Camera club critique session

Quicksnapper

Quicksnapper

Suspended / Banned
Messages
704
Name
Sara
Edit My Images
Yes
The club I'm a member of has decided, by popular demand from the members, to hold a critique evening. The idea is that folks can bring in work for non competitive critique with the idea that they ought then be able to go out and either do a better job with the same shot next time, go away and have another go at the pp or generally learn some useful lessons to help them improve their technique. The question is though, how do we run such an evening and make it a valuable sessions for our people? We could afford to get a "judge" or acknowledged expert in for the evening (7pm til about 9.30) or just ask some of the more experienced members to critique the work of the less experienced.

We're keen to get the best out of this time and make it appeal to as wide a cross section of members as possible (about 45 people), so does anyone have any experience of this type of event, and if so, how do you plan/run something like this. All thoughts very gratefully received. Thanks.

I should add, it's not a competition of any kind ....
 
We could afford to get a "judge" or acknowledged expert in for the evening (7pm til about 9.30) or just ask some of the more experienced members to critique the work of the less experienced.
Click to expand...

Personally think the latter idea would be best, one persons view will always be purely subjective and might not necessarily send the less experienced in the right direction.
 
The first step would probably be to make sure everyone understand the difference between critique and criticise. Provide two example images, one that's easy to critique and one that'snot so easy to critique, and then talk through a critique of each whilst drawing ideas from the audience. Send them off in small groups (max. 5 or 6 people per group) to critique images from one of the other groups that they've been allocated, then each group reports back with the image they've chosen fro those they've been given and a critique of that image. You can alter the last bit by having the facilitator circulating around the groups and picking two or three examples from the groups to be reported back on based on what s/he's overheard.

It's important to allow for the fact that some images are next to impossible to find anything to critique, whereas others could inspire an essay. I've run into this problem when running a critique session on a Flickr group, the only way to head it off was to pre-select the images to receive critique from those submitted.
 
I think the idea has merit, but as Alastair has said, be mindful of what might be considered as criticism, as opposed to critique.

With regards to having a "qualified" judge, I would say definitely not, as this would tend to imply 'competition'.

Personally I have a problem with photographic judges, as while they might all have attended judges courses, and supposedly learnt a set of basic rules, they are individuals with differing subjective views, 'subjective' being the key word.

Having been a member of a camera club for almost a year now, fortunately one that isn't obsessed with competitions :), watched and listened to two different judges, at two print competitions, it was very apparent that they approached the job quite differently, and it was very obvious they had their personal preferences. As such I'm sure that if the two judges had swapped competitions, there would have been a different result.

We all see things differently, and photographic judges are no different.

I think there would be good value in displaying an image, and letting the members offer suggestions as to how they think it could be improved, if indeed there was room for improvement. As long as the comments remained constructive as opposed to destructive, I think it would make for an informative and enjoyable evening.

Dave
 
I think it is fine for judges to be subjective as long as they explain their judgments.

E.g. 'The shot is slightly out of focus, which I see as a fault. It includes a large area of flare, which is not personally to my taste, but works well in the context of the shot.'
 
philthejuggler said:
I think it is fine for judges to be subjective as long as they explain their judgments.

E.g. 'The shot is slightly out of focus, which I see as a fault. It includes a large area of flare, which is not personally to my taste, but works well in the context of the shot.'
Click to expand...

This highlights one of the common problems with critique - putting the personal value judgement "which is not personally to my taste" in front of the meaningful comment "works well in the context of the shot" and thereby devaluing the photographer by a poor choice of phrase. Look at the critique sections of this forum and you'll find it all the time, and people don't even realise they're doing it. I imagine 50% of readers of this post won't even see it even after it's pointed out.
 
When I was going for my LRPS some advice I had from a panel judge said they recommended I included a shot even though they personally found it disturbing - I was happy with this.
 
philthejuggler said:
When I was going for my LRPS some advice I had from a panel judge said they recommended I included a shot even though they personally found it disturbing - I was happy with this.
Click to expand...

I think there is a difference when you're discussing an emotional response rather than a technical detail, but I can't quite explain why - perhaps an image has to inherently work on quite a deep level to create that level of emotion, and stating that feeling it's creating is acknowledging this and therefore a positive observation?
 
Alastair said:
I think there is a difference when you're discussing an emotional response rather than a technical detail, but I can't quite explain why - perhaps an image has to inherently work on quite a deep level to create that level of emotion, and stating that feeling it's creating is acknowledging this and therefore a positive observation?
Click to expand...

Perhaps - when I went for my LRPS they asked me to resubmit one image they identified as having a technical failing.

It was possibly my favourite image, but I understood their concern and it has helped me to think more carefully about my shots, despite the fact I think the shot worked as it was.

