Do You Ever Get Sick of....

I am curious as to how many people ever get tired of certain types of critiques?

Let me first explain. I actually like hearing honest feedback...as long as it is well thought out and the photo is honestly examined. However, I feel there are MANY times (mostly in the galleries on both NPN and other critique forums) where I see people make comments that don't seem well thought out at all and feel like the person making them just finished reading some text book on photography and have some sort of checklist that EVERY shot must follow. One example, is the rule of thirds. Yes, for most shots this is an important rule to follow, however, there ARE times where the rule of thirds may not want to be followed (i.e. a symmetrical composition). Another example, is all shots must be front lit...I shake my head every time someone suggests that any shadow my side light created is a bad thing....huh? Isn't light and shadows something you should use to create depth? Isn't light something that should be used to highlight something interesting?

What I mean by this is; do some of these people ever think outside of the box anymore and try to create something unique? Every shot does not have to look like everybody else's shot of the same subject...does it? Maybe I am the one on the wrong path...but I feel like I HAVE to try different things, otherwise, how can I ever set myself apart from hundreds of other wildlife photographers? Especially since there are hundreds which are MUCH better than I am and have years more experience and recognition than I do.

Where I am going with most of this is; I think I need a break from posting on the galleries here (not this forum, I love it too much and the knowledge that exists here). I find some of the critiques I get are the same verbal vomit over and over again even the positive ones and I find instead of helping my photography some of the critiques are actually starting to hinder my thinking. The last thing I want to do is turn into some sort of photographic robot and make my shots look just like everyone else's shots and end up never selling anything or ever being noticed.

Curious on your thoughts and whether or not I am going off the deep end for no reason?

(If anyone is curious, this is something I have been thinking about writing for some time and was not brought on by a critique anyone here or even on NPN made. It was actually brought on by another professional photographer's critique of an image of mine and I felt he seems to think his way is the only way to see an image...obviously he and I had it our verbally a bit ) I am actually sort of embarrassed to post something like this, but I really do want to know if others feel or have felt the same way.

Have you read Stan's pet-peeve list? Rule of thirds or death!!!

But I agree with a lot of what you are saying here. There are times when I have to just walk away from NPN all together because I get too irritated with the formulaic BS that I see in critiques. I have ALMOST learned to read any critique here with a large grain of salt and a very open mind. So if you're off the deep end then I'm right there behind you

Kurt, I applaud you for having the stones to do your own thing and stand up for your work. Personally, I find it hard to critique other photographers work since I'm an amature myself and have never taken a class or read a book on nature photography. I think the best critics are the general public since they're the ones that will ultimately make you or break you. Ansel Adams was a great photographer who did his own thing and it worked, yet in some of his images he seemed to ignore the rules. I say shoot your subjects the way you see 'em.

I don't think you are alone in this sentiment, especially with the number of websites increasing where images are rated without required critique. I think each site serves a purpose, we all just need to choose where to post our images that most closely aligns with what we are looking to get back. As a photographer looking to genuinely improve, NPN is the best fit for me (although I have been absent lately!). Other sites have me wrapped up in posting images I think will get positive attention, instead of what I feel are the most interesting artistically. A direction I do NOT want to take!
Cole Thompson has a vow of virtual photographic celibacy so he can develop his photographic vision uninfluenced by armchair critiques. It is a vow I have thought a great deal about, but am not yet ready to take.
Best of luck sorting through the photographic mumbo jumbo out there!

Kurt,

I think you have to be ... critical ... about the criticism that you ask for, or listen to. I think the best thing to do is ask for specific critique on a particular aspect ("Do you think that the dark shadow in the lower left is too much, or does it work as a graphical element", for example) or in comparison ("Do you prefer shot #1 or shot #2? Why?"). That gives people something specific to think about and comment on. I do think that NPN/Rockies is better about it than many other online forums.

Secondarily, you might want to look for and follow a few photographers who you think are original or pushing the boundaries. Off the top of my head, I might recommend Kane Englebert, Guy Tal, and Marc Adamus. At the very least, they're not trying to duplicate the icons. There are plenty of others, too...

So no, I don't think you're going off the deep end.

