How to critique your own photos?

[Bob k.]

The question that I have for the group is, how do you critique your own work? Do you have a formal process with a series of specific things you look for or questions you ask about each photo or is it an informal process where you just look at the pictures and know which ones to cull and which ones have enough potential to merit more work? My process is informal and I think I would benefit from a more structured approach.

As a starting point, I recently listen to episode 313 of the Beginning Photography Podcast and the author described the critique process he uses to evaluate his own work. He said that he asks these four questions:

1. Is this a good moment?
2. Where does my eye go (when I look at the photo)?
3. Does the composition lend itself to the image?
4. Does this photo need any editing to fix mistakes in camera settings?

If you have a good system and you wouldn't mind sharing I would like to hear what you do.

 

[JP Onstwedder]

I'd hesitate to describe what I do as a 'system' but it does have some order to it.
1 - is it clear what the subject is?
2 - is it clear what the story/emotion/reaction to the image is?
3 - is it technically acceptable? (or, in the case of a sequence or multiple images with the same composition, which one is technically the most compatible with #2?)
4 - is it balanced? does the eye go to the subject? does the image hold my attention for longer than it takes to recognise the subject?

My biggest weakness is taking pretty pictures with no subject, or a lack of a clear story/emotion, hence the focus on those aspects!

If all of those are a yes, I'll do some basic edits (crop, adjust white balance, exposure) to see if I think there is potential for a good image. I'll usually let images sit at this stage for a few days, then get back to them and decide whether or not to edit them properly. I'll always keep a 'maybe' list and often go back to those lists months later, sometimes when I want to try out different editing ideas.

 

[bleirer]

I feel like I've probably read every book and blog and watched every video on composition, and looked at a lot of art, not only photography, to try to figure out why the artist made the creative choices they made, yet when it comes to making decisions, either in the field or at the computer, for me it is more intuitive and organic than it is a checklist. Hopefully at some level what I've read and learned has sunk in and I'm secretly aware of the lines, tangents, forms, patterns, etc. or noticing that I used the baroque diagonal on one and the sinister on the other, or that the important parts align with the harmonic armature, etc. But honestly I try out a bunch of stuff and usually end up throwing the image away anyway, or sometimes some variation is pleasing to my eye for some reason that I can't always explain.

I don't know if that is good or bad, it's not boring though.

 

[bleirer]

Photography Life has a lot of excellent articles on the topic of composition which is one element of critique. I find I reread the ones related to Gestalt because it is a tangible way to think about how perception works.

Composition in Photography: A Guide to Composing Better Photos

How do you actually improve your compositions in a concrete way? This guide, Composition in Photography, aims to help.

photographylife.com

Compose Better Photos with Gestalt Theory

One of the better-known theories of perception is Gestalt Psychology. It deals with the way we organize information (usually visuals, but not always) into wholes. While Gestalt Theory isn't mentioned very often in discussions about composing good photos, I think that's a mistake.

photographylife.com

Levels of Perception in Photography

If you close your eyes, point your camera in any direction, and take a picture, I’m willing the bet the photo won’t be a success. Unless you’re doing some artsy “blindfolded photography” project, it completely lacks intent or any engagement with the scene in front of you.

photographylife.com

How to Make Photos Feel More Deliberate

Most of the time, when you see a good photo, you'll get a sense that the photographer took it deliberately. But how can you tell that? What subtle things about the photo make it appear deliberate rather than random? That’s what I’ll cover today.

photographylife.com

 

[DRwyoming]

If you have a good system and you wouldn't mind sharing I would like to hear what you do.

I don't have a system per se but I do think this is a very hard question to answer and one in which the answer likely changes over time. IOW, what might be a great and exceptional photo to someone just starting their photography journey and what might be a standout photo to that same person years or decades later are likely different.

The compositional and emotional aspects are really hard to pin down and there's no substitute for time and getting your work out into the world for viewing and feedback to develop a sense of your personal style and what works or doesn't work for you and for your subject matter. But the pure technical aspects like focus, exposure and basic composition can be learned but again folks tend to get more selective and refined in how they view these things over time.

Personally I start by culling the obvious misses which are often focus or exposure or simply subject not in the frame issues(with fast moving subjects). That part's easy but the harder bit is evaluating things like: emotional connection to the subject, subtlety or drama in lighting, composition that helps tell a story, use of environment or background to help tell that story and things like whether the subject, scene or behavior is unique or interesting.

No easy answers for those things but some of the links above might help you in terms of developing your sense of style and how you want to convey the scenes in your images. But still, expect it to grow and evolve over time as none of this stuff is static.

I would say that getting your work out in front of other folks and seeking feedback is one way to speed up your personal learning curve. I'd recommend not taking any particular feedback too seriously but being open to what folks see and feel in your images can help you define your style. But remember not everyone will like every image you share and that's fine and doesn't mean there's anything wrong with those images just that personal tastes differ. Still I think there's a lot of value in sharing your work in terms of developing a personal style.

 

[Butlerkid]

Many, many years ago I was a beginner running around with a camera. I was fortunate to develop a friendship with a very gifted landscape photographer. She became my mentor and for years I would ask her to evaluate my images. She taught me so much! And I wanted to learn and improve. She would point out both the strong points and weak points of my images.

I studied images in magazines, books, on-line, etc. I read articles in photography magazines, books, watched videos. If I liked an image, I asked myself WHY I liked the image. Why did the image "work"? Same with poor images - WHY didn't the image "work". And then a few years ago - SURPRISE! My mentor started doing wildlife photography and asked ME to critique her images to help her improve! Our roles are now reversed. That just shows that those - no matter how accomplished they may be - that are willing to accept feedback from others will benefit.

I go on numerous photography workshops and take advantage of critiques offered by the tour leaders. I explain to them I want them to be totally honest. "Likes" will seldom help me grow as a photographer.

I also solicit feedback on photography forums and am open to all comments.

Learning the "ingredients" of a strong image translated to capturing images in the field. I gradually was able to create stronger images in-camera before I ever tripped the shutter button!

The answer for me is to be open to feedback. That feedback can be via forums, mentors, educational materials, workshops, etc. Then I apply those analytical skills to my own images.

 

[tclune]

For me, the first part of judging my own work is to wait. I find that I can't separate the work from the experience in the field until the memory of the experience fades a bit. Then, I can view the photo as an object instead of an event.

 

[Whiskeyman]

I know a PSA judge and he lectures on "impact!" According to him, if the photo doesn't have impact, it just doesn't compete. And if it has enough impact, it can overcome other shortcomings, if it has them.

 

[JAS]

One more model. I shoot for myself first and others later. So, when I see something "in the field" that catches my eye, I take a few shots. When I gert back to the download, I look at the shots and if I can't remember why I took the shot, it usually is deleted, except for serendipity - those lucky moments. I enter few contests, so the processing is looking to recreate what I saw when I hit the shutter. Again, for me. Many of those shots follow the tried and true formulas, suggestions, teachings, etc. because they work, but many do not. In the end, most of the photos I keep and/or display capture a moment that comes back to me when I see the photo again even years later. If I do not like it, I doubt others will. If I do like it, I am not all that concerned what others think and seldom participate in critiques either receiving or giving. I do carefully consider all criticisms offered - if I asked for them. In others words, if the photo speaks to you then it is a good one for you. If you want others to look and see what you did, you may have to make a few other changes to draw their aattention. Just my humble opinion.