good photo critique sites

<p>I am just an amateur, hobbyist photographer. I am, however, serious about trying to improve and broaden my abilities. I do not intent to sell - just enjoy the adventure in retirement. I do not just want to share photos. I want to use the experience to learn.<br>

<em><strong>My question is what sites offer good opportunities to have productive photo critique interchange?</strong></em><br>

<em><strong>Are there any good photo critique groups that are on the internet?</strong></em><br>

I am willing to share any opinions I have as well as receive honest feedback as opposed to all pats on the back.<br>

Thanks for your responses.</p>

<p>Dave: I believe you've found the site which matches your descriptions and fits your needs; it's called photo.net.</p>

<p>Although I tend to agree with Michael, I also want to throw in a "it use to be!"</p>

<p>PN has been the only photography site I have frequented for many years but, I'm starting to consider searching for another as your post indicates Dave.</p>

<p>Everyone I think likes a few "flowers and pats on the back" once in awhile. But some honest feedback would indeed be much more beneficial.<br>

Maybe I just go about it in the wrong way, . . . and one should only request anonymous critiques. <br>

Most will indicate that the Ratings "don't mean anything." But at least by submitting for ratings you get something! </p>

<p>Back a couple of years ago, I recieved an email invitation to join another website. I spent a few days on it looking around but, at the time I was not interested because PN was putting out more photography education and information in the forums than I could absorb. And I "just couldn't seem to get my fill of spending enough time here."</p>

<p>I need to find that email again!</p>

<p>1) In the past, I spent a lot of time on Photosig, and received many useful critiques. Give it a try. Unfortunately, it suffers from the same issues as the world in general, there are more takers than givers. And some people don't really want critiques, they want praise. Others think they are so great that we should be honored that they have shared their awesome images and that makes up for them not critiquing.</p>

<p>They have a reasonable expectation that you will give 3 critiques for every image you post. But, critiquing others work can be just as educational as receiving critiques.</p>

<p>2) The Photographic Society of America has online study groups, you will need to join PSA to sign up for one. But, the study groups and other benefits are what makes it worthwhile, the magazine is not worth the membership price.</p>

<p>I have been on PN for 10+ years. I don't come for specific feedback so much as just to get a general sense of what does and doesn't work with photo-types. The feedback here is usually camera-club stuff - "you should crop it like this", "your horizon is tilted", "try it in B&W", "why did you cut off the foot?" and of course, "this violates the rule of thirds". <br>

It is almost impossible to get useful feedback online. Better to try and make friends with real live photographers and hang out.</p>

<p>The way to get interesting and useful feedback on PN is to be engaging and hopefully create a group discussion on any pictures you host. It's possible, and I've done it, but it takes some effort and a consistence presence. </p>

<p>Interesting and useful comments usually emerge through an interactive process. Someone reads another's comment and adds to it, then a critical mass develops and a discussion takes shape. The dynamics is similar to Photo of the Week but quite different in that on a personal image the discussion is more contained. Over time you develop friendships and a community spirit, then folks will mark you as "Interesting" and regularly visit your uploads and participate in discussions. </p>

<p>I can think back years ago when members like Doug Burgess and Marc Gouguenheim were active and contributed significantly to discussions acting as the catalyst to critiques and comments, and they didn't just favor "worthy" photos. <br>

<br>

Those were the good 'ol days. <br>

<br>

Times have changed and long-time members have evolved so discussions are no longer as spirited as it once was, but is it possible to get back the community discussions as we had in the past? I think so, but it takes a group of committed participants to take the lead role with a more relaxed attitude. We still have the Burgess/Gouguenheim equivalents active on the site, and if we want a community, we should avoid pointing fingers and maybe start looking at ourselves in the way we participate. In other words, don't sit around with expectations, rather invest the time to create a fulfilling experience by actively participating. <br>

<a href="/photo/8308717&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/8308717&size=lg</a><br>

</p>

 

