.com.