I do worry slightly about your statement "never selling anything or ever being noticed". I've been lucky enough to sell prints in the past (pre-2007, when the general economy was better) and I will say only that my most popular images usually weren't the same as my best images, or at least what I thought were my best images. If you get to the point where you're selling images, be careful that those sales don't turn into another kind of pressure from your audience for good but formulaic images. If you want to be an artist, you have to balance outside feedback with your own calling. Then comes the next big question: are you trying to create something new for uniqueness's own sake, or because you're left dissatisfied with the earlier interpretations and feel like something else might be better?

At any rate, these are some of the ideas that I've thought about and struggled with. I hope it provides some insight.

Personally, I hate any "rules" for photography. I know it helps some people compose shots, but I've never once used a rule when composing a shot. Admittedly, a large number of my shots do end up using the rule of thirds, even though it's not planned. Our minds tend to think that way and like compositions like this, so there is some validity for the rule. Rules basically analyze what people like and then provide guidelines based on that. But I have a big advantage in that I am human, so I already know what I like and I can skip the step of using other people's analysis of what humans like . So, I don't like any robotic-type critiques that rely solely on the rules of photography.

I don't post too much on the critique forums, but oftentimes if I see a critique that seems weak, I'll click on the person's web site and see a lot of really average photos, which makes me laugh. The more well-thought-out critiques are more-often-than-not from people who's work I respect and admire. So, oftentimes there are some really valuable critiques. You just need to be able to sort through them all and ultimately only take advice if you yourself think it's valid. That being said, even if only 1 in 5 critiques is something you agree with, you're still gaining something valuable out of it.

As a visual artist I think it is necessary to understand all the basic concepts of composition, lighting, rules of color and tones,etc. At some point, after gaining a full understanding of these concepts, you are perhaps ready to try your own wings and try and find that artist within you. Then, at least, when you break the rules, you know why you are doing it. Yes, there is a lot of derivitive work out there. Landscape photography particularlly seems to lend itself to that...but, then you run across a break away guy....someone who is plowing new ground and truly has a new vision....thats what most of us want to become, but, forming a foundation is the first step. I am a portrait photographer by trade. Now, I am trying to gain a solid foundation in landscape and that is the path I am following. I am getting a good education on this forum. Maybe it's time you were trying your own wings...and you should do that....but be respectful of the really good artists here that are trying to help others lay a good foundation by pointing out basics.
Joe Rogers

I think one thing you have to keep in mind is that there is a wide range of experience among the photographers on NPN. Many photographers are accomplished pros while others are just beginning.

As an amateur photographer who is closer to the beginner end of the learning curve I appreciate feedback that I receive from NPN photographers but I often feel intimidated to offer critiques of the images posted by more accomplished photographers. I usually try to offer a thoughtful critique from my limited experience but often feel as if I should disclose the fact that I am more of a beginner myself. As such, I tend toward commenting on images from photographers who I perceive are closer to my skill and experience level. I may comment on an image from a more accomplished photographer but I rarely offer any sort of critique. Commenting on images posted in the critique galleries has helped me be more mindful of compositional and technical elements in my own images both in the field and when I review my images during post processing. This process has helped me learn. I would venture to say that my comments have helped me much more than they have helped any other photographer whose image I post a comment.

The point that I am trying to make is that the value of the feedback that you receive as an accomplished photographer is going to be varied due to the wide range of experience level of the photographers commenting on your image. Beginner or intermediate level photographers are probably more conscientious of the "rules" of photography; therefore, the feedback offered will be more likely within the structure of the "rules". Furthermore, I think that there are many other photographers such as myself who are intimidated when it comes to offering a true critique of an accomplished or more experienced photographer's image. It stands to reason that a more experienced photographer is going to get more valuable input from photographers who have similar experience and skill level.

I hope that NPN will remain a place where photographers from all skill levels can participate and learn.

THE SHORT READ …

You can make truly excellent images by completely ignoring much of the advice you'd receive here. That about sums it up. Don't go away, just remember that fact!!

THE LONG READ …

NO, you are absolutely not going off the deep end. You're about to step onto a diverging path. A path towards more creative freedom ... and more self fulfillment. That's my take on your comments anyway.