I guess I'm happy with any critique as long as justification is given - I reserve the right to disagree, but will respect any comment which is explained reasonably.
 
But it was a technical failing, there wasn't the "doesn't work for me, but it works for this image" type of comment.
 
I see - fair enough - I guess I'm not bothered by negative personal responses as long as the viewer appreciates the intent.
 
A technical failing is a technical failing, no argument there, and when pointed out its there to see.

The subjective element comes into play, with things like composition and artistic interpretation.

This is where the whole subjective bit is wide open to individual preferences.

An extreme example yes, but to some a pile of rusty bicycles and buckets welded together, is a mesmerising piece of abstract art. Whereas to me its a pile of rusty bicycles and buckets welded together.

As individuals we all see things differently, which is what makes us the individuals that we are.

Who decided in the first place that the 'rule of thirds' is the basis of composition?. Of course it works with many images, but there times when breaking the 'rule' works better. At least in my subjective opinion that is.

Dave
 
There is room to argue over technical 'faults'. I put a light behind a model's hair as a deliberate strong highlight, but a judged suggested that was a fault, whereas it was deliberate and looked good in my opinion.
 
I would say that was a subjective opinion on the judges behalf, and not a technical fault in the true sense of the word Phil.

Dave
 
I think getting a judge in can work, I have been to such an evening and it was quite interesting, the judge started by describing what he was looking for and how he would mark an image if it were a competition, and then critiqued each shot giving his opinion on what could improve the shot.
However, I think the audience, particularly if they are fairly new to photography or club competitions would need to understand that this is just one way of looking at an image and just because a judge does not like it or can find reasons to mark it down does not mean it is not a good photo. For example many photos that do well in LPOTY, would not do well in a club or regional competition.
 
When I was a student we all had to show work at the Friday criticism. Anyone could speak and raised their hand. the head of school called you to speak.
constructive criticism was the order of they day... it could be your work next.
We were also expected to comment on our own work.... the whole exercise was character forming.

In a club situation I would limit criticism to those members showing that night, for obvious reasons.
The chairman should call those who indicate they would like to comment, or nominate someone if no one volunteers.
 
Thanks for your thoughts everyone. We have a mix of very skillfull and experienced people and those who are are less so but keen to improve. Also, we are a friendly lot who know each other well and so I think some process where someone offers a work for critique, says a few words about their thinking when they took the image and then an open discussion about how it could be improved, might be the way to go.
 
In the dim and distant past Amateur Photographer had an Expert going by the name of Ronaldo ( if my memory is working)
Each week he commented on a photograph drew lines on it and made impossible suggestions on how it could be improved... It was like a long running Joke.
Your suggestion was like deja vu, and brought it back, in all its horror.
Criticism is about discussing what is, not making up some imaginative what if, that was not even possible at the time, or not the intention of the author.
Criticism of technique and what to do to correct it in the given image. Criticism of composition if it could have been improved with the existing elements. Criticism of execution If it is known what has gone wrong. and Praise for all that works. These are all elements of useful criticism.

Discussing how some one thinks it could be improved is a waste of hot air.
 
Quicksnapper said:
The club I'm a member of has decided, by popular demand from the members, to hold a critique evening. The idea is that folks can bring in work for non competitive critique with the idea that they ought then be able to go out and either do a better job with the same shot next time, go away and have another go at the pp or generally learn some useful lessons to help them improve their technique. The question is though, how do we run such an evening and make it a valuable sessions for our people? We could afford to get a "judge" or acknowledged expert in for the evening (7pm til about 9.30) or just ask some of the more experienced members to critique the work of the less experienced.

We're keen to get the best out of this time and make it appeal to as wide a cross section of members as possible (about 45 people), so does anyone have any experience of this type of event, and if so, how do you plan/run something like this. All thoughts very gratefully received. Thanks.

I should add, it's not a competition of any kind ....
Click to expand...

The club I belong to does this a couple of times each year. The first evening is usually about 4 weeks after our beginners course ends and is intended for the students (who get club membership for a year as pert of the course fee) to show off their work and have some of the more experienced members critique their work. Closer to the end of the season (mid-June) we do it again with all members - we normally have between 45 and 55 attendees - being able to submit upto 5 images. This time anyone can offer critique but there is a clear rule that any comments have to be constructive.

So far no-one has run away screaming and they have proven to be a very popular evenings :)
 
it is interesting to think about why club are so keen on holding Competitions and Criticism sessions.
It always seems to be a top down process with the emphasis on comparison with long established standards.
More experienced members who understand what it takes to win club competitions, bring on new members to emulate them.

