|
|
Judging a photo.. my thoughts..
Last Post 17 Aug 2008 03:30 PM by dolcevita78. 6 Replies.
|
Sort:
|
Jenna
New Member
Posts:6
 |
| 07 Jun 2008 02:43 AM |
|
We all look at, and see, a photograph differently. Just for discussion,
here’s how I judge or critique a photo. Of course, this is just what I
think about it.
When I look at a Photograph (and we‘re not talking about “record“ shots, or snap shots), I look at 4 things:
1- Is it an appealing picture?
Does it follow the basic rules of composition (rule of 3rds, leading
lines, etc.) so that it’s pleasing to the eye? Or, if the basic rules
were broken on purpose for effect, did it work?
2- Is it a “proper” photograph?
Is it properly exposed and focused? Is there too much or not enough
cropping? Are the colors right? Is there too much or too little
contrast, too dark, too light, etc.? Basically, how does it stack up
technically? Again, if it was purposely adjusted so that it wasn’t
“proper”, does that make it better or worse?
3- If a feeling or mood is trying to be conveyed, did it work? Did I go “Wow!”, “Ooooh”, “Awwww… ”, or “Ugh!”? Or did I stare at it and say, “And the point of this shot is….what?”.
4- Is it interesting? The final
and toughest test. I look at a photo and if I say to myself, “Gee, I
wish I could’ve been there to see that in person.” then I think it’s a
great photo. If not, to me it fails as a Photograph. (In other words,
boring.) It doesn’t make any difference if it’s a landscape, sports,
macro, nature, portrait, or even the subject really. We’ve all seen
them: dull subjects presented in dull ways… verses dull subjects
presented in interesting ways- and vice versa. (The best, of course,
are interesting subjects presented in an interesting way.)
While this is how I judge photos, please know that very few of my own photos pass my critique.
Your thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
scarlett
Basic Member
Posts:12
|
| 23 Jun 2008 07:05 PM |
|
Posted By Jenna on 06/06/2008 8:43 PM
We all look at, and see, a photograph differently. Just for discussion,
here’s how I judge or critique a photo. Of course, this is just what I
think about it.
When I look at a Photograph (and we‘re not talking about “record“ shots, or snap shots), I look at 4 things:
1- Is it an appealing picture?
Does it follow the basic rules of composition (rule of 3rds, leading
lines, etc.) so that it’s pleasing to the eye? Or, if the basic rules
were broken on purpose for effect, did it work?
2- Is it a “proper” photograph?
Is it properly exposed and focused? Is there too much or not enough
cropping? Are the colors right? Is there too much or too little
contrast, too dark, too light, etc.? Basically, how does it stack up
technically? Again, if it was purposely adjusted so that it wasn’t
“proper”, does that make it better or worse?
3- If a feeling or mood is trying to be conveyed, did it work? Did I go “Wow!”, “Ooooh”, “Awwww… ”, or “Ugh!”? Or did I stare at it and say, “And the point of this shot is….what?”.
4- Is it interesting? The final
and toughest test. I look at a photo and if I say to myself, “Gee, I
wish I could’ve been there to see that in person.” then I think it’s a
great photo. If not, to me it fails as a Photograph. (In other words,
boring.) It doesn’t make any difference if it’s a landscape, sports,
macro, nature, portrait, or even the subject really. We’ve all seen
them: dull subjects presented in dull ways… verses dull subjects
presented in interesting ways- and vice versa. (The best, of course,
are interesting subjects presented in an interesting way.)
While this is how I judge photos, please know that very few of my own photos pass my critique.
Your thoughts?
I like the way you think, Jenna. That's a great list! The first thing that always attracts my attention is if the subject matter is out of the ordinary. Usually it's the colors that catch my eye next. After that, if there's some kind of emotional pull created by it, I like it even more.
As you say, there's a lot of boring stuff out there. I'm just learning so would like to ask something. Do you think simple is better or does having lots going on in a picture make it more interesting?
|
|
|
|
|
maryelser
Basic Member
Posts:24
|
| 10 Jul 2008 10:01 PM |
|
| I would think it depend. I, myself like simple things, pictures included. Sometimes if too many things are going on in a picture, it takes away from what the artist was trying to convey. Other times, a busy picture is fine.
|
|
|
|
|
dheeruyadav
Basic Member
Posts:11
|
| 25 Jul 2008 07:38 AM |
|
i think apart from what ever it is mentioned..it is personal choice as well. there are chances one may find one particular picture suitable and at the same time it will not sooth to some one else.
|
|
| never hesitate to take the most difficult problem |
|
|
janelle
Advanced Member
Posts:56
|
| 26 Jul 2008 05:29 PM |
|
| I think this is a great list to judge photography on. I would also consider if it was a creative picture and if it seemed to be original. Everybody has different things they like that jumps out at them when they see a picture. So, I think that we all would have different things we were looking for in judging photography. |
|
| ~janelle~ |
|
|
Brandbla8
Advanced Member
Posts:54
|
| 29 Jul 2008 06:19 PM |
|
| I like the simple pictures also. I also like anything old looking with the new techniques today that can be accomplished with ease. It all depends on what is pleasing to your eye. Each person is unique at what they like. |
|
|
|
|
dolcevita78
Basic Member
Posts:28
|
| 17 Aug 2008 03:30 PM |
|
Thanks for sharing us your thoughts on this.
Beauty is always in the eyes of the beholder. What could be beautiful for me may not be appealing to others or what could be appealing to them may not be of my taste. It is of course important that the photo depicts what it should.
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|