<p>Dave,Michael is up todate,PN is not what it was before,but I think that his example and mine as well,and a group of members that are always in the learning mood can be susccessful.</p>

<p><a href="/photo/17443780&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/17443780&size=lg</a></p>

<p>I agree that photo.net is probably the best for comments & criticism, but it truth, I don't think that's good enough! I think much of the blame is US! I rarely comment on photos any more; the hassle just isn't worth it. People get argumentative and resort to name calling and generally become unpleasant if you don't provide them with unqualified approval. And I use the request for criticism more as a way to promote my photo and get it seen by more people than I do to get honest criticism. And the few who bother to comment at all rarely offer anything beyond "nice shot" or the like, anyway.</p>

<p>For one thing, if we want honest opinions on our work we all need to toughen up a bit. C&C implies you are asking people to tell you what is WRONG with your photos in addition to what is right. There is no reason to be cruel, but sometimes people DO have to mention the shortcomings of your photo. Perhaps we don't always use the words you would have used, but that's the risk you take by opening up a photo for criticism!</p>

<p>Maybe one way to get over this hump is to lock responses from the poster of a photo for a given period of time or until a certain number C&C comments are received. That way the requestor has time to cool off when he/she realizes that people actually judge his/her photos on their merit before lashing out!</p>

<p>There are a lot of problems with this solution, I know, but I don't see any GOOD solution.</p>

<p>I'd like to add that I think the critique aspect of PN will never be perfect unless we all assimilate to a culture of mutual acceptance of individual differences; there will always be perceptual differences due to age, life experiences, education and competence, but every comment has value as long as it's not made mean-spirited. </p>

<p>The health of PN's critique forum is also tied to its financial health due to its prominence in every member's photo and the way it serves as a gauge to a member's feeling of participation, so I think it's imperative that we (members and management) nurse it back to health or suffer its neglect at our own peril. </p>

<p>I don't think there are any critique sites that are worth much. I think your own evaluation of your own work is what counts, not the opinions of random strangers. If you don't know when a picture is bad then there's little hope for your photography. If you take the "advice" of others then your work will be driven to the norm, i.e. typically run-of-the-mill picture postcard work. That you can get from a book. You can get the same information that you do from online critiques from any decent book on photography and composition. What you get online will pretty much be a regurgitation of what's in the book anyway.</p>

<p>If you want praise for your work, then online critique forums are certainly the place to get it.</p>

<p>I go so far as to say that there are <strong>no</strong> photo critique websites of the type you are looking for on the web. None. Photo.net is as good as any. If you get comments, most will be simple praise or comments on how someone else would have taken the shot. If you are very lucky you might get a comment which is actually useful, but I wouldn't count on it.</p>

<p>If you seriously want a critique of your work you best bet is to look for local photography groups or courses/workshops which offer an image or portfolio critique as part of the package. No doubt you'll have to pay for it and even then it may not be of much use, depending on who is giving it. Two different photographers may have two very different opinions on any set of images.</p>

<p>Here's a pay-for-review <a href="http://www.photoplusexpo.com/expo-events/portfolio-reviews">http://www.photoplusexpo.com/expo-events/portfolio-reviews</a> It's $275 for a portfolio review from 5 of the 175 reviewers available. It's probably very good and very useful but you do need a portfolio of well printed images, not just a few digital files.</p>

<p>As a last resort you can always follow the <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/10_tips_for_better_photographs.html">11 tips for better pictures</a>....</p>

<p>

If you wanted me to make an overall critique of your work here on photo.net I'd say your technique is fine, but you need to work on framing and composition.