The great thing about nature/landscape photography is that there are many paths towards self fulfillment and even success. For some, following the common formulas work well. They are quite happy emulating Ansel Adams. For others, these formulas are very restrictive, and they break away towards more creative pursuits. And the beauty of photography is ... nobody is "wrong" really. There really are no rules. I certainly think some of the available paths use far more of our left brains ... but to some, that doesn't matter. It really depends on the motivations of the individual, and you are certainly feeling a need for a more creative atmosphere. Kudos. This is a sign of growth.

But you have to realize that online communities are largely going to reflect the formulaic habits of the masses (the people, the publications, the everyone and their grandmother offering workshops, etc.). Plain and simple.

And sorry, but you won't find good critique online. People really don't know how to critique - largely because nobody really teaches how to do it. Beginners and pro alike fail at it. It's all a very lazy and rushed process these days. Furthermore, people don't know how to post for critique. Photographers slap random photos (usually from their latest scenic conquest) online without any context ... the why, and the how that follows the why, and so on. We have to give meta data, instead of why we made the image in the first place. ???? At least in places like NPN. I'm not really criticizing NPN ... you just have know that there are common formulas in place here, and nearly everywhere. There's very little direction otherwise, so everyone just follows the lead of those who have been here the longest - or those who have the loudest voices. Or worse, we're simply encouraged to simply "like" something or "+1" it!! I've watched critiques for years, and it is truly the same verbal vomit over and over - at least from the majority. (Read Guy Tal's latest blog post if you want to know WHY this is all happening ... few are TEACHING the basic fundamentals that matter.)

Find alternatives. Develop close relationships with other photographers. Share your work in real ways, outside of quick forum postings that are here one day, and gone the next. You're FAR better off sharing/critiquing within a smaller, more intimate selection of friends/photographers outside of online forums. I do this with some of my friends. We KNOW each others body of work. We know habits. We know motivations. We know the stories. We're able to make meaningful critiques within this context.

Despite what some might say, there ARE NO FUNDAMENTAL RULES towards creating good nature/landscape photographs. There are only formulas that are more common than others ... and a complete lack of fundamental questioning, tutoring and self refinement. If there are such "rules", then what I'm shooting in recent years is pure crap, for sure.

Yeah yeah, online forums like this are great for developing an eye for technical skills - post processing, etc. You see what works, you see what doesn't work. There's no denying that many are learning something from this process. But again, what is being learned is far less critical than than acquiring the fundamentals of how to truly make a "good" image. Yes, you should know how to make a photograph where everything is sharp ... where your shadows aren't blocked up ... where the composition is tight ... and so on. Good photographers must have a mastery of the craft. BUT, it does not mean that these techniques need to be employed to make good images.

Again, you can make truly excellent images by completely ignoring much of the advice you'd receive here.

That's why I don't post to the other galleries here and avoid the highly competitive photo clubs. Although I do try to stick to the general "rules", I have found that often the photos that I've shot that do well critically, don't sell. Since I need to sell my photography, my customers are who I really must ultimately satisfy.

After saying that though, I really have gotten some very helpful guidance from many of the members of this group and I really do appreciate their suggestions that are very specific to what they think could be improved.

I had to get away from all the forums for awhile a short time back. And this, because I had one thought, "Get out of my head!" I had spent so much time making my often useless critiques and viewing other's comments and images that I could not look through a viewfinder without hearing someone from the forums critiquing me before I made the comp. That can be a good and bad thing.

In defense of my useless comments, I do want to say that I regard encouragement as a crucial part of an artist's growth. If all one hears is negative, it can be discouraging, stifling, and even crippling artistically. So, most of the time, I try to find the positive part of the image and comment on that. I leave the serious critique to those more qualified and critical by nature.(Stan ) And, I really don't have a keen critical eye anyway. That is a lot of why I post often. The feedback lets me know if I'm seeing it the way a detached observer is, or if I have too much emotional connection with the moment. Or just bad technique in capture or processing.

If you want to see how trying something different goes on the Landscape forum, check out my last post. 89 views and 9 comments by the time it moved to the second page. It is so far from the praised image, it's ridiculous. Well, there is the point that it's just not very good either. But, I hope most here see that I am trying to move away from the formulaic.

Kurt, you make several valid points and you can see that others struggle with the same questions and pursuit. I can only say, take a break for awhile, listen to your inner voice and not the ones trying to get inside your head, and to offer this:

Polonius:
This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
Farewell, my blessing season this in thee!


Laertes:
Most humbly do I take my leave, my lord.


Hamlet Act 1, scene 3, 78–82

Listen up you guys!
You could be stuck with soft useless comments like the ones you get on flykr...
In my opinion, LET IT RIP.
Im intimidated by the quality that you and others on this forum post. I have to catch a real winner, in my opinion, to even think about posting.
I have learned a lot readings suggestions from you and others on each others photos. When I get big, I'm going to,post more.

Kurt: I have stopped posting anything at all in the NPN critique forums for many of the same reasons. Another one I'll add, are that there are a few "photo Gods" that many on NPN seem to bow down to as if they're some sort of deity. Their photos garner 40, 50, 60 and more comments while other photos go virtually unnoticed.

As I see it, critique forums are places where photographers who are looking to improve their photography post their work for honest, thorough, constructive feedback. I also believe that there is a lot to be learned by studying the work of others, including the aforementioned "photo Gods". But, when forum citizens would rather add their "this is the most amazing photo I've ever seen" comments to the other 50 already posted on an image, those who are posting their work for critique are doing so into a vacuum.

Oh yeah, and what Jesse said is dead on the money.

There you have it, my two cents.

First, thank you to everyone that read this and second, thanks to those that responded. I think everyone makes good and valid points, however, Jesse, I think you seem to understand where I am in my work the most based on your comments and I actually have been pursuing other avenues for sharing my work. I just need to find more of them.

I do want to make sure people understand...I am not saying the comments of basic rules are not valuable, but I have been posting on the galleries plenty long enough for people to know my level of knowledge. It isn't so much of what they say, it is more of put some thought into it, instead of making everything cookie cutter critiques. I have heard some of these things so many times, that sometimes when I photograph I hear little voices in my head saying...okay, move a tiny bit to the right so you don't have that little tree in the background, because someone might find it distracting. Instead, I should have a little voice in my head that says, 'move a little to the right, because the composition looks so much better without that little tree in the background. I know for many that probably doesn't make sense, but for me it does. I am making these images because of how I feel and what I want to communicate from my shot...I am not making them to please someone on the forum. I just wish sometimes people can see that instead of quoting something they read out of a book somewhere.

I also want to say, one thing I really like about this forum instead of posting on the galleries, is many are more landscape photographers instead of wildlife and you all provide me completely different inside than I get on the avian or wildlife galleries. Plus I get a TON of valuable lessons on processing in this forum...compared to the galleries. So I post in the forum for a different reason and I am not in the slightest bit tired of the comments I see on here, so sorry to anyone if you thought I was leaving this forum.....you are stuck with me for at least awhile longer

oh, and Morris, thanks for the Hamlet...it really seems to fit perfectly!!!

Bret, I was writing this when you posted yours...I couldn't agree more with what you said.

So many points already mentioned above that I could not agree more with. I don't have a lot to add other than to re-iterate the thought that photography is not about rules. Anyone who tells you that it is or that is how you should approach it will never be a great photographer. It certainly helps to know and understand those rules, but at the root level it is an art. It is about expression and portraying beauty through your work. It doesn't matter what rule you used or did not use, what subject you shot or included or did not include. The end result of an image has nothing to do with these things in my opinion, and they don't make or break an image. In the end, follow your inner creativity and stop listening to the majority wankers out there trying to be critical so they sound smart. Jesse said it best, if you want good critique, then develop a relationship with someone and build an open and strong critique with that one person.

Great discussion. Something else that has not been mentioned... thoughtful critique takes considerable time to study and think about the image. A 10 second glance and first impressions do not make a true critique. And most forum users are not willing to invest that time. They've got to get on to the next image, and the next, and the next, so they can add their 2 cents to each. This holds true for learning, too. You can glean many of "the rules" by glancing at published or popular posted images. But in order to understand what really makes an image work, what gives it power, or mood, you need to spend a little more time both viewing and thinking.

