Lightnings taking a ride

by ceinmart

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

43

What a critique isn’t: There’s no better way to say it… A critique is rarely short, because it is specifically designed to provide the artist with detailed, constructive feedback. It’s primary purpose is not to make the photographer being critiqued feel good (though that’s not to say that it can’t be a side benefit), or bad (though again, this can happen as ...


37

A technically correct photo should: be sharp rather than blurry be focused properly rather than on some random AF point be properly exposed have correct color balance not have too much noise


26

For start, one should be aware that technical correctness is no substitute for artistic vision. Here are some technical criteria in no particular order: The exposure is correct, shadows are not lost, highlights are not clipped The parts that need to be in focus, are in focus There is no motion blur (caused by camera shake) The photo does not have a color ...


25

I would like to recommend one exposure dot com. I recommend this for two reasons. The critique is honest, harsh, informed, and deep. As a community, they strive very hard to give very in depth reviews and suggestions. They also have the added benefits of extreme honesty, which is sometimes hard to get. One thing I dislike about flikr is precisely the fact ...


11

Well, for Flickr, I'd say that the photographs that get noticed are often by people that are group active rather than necessarily all that good. Not to say that there aren't great shots that don't get noticed otherwise, but if you look at "interesting" you'll find some that aren't really all that interesting at all, just that they got a lot of group hits. ...


11

Since someone covered the story aspect, a few thoughts on the technical parts of the image. The subject is the man, but he's in shadow and badly underexposed. The shot in general is really dark, making it hard to actually see what's going on. It looks like your camera is in auto mode or some exposure mode where the couple of bright blocks of light have ...


11

Storytelling is really the most important thing but "tell a story" is hard advice to follow so I'm going to go for a simpler approach, you can think of a picture as having 3 parts: The subject You should decide what the subject is and make sure it is the most prominent item in the image, you can make it prominent by making it brighter, more colorful or ...


10

Projector native resolution needs to be taken into account. This will often be no higher than about 1024 x 768 in cheaper or older projectors. If you drive it at higher resolutions or at different aspect ratios it may convert internally but you are at the mercy of its processes. A very major and often overlooked factor in using a projector is that what you ...


10

I agree with the answer about storytelling, but this answer is more about the technical part. First, I wouldn't take the shot all that differently. It looks like the bright areas are exposed close too full but not blown. The raw data is there. The issue is how to post-process it. Here is your original for reference: The main point seems to be the ...


9

There are not many great places to get such feedback. One site that I use is 1x.com, which is known for only accepting the absolute best work. They have fantastic art there, and its useful as a milestone...if you get something accepted, you've really improved your work! Even if your art gets rejected, you can still submit it for critique. The community at ...


9

Your camera doesn't know what the image should look like, but can make some informed guesses. Primarily, it tries to make the scene some average amount of bright (18%) so if you have a lot of dark areas then it tries to brighten it up (or if you have a lot of bright, it'll darken it). So the curtains that you probably don't care about, the camera doesn't ...


6

Focussion This site uses a "token" system to encourage helpful feedback. You need to give feedback to get these tokens, and you can spend them to upload your own new photos. If you write really good feedback, other photographers may mark your feedback as helpful, and you earn even more tokens.


6

I’m going to suggest that all critique can be valid. It doesn’t really matter that much to me if somebody is being sarcastic or they have a strong view they want to express. Whether or not you pay attention to them seems like it’s going to come down to personal choice. To me, the deciding factors are: Have they said something constructive, which can be ...


6

There are two things I can see going on here. First, different understandings of what "critique" is within a given context, and second, interpretation of writing tone on the Internet. What is meant by "Critique"? Critique can mean a lot of different things. There's a good answer on photographic critique here on this site, and I think it's also useful to ...


6

What, exactly, makes them complain about poor picture quality? If you're shooting an uncalibrated projector toward an arbitrary projection surface, you've got a lot of things working against you. First of all, your color configuration is liable to be all over the place. Secondly, you're going to be at the mercy and the reflectivity of your wall. I'd ...


6

I am certain there are no such generally-accepted criteria, because there are too many variable factors. Even technical aspects of image quality are subjective, and one person's "too much blur" may be another's "sense of motion". I'm sure many specific contests have their own scoring systems and scoring rules, to help with consistency across years and ...


5

Here: http://www.reddit.com/r/photocritique /r/photocritique has a lot of people from reddit.com/r/photography. The subreddit is active and anyone can participate, there's no requirements like on other critique sites. Most pictures, no matter the quality, seem to get a least a couple comments.


5

It is too hard to say what a pro would have done without seeing what else was in the scene outside of that frame, and also, every pro is a bit different. Pro is also a relative term. Something I always recommend is to find photos you like, and then assess what specifically is it that you like about that shot. Is it the lighting, the composition etc. That ...


5

Not having ever been to art school or worked as a photographer/artist--(I've just been someone who professionally was once handed a stack of two hundred resumes to pick three interview candidates)--take my advice with a grain of salt, but I think the first thing you should do is ask the art school in question what they want you to show them in your ...


4


4

For completeness sake, you can post a picture in the photo.stackexchange.com chat room and request feedback on it there.


4

I would say that critiques worth listening are those of people that make photos that you see are better than yours and you really like. When I just started taking pictures I had no clue how bad I was, so even if it was rather unpleasant, first rough critics I got have been useful for me. On the other hand some great achievements (like Columbus' discovery ...


4

All of the example pieces in Mike Johnston's humor piece are highly-regarded and successful photographs by some of the most accomplished photographers in history. But the humor is more than just "Haha! Those commenters didn't know that they were looking at something famous!" After all, that just comes down to the logical fallacy of appeal to authority. ...


3

I think the most important part of your question is who, not where. There are places all over the net that over critiques and most are amateurs (i.e. social media) and at best they are professionals (i.e. Flickr and industry forums). Even if you get a critique by professionals, most of them are industry specific and have expertise in a very narrow field ...


3

Also for completeness: Flickr has this group: http://www.flickr.com/groups/photographycritique/ You can post a picture and ask for critique.


3

This site is no longer online KarmaCritic is a site where the more good feedback you give others for their photos the more prominence you get for your work. The feedback is peer rated, and the submissions are not. On many sites, the lesser work often gets the least replies, but often are those that need the feedback the most. I think the concept is ...


3

http://photocamel.com Billed as "friendly", it does seem to both provide critique without holding back. Depending on your genre, it has professionals who visit and will give critiques. At least I can vouch for Kids/Family and Portraits.


3

photoSIG [The following was edited in by @Jerry:] PhotoSIG attempts to "encourage" users to critique photos that have been submitted by limiting the number of pictures a user can submit for critique based (in part) on the number of critiques they've written. Many pictures are nearly ignored, and a high percentage of "critiques" that are written are strictly ...


3

The first question you need to answer here is "What is a good picture?", unfortunately this is subjective, and also context-dependent. Consider, if you will, a blurry photo (for example, due to motion blur, lens shake or just plain out of focus). Is it good or bad? From what I've said so far, who can tell? If it's a shot from a wedding, from the paid ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible