Judging photograph

[riz]

Hello,

 

Can anyone outline the points on which a photograph could be judged. Please

exclude the mouting/framing aspects, just a photograph only.

 

Regards,

 

Rizwan

[seismiccwave]

From my understanding and it has NOTHING to do with reality.

 

The rating system is based on 1 to 7 points. So 4 is the middle. Since 4 is the middle it is

the "average" photograph. If you look at a "bell" curve in statistic "normal" or average is

the biggest portion of the curve. So the majority of the photographs in this world should

rate a 4/4.

 

From there you use your own judgement. If a photo catches your eyes and is very pleasant

then you may want to rate it a 5/5. If the photo is really good to you then it may be rated

a 6/6. If you can't find any flaws and you think you have not seen anything better then a

7/7 will be good.

[riz]

"If a photo catches your eyes and is very pleasant then you may want to rate it a 5/5. If the photo is really good to you then it may be rated a 6/6. If you can't find any flaws and you think you have not seen anything better then a 7/7 will be good."

 

Hansen thanks for the post. Please advise what the criteria for "very pleasant", "really good", "can't find any flaws".

 

I need to know are there any parameters on which you can judge the photograph in some manner.

[fullmetalphotograper]

Why does the sun come up? Or are the stars just pin holes in the curtain of night, who

knows? - Ramirez, Highlander

 

Rule number 1 in judging a photo. No two people see the same thing. Nor do they share

the same definition as to beauty.

 

When 1st thing with me when I look at a photo does it grab my attention, pull me in. Then

I look at what works for me, the strengths. Finally I look at how I would improve the

image, what is needed to give it a little pop.

 

As for points I could careless. People focus too much on scores not enough on the art.

[ananda1]

I don't believe in 3,2 and 1 ratings. According to me if a photo fails to get 4 ratings then it is bad, thats it.

 

I do agree with Ralph, one should focus on the art, not the score.

 

"very pleasant", "really good", these two are in a tricky situation. I don't feel difference between the two. If a photo is pleasant then it will be really good.

I think there is a very thin line between 6 and 7 ratings.

Last words "if it not for any competition, then there is no universal rule to judge a photo, it differs from person to person".

Regards

Anand

[iancoxleigh]

I agree with everyone above that trying to 'objectively' 'rate' art is likely to be frustrating and close to being pointless. At the very least it can be misguided.

 

But, on the other hand, this is what a magazine reviewing a submission or gallery looking at a portfolio is doing, so it might be good to have a general idea of what to think about in your head.

 

The following are some questions I ask myself in editing my work rephrased as questions to ask of work you are looking at.

 

1. Focus. Is the focus appropriate to the image and your perception of the intent of the photograph/er?

 

So, is there enough (or too much, or too little) 'depth of field'? Is there unnecessary and unwelcome motion or subject blur? Is there unnecessary and unwelcome camera shake? On the other hand, is there creative use of motion blur, camera shake, shallow or wide DOF that creates interest in the image?

 

2. Composition. Is the composition appropriate to the image and your perception of the intent of the photograph/er?

 

Does the image feel balanced and harmonious? Or, does the image feel dynamic and engaging? Is the feeling created by the composition suited to the subject and other elements of the overall presentation?

 

Does the composition feel 'imposing' or forced, or is it more 'natural'? Do you notice the composition itself when first looking at the image? Is this (which ever way you answer the last questions) a good thing or bad thing when you consider it in light of the subject and overall mood and presentation?

 

3. Exposure. Does the exposure see appropriate to the image and your perception of the intent of the photograph/er? Does the exposure help convey the 'message'/mood/overall effect of the image?

 

Is there detail in the brightest highlights and the darkest shadows? Is there a full range of tonalities? If not, is it a problem for the overall effect of the image or does the contrast and tonality work to help the image? If it is high-contrast, does it suit the subject and overall presentation? If it is some other specific tonality, does it work for you in furthering the impression of the image for you?

 

4. This is probably the most important and difficult question. Is it interesting? This is a very difficult question to try and answer with a sense of objectivity. But you can try by asking yourself whether the photographer has caught something special. Is the light special and interesting? Is there a unique or interesting 'gesture'? Is the combination of elements particularly powerful? Are the colours or tonalities exquisite?

 

Does the image create a strong emotional response in the viewer? Is it experiential (do you feel involved in the image)? Should it be more emotionally engaging or experiential? Or, is a more 'observing' or 'clinical' view suited to the subject and other elements of the presentation? Perhaps this is meant to be more documentary in style and should give the initial impression of presenting 'fact'.

 

Was the photographer simply 'there' and felt he/she had to take a photo or was there something special about that moment that made it the right time (and place) to take the image?

 

5. If you are judging this as art, you might want to ask if you have seen this exact type of work before? Is the work too closely similar to another artist's work? Frankly, is it derivative?

 

Perhaps it is in the style of another artist but the work never-the-less conveys a unique message or perspective. Perhaps it takes a previous style and pushes it in a new direction or to a new level of technical perfection. After all, there were several Impressionist painters utilizing similar styles, but we value each for their unique work.

 

5. Small technical stuff. This is usually much less significant. Is the print a good quality? Are there marks on it? Are they detrimental to the image?

[seismiccwave]

Rizwan,

 

Very pleasant - you feel comfortable viewing the photograph. The rest of the members

said it well. That comfort level is your own judgement. Every one was brought up

differently so their comfort level is different.

 

Very good - that is beyond your comfort level but you get more emotional viewing the

photograph.

 

Can't find any flaws - fairly self explanatory. If the photographer intended the image to be

out of focus, the image should be out of focus. If the photographer meant for the image

to be in focus then it should be in focus.