Kurt, your post couldn't have been more timely. I've been thinking about this for a long time and considered such a post to go with some images I'm prepping. First off, I find myself quite in agreement with you and some of the responsers to your post. (I wish I was as lucid as Jesse, because that's what I would have said). And, if you are going off the deep end, you'll have company!
But, let me play devil's advocate for a moment. What if everyone adopted the attitude that they should only post deep, meaningful, thoughtful critiues? The number of forum posts (on all photo forums) would fall off a cliff. In today's hyper-frenetic, internet driven, gotta have it now, world, people are just too damn busy and there is an expectation of instantaneous response and gratification. So, the fact that there are so many empty platitudes doled out here, and on most internet forums, is simply a reflection of the the times and technology. I'm not saying I like what I just said, but it seems to be today's reality, unfortunate as it is. And being just as guilty as the next person of verbal vomit critiques, I consciously avoided internet forums these last several months, feeling that if I had nothing meaningful to say, I shouldn't say anything at all. I only recently started viewing other's work again. I don't think I'll ever be as active on NPN as I used to be, but when I do participate, I hope my posts will be more thoughtful and considered.
Personally, I would love to hook up with a small group of photographers to have the occasional, face to face, over coffee or a meal, critique sessions. Bring a print or two, and let's look each other in the eye and give each other some honest feedback and encouragement. Any takers?
Thanks for this post, Kurt. I think we all needed it. I know I did.

I'm not sure if you're looking for critique to help you become more creative, or looking for critiques to reflect appreciation of creativity. Very different goals imo. Critique is a valuable process for improving technical execution. And while it can reflect an appreciation of creativity, it's typically not very useful for actually driving creativity and individual expression, unless, as Jesse suggested, you're dealing with a smaller, more focused group of people than what you have in the large NPN galleries. Herd mentality is unfortunately very common there...

Regardless, I think your plans to step back are right on the money. Evolving as a photographer is a process of learning and applying; experimenting, adjusting and contemplating the results. Too much input - even when it's thoughtful, valuable input - can overload the system and risk replacing your own, unique sensibilities with those of the crowd. You ultimately have to find your own way, as you state.

So it's good to balance the equation - a little personal experimentation, a little critique. Explore what you want to express, then seek input from the community on how well you've expressed it. There will always be people who don't recognize/appreciate creativity, but that not what critique is best used for.

Seeking community input relates to the other topic discussed above - the quality of input/critique in the NPN galleries. I agree with most of Jesse's comments, but disagree that you can't find good critiques online. You can; but they're overwhelmingly outnumbered by generic contributions. Most people aren't even attempting a critique - they're simply expressing appreciation of an image, or lack thereof, without explaining their thought process.

I think we all need to do what you're doing. It's hard to find our own style. It's much easier to "improve" by mimicking what we see/appreciate in others' work, especially when the NPN popularity contest suggests that certain styles/techniques work well. But, while the easy path can return modest gains in quality with little effort, it inevitably leads to the homogenization of imagery that is very evident in the NPN galleries. There continues to be many high quality images posted there, but diversity and creativity are now scarce...

This is an awesome topic. It's nice to know so many are feeling the same way. You can count me in too. I've posted quite a bit less over the past year due to some of the same reasons outlined by all of you above. Two of the biggest reasons have been those Bret and Scott described.

A while back I posted an honest critique on an image by one of the "photo gods" only to have said photo god respond defending against what (in my opinion only) was a flaw which negatively affected the whole image. In this case the PG stated I wasn't "viewing the photo correctly." Then there were probably about ten more subsequent posts immediately reaffirming the PG's defense. I don't mind if a majority of people disagree with me, but what bugged me was the PG's need to respond against an asked-for critique.

This contradicts my philosophy which is to thank all posters for their comments knowing some of them I'll find useful and successful to implement into my images later, some suggestions I may experiment with but ultimately not like in the image and some of them I just won't agree with at all (but I don't need to tell them that). I might repost an image using the advice, I might not. It's my image after all and the final say of how it will look is in my hands. No defense of that is necessary. Politely thank your critiquers and move on. It's sometimes difficult for creative people not to take their work too personally, but I think it's useful to apply the saying from "The Godfather" to critique: It's business, not personal. If someone doesn't like a particular one of my images it doesn't mean I'm a bad person (or even a bad photographer!)