This process makes at least two fundamental assumptions,
First, that the perceived standards set by Club photography, are worth emulation.
And secondly, that contemporary or popular imagery is not.
In any event, the first is used as a standard to judge the second.

Over the years this process has maintained standards exceptionally well.
Photographs taken to day would have done reasonably well in competitions judged by senior photographers from the 1920's and 30's

I can not imaging the same to be true in any other art form.
 
Terry ... Thank you for your comments. That's an interesting viewpoint, but this isn't only about winning club competitions. Our club does have more than it's share of comps (probably too many, if I'm honest) but it's not just about winning comps.

Many of our less experienced members want to improve their technique, composition skills and the way they "see" a shot, which is a very subjective thing and not something which comes naturally to everyone. (And possibly a theme for a whole new thread) We thought a session where members could simply present a shot and ask the question "what do you think of this? Could I have done it better? And if so, how?" might at least be a starting point for improvement, where that improvement process means encouraging members to give their photography more thought, getting them to look at a potential shot more critically before pressing the button, and shooting with a clearer idea of what they want the end result to be.

We've never done this before, so are keen to start to ball rolling on a process which results in improved results from individual members and - yes, of course - that having a knock on effect in producing better quality images to represent the our members and club in future competitions.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
In the dim and distant past Amateur Photographer had an Expert going by the name of Ronaldo ( if my memory is working)
Each week he commented on a photograph drew lines on it and made impossible suggestions on how it could be improved... It was like a long running Joke.
Your suggestion was like deja vu, and brought it back, in all its horror.
Criticism is about discussing what is, not making up some imaginative what if, that was not even possible at the time, or not the intention of the author.
Criticism of technique and what to do to correct it in the given image. Criticism of composition if it could have been improved with the existing elements. Criticism of execution If it is known what has gone wrong. and Praise for all that works. These are all elements of useful criticism.

Discussing how some one thinks it could be improved is a waste of hot air.
Click to expand...

Ricardo.

I'm not sure I agree with your comments on what is or is not useful, assuming that I've understood you correctly.
 
StephenM said:
Ricardo.

I'm not sure I agree with your comments on what is or is not useful, assuming that I've understood you correctly.
Click to expand...
Ricardo.... yes indeed never good at names..........

My yiew of club photography is based on the fact that it is a top down system, Pervading the entire amateur world, from international to local level.
The Standard and quality required to pass mustard at each level, is virtually unchanged since the thirties.
New blood with alternate ideas has no option but to fall into line, If they want to succeed.
This has resulted in much Club work being beautiful but sterile.
No other art-form would accept this stagnation.
 
Quicksnapper said:
Terry ... Thank you for your comments. That's an interesting viewpoint, but this isn't only about winning club competitions. Our club does have more than it's share of comps (probably too many, if I'm honest) but it's not just about winning comps.

Many of our less experienced members want to improve their technique, composition skills and the way they "see" a shot, which is a very subjective thing and not something which comes naturally to everyone. (And possibly a theme for a whole new thread) We thought a session where members could simply present a shot and ask the question "what do you think of this? Could I have done it better? And if so, how?" might at least be a starting point for improvement, where that improvement process means encouraging members to give their photography more thought, getting them to look at a potential shot more critically before pressing the button, and shooting with a clearer idea of what they want the end result to be.

We've never done this before, so are keen to start to ball rolling on a process which results in improved results from individual members and - yes, of course - that having a knock on effect in producing better quality images to represent the our members and club in future competitions.
Click to expand...


My point about only letting people comment "who show and tell" is to kill two or three birds with one stone.

very many new photographers have no Idea what can be done or what is easy or what is difficult. They go in with both feet and just do it, because they know no different. The results are often amazing, if imperfect, and achieve the near impossible that the more experienced photographer would never even attempt because they "know" it is impossible. These people can see work by advanced photographers and wonder why they had not tried something more exciting, and see opportunities that had been missed. This is all to do with mindset.
It becomes a two way street with the new workers questioning the "Old Hat" standards, and the experienced giving technical advice to the new.
The compositional elements are often best left to personal judgement and not commented on, because almost every rule of composition has been broken by the masters in their greatest work. The new worker needs to discover how and when to break rules not simply to play safe. That way they can achiev the goal of their "own" style, rather than become a clone of the club style.

The advantage of having a mix of experienced and new workers photographs for comment, is that the new worker can see examples done by the person commenting, and take that into account when assessing the value of those comments.
The experienced worker gains by hearing what a virtual member of the public thinks of his work.

At one time a local camera club met on my premises, and I entered a few of the competitions. The only one I ever won was an anonymous Christmas competition, where we all handed in a photograph at the door to be pinned up and voted on by everyone else. There was no expert judge or commentary, we all had to vote on the one which we liked the most,during the course of the evening, by putting our slip in a box to be counted at the end of the evening. Democracy can produce a popular result quite different to an expert one. Even in a room full of experts.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
My yiew of club photography is based on the fact that it is a top down system, Pervading the entire amateur world, from international to local level.
The Standard and quality required to pass mustard at each level, is virtually unchanged since the thirties.
New blood with alternate ideas has no option but to fall into line, If they want to succeed.
This has resulted in much Club work being beautiful but sterile.
No other art-form would accept this stagnation.
Click to expand...

Fully agree - but only as an outsider who's looked at club exhibitions and seen comments on photos by club photographers. And as far as the exhibitions go, I was told that it's normal to let everyone exhibit anything they want to, rather than having a standard that has to be met. I now find myself wondering if the few really good images I've seen at exhibitions were the ones that would have failed the standard. :) But - don't these objections apply equally to competitions generally, not just camera clubs?
 
There are 2 standards here. Subjective and Objective.

Some are givens in 99% of cases, e.g. you'd expect something to be in focus and no obvious sensor dust. But there are times when that would be acceptable.

I once saw a judge say that an image could be improved by cloning out some figures in the background. Issue was, it was a photojournalism category.
 
StephenM said:
But - don't these objections apply equally to competitions generally, not just camera clubs?
Click to expand...

I think you are right Stephen, at least when the deciding factor has any sort of subjective element to it.

I also think that Terry is right, when he says that the basic rule set for photographic competitions, hasn't changed since the thirties.

As I said way back in an earlier 'thread', a few years ago, when I used to race sailing dinghies (Class Racing) at competitive level, the race winner was always the first one to cross the finishing line, providing he or she hadn't infringed any of the rules during the race.

There was no subjective element, and it didn't matter who the race officer was on the day, he or she who crossed the finishing line first was the winner. The same goes for athletics etc.

As soon as you include a subjective element, as in the judging of photography competitions, the whole thing is open to the personal preference of the individual judge. There is no defined finishing line that a winner has to cross.

You can't blame the judges for this, as they are human beings like the rest of us, and what one judge likes, another judge won't.

Does this make the whole club photo competition thing, a bit of a nonsense?

I should perhaps add, that I belong to two camera clubs, one that doesn't have any competitions, because of the reasons stated above, and the other just three competitions a year.

These I usually enter for the fun of it, and to be supportive as a club member.

Dave
 
Last edited:
Our club has one or two critique evenings each year, very successful and popular nights. Format is simple and most importantly inclusive. Anyone can put up to 4 photos in, everyone can comment openly when they are shown. The author of the photograph isn't generally announced unless they do it themselves, maybe want to talk about it specifically, or if someone asks who's it is. Everyone can comment ... very important, it gets people involved, or at least lets them feel involved even if they don't speak, avoids the feeling of 'being lectured to' and the formulaic photo scenario too. Very often the newcomers have worthwhile comments to make, the longer standing members can take it a bit further with their experience. They also enter photos. Comments are always constructive .. how the photo could have been improved, can be improved etc. They work well, are valuable and are fun too!
 
The thing about getting an external judge in is that you are accepting his (or her) opinion. You don't have to agree with it, just accept it as their opinion.
When you all comment on each others pictures, either it gets very ego massaging or engenders bad feeling - neither good for club relations.
 
john-oh said:
The thing about getting an external judge in is that you are accepting his (or her) opinion. You don't have to agree with it, just accept it as their opinion.
When you all comment on each others pictures, either it gets very ego massaging or engenders bad feeling - neither good for club relations.
Click to expand...

I'm very lucky, nothing like that in ours at all, it's all very much geared towards helping, teaching, learning, sharing and passing on experience. Although I can imagine that happening in some clubs sadly.
 
Last edited:
My camera club runs a critique evening twice a year. We ensure it is not too serious and encourage a certain amount of banter to make it reasonably sociable. We set a time limit so all images are critiqued. The photographer introduces the image talks about what was good what was bad and what was trying to be acheived. Then the members pitch in with constructive critique. It works well and a lot can be learnt.
 
Hobbytog said:
My camera club runs a critique evening twice a year. We ensure it is not too serious and encourage a certain amount of banter to make it reasonably sociable. We set a time limit so all images are critiqued. The photographer introduces the image talks about what was good what was bad and what was trying to be acheived. Then the members pitch in with constructive critique. It works well and a lot can be learnt.
Click to expand...

I think this might be the way we'll go. We will have to either set a time limit or a limit on the number of images people can enter in order to give each one a fair hearing. DPIs will have to be pre-submitted so we can put them on the club software to save time, but, hopefully we will all get something useful out of the session.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top