<p>If it's not good for critiques, what would you say Photo Net is good for?</p>

<p>That's not the subject of this thread.<br /> <br />I'm sure many people like the critiques here, I just don't often see any comments that are particularly useful or constructive. It's fine if you want to know what people like. As I said, I don't think there's another site that's particularly better. It's just the nature of web based critique sites that they typically don't provide much useful insight. I'm not sure that's even possible on a single image viewed in isolation.</p>

<p>How can a collection of strangers know what was in my head when I took a particular shot or what I was trying to convey with the image, and even more to the point how could they then possibly know how I could have made it "better"?</p>

<p>The forums on www.PhotographyTalk.com are well suited to requesting feedback and interacting with others. There's no rating system, just dialogue. The site actively pursues educational articles and videos geared towards all levels.</p>

<p>I gave up requesting ratings when I figured out that pictures that don't contain bare breasts often get "3"s even when it gets a lot of high marks. Besides, a rating is often just an opinion, and without verbage isn't helpful, in my mind.</p>

<p>Dave:</p>

<p>For the most part, I agree with Bob and Ian. For an amateur or a hobbyist, the critiques here are as good as any. For the last 150 years, the mountains of photography have formed, and these are the standards that we gauge success and proficiency by. If you're trying to get to the top of any of these mountains, I believe it's much easier to swallow the critique of someone at the top, be it harsh or kind, than the view of someone telling you how to get there when they don't know themselves.</p>

<p>There are many fine photographers on all the sights. Seek technical advice when needed, and gauge if your work is getting close to the standards you have set for yourself. In the world of creativity, there's always room for another mountain...... </p>

<p>Bob, maybe it is the subject of the thread just in a roundabout way. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><em>"It's just the nature of web based critique sites that they typically don't provide much useful insight."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think "useful" is often an intangible. While it's true that a single image commented in isolation offers little insight, the totality of peer feedback on ones portfolio over time does in my view represent how the world might view it, and that in turn can be extremely useful. <br>

<br>

Part of the problem is also the widespread gradation of experiences, expertise, genre preference among many other things becoming obstacles to peer/personal interaction. <br>

<br>

The "critique" aspect of PN has always been fraught with problems, but it can serve an extremely useful purpose if the "rules" are well developed, defined and entrenched into members' psyche. If 10 people can be "friends" on Facebook to form a small scale community offering mutual feedback, the same, in my view, can be scaled to PN's level if influcing factors are carefully considered and addressed. </p>

<p>Who follows rules on the web? That's the problem. When anyone, with or without any qualifications, can say anything about anything, it ends up as babble much of the time. sure there are a few diamonds in there with the rocks, but finding one is a matter of luck.</p>

<p>You could certainly have a site where some sort of qualification was required to offer critiques, but you'd still have the problem of 10,000 people wanting critiques and a handful of people willing and capable of offering them</p>

<p>You'd think that if a good model for a photo critique site existed, someone would have used it by now and there would be one site that was way better than all the rest. As far as I know, that's not the case. You could almost certainly form a small group of 10 people who would perhaps critique each other's images in a somewhat useful way, but the model doesn't scale up to a commercial website application. I'm not even sure it would work well for long within the small group.</p>

<p>My advice would still be to get a book and critique your own work, or possibly join a local photo club and see what they have to say. By all means also post images for critique on photo.net. You will probably get some feedback, but how useful it will be in the development of your photographic skills is somewhat questionable. It certainly can't hurt (unless you react badly to negative comments).</p>

<p>Maybe the thing to do is critique other's images. Once you figure out what's wrong with their images it could give you useful insight into improving your own.</p>

<p>When I sit down with a "photographer" to offer a critique I have the luxury of determining the skill lever from him/her, and present criticism based upon their current level of understanding. Not so with an online critique, I have no idea who I'm talking to nor what I can say that will effectively reach them. Add to this, the sites dogged determination to neuter any serious intent with kindness, positivity and false praise and even the best of intentions become impotent. </p>

<p>IMO the greatest failing in most requests can be attributed to a sever lack of visual maturity. Photographers are so in love with their images that they fail to observe what's being done all around them - and just like those who have already stopped reading this post - are completely ignorant of any work but their own. Most experienced shooters can't waste time and energy on such a vast compellation of naive images on such a truly basic and visually immature level.</p>

<p>PN has been an increasing disappointment in recent months - an elitist attitude for subscribers only - a constant influx of really stupid questions from and ever expanding base of newbie's that never learned how to do a simple search to answer their question. If there are moderators, wouldn't it be wise to gently let these folks know the search capabilities of the site and advise it's use? In addition these newbie's need to address there query to the Beginner Photography Questions Forum. I just becomes noise and clutter that must be culled in order to find something of interest. Hopefully. Perhaps a new forum dedicated to "Pixel Peepers" should be established to funnel the endless "technical" nonsense that has little to do with practical shooting and real life situations. I, nor very few others, really care if an old AFD lens will focus faster on a D3 or a D800. </p>

<p>For PN to succeed and overcome the current recession, the powers that be, might consider a new paradigm for critique and inclusion of all members in POW and Editors Choice, rather than subscribers only. If indeed this site is "A Site for Photographers by Photographers" then all members qualify - not just subscribers. Interest levels would rise and an atmosphere of inclusion would result.</p>

<p>Gary, I'm more than 10 years in this site, and I must say that it was a great photography school for me.<br /> My advice is be open to real critique, and try to write an answer if you agree, and what you thought about when you photographed the secne. You learn this way to get/give to/ from others .</p>

<p>Another way is to read critique given to other photographe/phers when you see something interesting in both the photo and the critique.<br /> And the last but not least is what Bob advice is: reading and joining a photo club if you can.</p>

<p>All of it is developing your seeing and observeing the life around you.</p>

<p>As has been mentioned, online critique forums will let you know what people like. The critiques generally give you suggestions as to how to make your images more like the popular common denominator. If you look at what rises to the top in online photo communities like PN and this is where you want to take your photography, then these sites will help you to emulate those types of images. If on the other hand you want to pursue your own vision you need to become self critical. Basic research skills will get you answers to any technical questions you may have. Finding your own voice is a bit more challenging. Ask yourself what you want from your photography. Determine what barriers there are between you and those goal and chip away at them, a bit at a time.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Something I posted to a very depressing comment from a PN user who was wondering if he is wasting his time.<br /><br /> "I know I've stopped commenting on all photos except those who have significantly moved me in some way. Too many people don't want intelligent criticism, what they want is the same uncritical support that their mommies will give them.<br /><br /> If you don't say "good Job!!!!, give them a gold star, and promise to stick their photo on your refrigerator door with magnets, they think you are being mean and cruel.<br /><br /> Am I wasting MY time by posting photos here? I don't know. I do know that I see photography as a form of communication and of reaching out to others to share what I've experienced, and of my vision.<br /> <br />I don't expect anyone to comment or spend any time rating my photos, instead I count the views, and if I get more than 20 - 30 views, I'm happy, I've shared my work with others.<br /><br />BUT - this is just a single minor stop on my outreach, I also share my work on Flickr, and Google+, both are good in terms of feedback. Google+ photographers seem particularly good at intelligent comments."</p>

<p>I am getting my best, and most, critiques on Facebook. I am in two groups specifically created to generate critiques. One generates excellent critiques from very good photographers. Its subject matter is skewed toward models and portraits, but I get good critiques not only on my people shots, but any thing else I post. The second is a site that has a lot of amateur level enthusiasts with a few standout photographers. I use critiques and comments from the enthusiasts as kind of a sampling of first impression public response to my work. The good photographers come through with valid critiques. Facebook, by its nature, results in a closer, more personal group of folks than does Photonet. I'm here mainly for inspiration and the type of education that comes from research. I just don't put in the effort to create the type of relationships required to get critiques on here. I've gotten a few that make me think, but nothing compared to those over on FB where the group starts with a bit more of personal relationship already in place. Plus, if you're after ego-stroking it happens faster over there because you are playing in a smaller pond. I once had a goal of really plugging into the Photonet community. I was envious of some of the interplay of those who were here before me, but my time is limited. I've found no better place, though, for finding awe inspiring and inspirational work.</p>