Because of this experience there are several photographers on the site whose images I may view and admire but they don't need my input if they have 50 other comments to choose from. I'm definitely not an amateur at this anymore and my time will be better spent on those who really need (and will appreciate) the advice. I'm trying and will continue to try harder to comment on those images that obviously aren't winning the popularity contests.

Also, to expand on what Scott said, I've found the first one or two critiques in the galleries often dictate how the rest of them will go. If the first poster writes that there needs to be more detail in the shadows (one of those "technical" comments that is so common now it makes me throw up in my mouth a little every time I see it ) you can bet you're going to see five or so more comments repeating the same thing. Maybe we all have done this from time to time, but it's evidence of quick, lazy and unoriginal thinking. It's now a worthy challenge NOT to comment on an image unless I can add something constructive to a previously-said comment, say something about the image no one else has or to play devil's advocate ("screw the shadow detail, see what this will look like as a silhouette!" Just because our digital tech can pull out more detail doesn't mean we have to!) As we sometimes need to step away from the icons and shoot our images in original ways we should also try to step away from the played-out critique methods in original ways too. Rant over. Thanks for your post Kurt!

I see where Jesse's coming from and agree with a lot of it but there's certainly things I don't agree with. Sharing things with a small group of friends is good if you have the right group to share things with. Before I joined here, I shared images with a group of friends, one of whom was a photographer, one of whom was an artist but not a photographer and the rest of whom where neither of the above. The photographer-friend was a pretty good photographer but he believed that his stuff and my stuff were great and most other people's photos were crap. The other friends were all pretty easily impressed by any nature shot, regardless of how commonplace, as they hadn't seen a ton of other nature photos. So, for me, I was pretty much immersed in a bubble. My photography was gradually improving but it was through no help from outsiders.

I can say that joining RMNP has helped my photography a lot. There was no "ah-ha" moment but just a lot of small things through the years. Most of this involved post-processing techniques. But it's also good to see what others are doing to keep me motivated and try to keep up. For me, photography is a business and a lot of the photographs that I sell are the very traditional landscape photos. I can get bored with that occasionally, but seeing how others have pushed the boundaries of traditional landscape photography can at least keep me motivated. If photography weren't a business for me, I may have gone in a completely different direction. I still dabble in other types of photography but rarely post those photos anywhere. In some ways, I find it more fulfilling to do things for yourself and not care about getting attention for it or even care what others think about it.

I can’t really agree with Jesse's blanket statement that there is "a complete lack of fundamental questioning, tutoring and self refinement." I know there’s elements of truth in this and I had similar thoughts when I first joined, as the posts tend to be very one-dimensional and lacking any real philosophical insights. But I realized that forums like these don’t lend themselves to longer philosophical musings. With so many posts, short comments focused on a narrow theme are really the only way a forum like this can operate. I won’t guess or assume what may or may not be going on in other people’s heads.

I did join a modeling photography forum once when I had become a little bored of traditional nature photography and found it to be mostly full of infighting, petty jealousies, and some of the worst grammar and spelling I’ve ever seen. In this case, I think I can safely say that there wasn’t a lot more going on in these people’s heads than what they were communicating on the forum. I had one argument with a guy who said that people should try to be more creative and try to emulate the cover photos of Maxim Magazine. I responded that trying to emulate the cover photo of Maxim Magazine, which tries to emulate just about every other cheesy magazine cover, is the antithesis of creative thinking. My opinion was very much in the minority, as everyone looked up to this other photographer. Suffice to say, I didn’t stay long in that forum. By contrast to that at least, NPN is a great forum, even if it has its obvious limitations.

I do agree that the critique forums seem to have turned into “show off your best photos and receive adulation” forums. That’s not entirely bad, as it’s nice to be able to quickly browse through some of the best landscape photos of other photographers. But I usually only post there if I’m not entirely sure about a photo and want it seen by new eyes.

Okay, now I’ll go back to posting the shorter “vomit comments.”

If you are posting images where you have done some experimentation or have "broken the rules" I think it is important to mention what you have done and why you chose to do it, that way people can evaluate if they agree with your composition. If they already know you consciously broke the rule of thirds, they then can evaluate whether you were successful in doing that rather than reading the rule book to you. I think we get out of a critique what we put into posting and describing the image. The more we put into describing our methods, inspiration, goals, etc., the more we give to the critiquers to evaluate the image.

