We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.
13

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 ...


12

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 ...


11

As already noted, this question is at least borderline "opinion-based"... But for my 2¢ I think the watermark is a) too prominent & b) in the wrong corner. It looks more like an artist's signature than a copy-protection device. This was just a quick 2 min tweak. I dropped it to 25% opacity & moved it bottom right. I think if you're going to have a '...


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

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 man, ...


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 ...


7

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 ...


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’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

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 portfolio....


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

According to Froese's website, the shots from this series were not digital but in fact analogue. These are most likely split prints from one single image. This would mean Froese went in to the darkroom and finally printed his negative or positive on three sheets of light sensitive paper, adding a border in the process by bursting the edge with unfiltered ...


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. ...


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

It is overexposed. Your camera metered the black areas of the scene as medium gray. That caused the shutter speed to be too slow and you also got motion blur. Concert photography is one of the most demanding types on several levels. Getting proper exposure in such an environment is as much an art as a technical skill, and takes a lot of practice to find the ...


4

There certainly seems to be a disconnect between the style of the photos and the style of the signature in the watermark. It's like looking at an edifice built in the Greco-Roman temple style with the expectation that there will be words chiseled in bold upper-case Latin above the entrance, yet looking up and seeing an inscription in Comic San Serif. Or ...


4

As to a determination of the span of the depth of field for this image: Based on my expertise, this picture was taken from a substantially distant viewpoint. Likely the focus setting for this shot was at or near the infinity position. If true and I believe this is so, all objects depicted will be in focus. In other words, the span of the depth of field is ...


3

@inkista's answer is a good one. As someone who teaches in an Art department and sees many portfolios every semester I'll also add this: go look at as much art as you can. This could be at galleries, museums, or work in books. Whether you personally like the work often isn't as important as enlarging your knowledge and experience of art. There will be (...


3

I think one of the points of the page you linked to (as well as poking fun at armchair critics on the internet) is that different advice applies to photographers at different levels of ability and experience. When you are beginning photography, it is helpful to follow some simple guidelines for good composition. When you are a proven master (like the famous ...


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

Specifically regarding the lighting... Lighting can most easily be determined by looking at reflections and shadows. Since we don't have any reflections in this shot, we have to look at shadows: The direction indicates where the light was coming from. In this case, it appears to be from over the photographer's right shoulder and above the camera. The edge ...


2

dGrin (officially Digital Grin) is an online community that has a very large section for critiques and reviews, as well as sections for challenges and assignments run by the community. There's a lot of just sharing of images, but there's also a lot of critiquing of images... especially if you specifically ask for critiques. DISCLAIMER: dGrin is hosted by ...


2

I managed to learn some things and have a great feed back using a carefully select google+ users circle of photographers. Although non photographers tend not to comment there.


2

Here are my thoughts... The first example is basically asking for a negative response because most of the questions can be answered without elaboration. Question that lead to a more thoughtful answer are usually more positive. For example: What are some ideas that can help improve the composition of this image? Now you're asking for positive ...


2

Jay Lance's answer is great but I would like to suggest a slight modification in the ordering of items. Specifically, our natural tendency is to deliver the good news first, and the bad news last. While this approach has the advantage that the recipient will consider the negative feedback more seriously, it has the disadvantage that ending on a negative note ...


2

I don't think there's a single checklist. I've spent a little time looking at the forums of some stock photography web sites and can list at least a few of the technical things they look for: Focus - are the right things sharp? Are the sharp things sharp enough? Is the depth of field appropriate for the subject? Composition - this one is a huge topic and ...


2

I think the Professional Photographers of America (PPA) criteria sums it all up. I was a member for many years. Follow this link. Professional Photographers of America – 12 elements to judge 1.) Impact. 2.) Technical 3.) Creativity 4.) Style 5.) Composition 6.) Presentation 7.) Color Balance 8.) Center of Interest 9.) Lighting 10.) Subject ...


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