I think a perfect example of this was earlier this year (?) when Jesse posted a series of B&W images and in the description he noted that his intent in some of the shadow areas was to go totally black and gave his reasons why. That statement eliminated most of the "you need to pull some detail out of the shadows" comments and focus on evaluating his concept with the series of photographs.

A big part of the problem, for me at least, is that almost all of the photos posted on NPN have just one motive, which boils down to, "look, isn't nature pretty!" I happen to agree because nature IS pretty. Such pictures don't tell me anything more about the subjects or the photographers who made them. So now my question to the person requesting a critique is this -- what do you really want me to tell you about your photographs?

Of course, there are exceptions, and every now and then someone displays a really illuminating photograph which is a joy to see. I browse NPN's IC galleries in the hopes of running across these rare gems.

"...which tries to emulate just about every other cheesy magazine cover, is the antithesis of creative thinking." A very valid point Grant! And yet we have a situation here where someone actually hints at imitating Kane, Guy and Marc. It has been an underlying theme here all along (ehem... photo gods). I have a feeling Kurt (same as a lot of us) is stuck in the identity bubble that is partially imposed by comments that direct you to become the next Marc and not towards developing your own style. I struggle with that day to day. Not necessarily about becoming the next Marc but the next Jesse (as if that were possible..). Some of my work has already gotten comments along those lines. I am aware of the fact that I cannot free myself from the influence Jesse's work has on my work, yet I still work (with a lot of frustration) to make sure I develop my own style and not become his clone. And I think that should be everyone's goal in any art medium. Not to become the next (fill in the blank photo/art god) but to develop your own eye. I actually make it a point to not shoot with Jesse or see his LCD display if we happen to shoot together and keep doing what feels right to me. I don't even want to see his images until I am done processing mine. But I still feel very fortunate to be one of the "friends" (btw, he pretty much only has photographer friends ;)) who gets to hear his sometimes brutally honest but meaningful critique

My two cents for what its worth. Who really wants honest feedback on NPN? I think it has to be asked for and if you do get it, who do you take it to heart from? You also have to be able to take it. Photographers aren't my buyers. Then again ifotoguide with Bret and Dan are packaging a guide to Yellowstone containing my images and info for photographers. But mostly I sell to non photographers, tourists, photo editors, decorators and the like. Sure I shoot the icons to sell because sometimes thats what people want, but most of the time I shoot for myself for the sheer enjoyment of it. Critiques, comments and even sales for me are after the fact, but then I have been taking images for a long time. I learned about rules when I first started photography but I never think about them out in the field. All that stuff gets left behind and I'm in my own world when I'm out there. I guess I don't see a problem with emulating someone else's work. You stick with it long enough you will develop your own style. It kinda of depends on where you are at on the learning curve. Now I must admit I do need more help on the computer end of things.

I had a similar experience with a pro photographer who stated that an image I took of the Tetons was crap. Little did he know that I had sold 1100 prints of that same image through a retailer called Coldwater Creek. Sometimes you just gotta let it go into one ear and out the other. Critiques are not a bad thing, just make sure you know where it's coming from.

If NPN is getting into your head, leave it alone for awhile. Just enjoy yourself. Thats when creativity can flow freely. I've seen and commented on your images Kurt. What a awesome place to be with the animals you've photographed and with the ability to take a piece of it home with you and share with others! My enjoyment is looking at your work and the work of others on this forum and giving encouragement to others in their pursuit of photography. Thanks for bringing it up.

Good post, Dean....lot of wisdom here. For many of us beauty is still in the eye of the checkbook holder.
Joe Rogers

Rick makes a great point ... there ARE good critiques to be found here and there. I was generalizing for the sake of simplicity. I didn't mean to offend those (even those reading this thread) that make good critiques. Thanks for starting this thread Kurt. The kind of transparency and honesty shared here really adds value to the hurried internet.

Great topic Kurt - thanks for posting! Excellent discussion everyone.

This is a thought provoking thread, imo. I am a relatively newbie here, but have tried to dive in and contribute opinions and suggestions that may include a reason for my thinking. I sense that some of the problem in critiques may be due to a difference in image styles and visions. It takes some time of studying another's website to determine that person's style and hence critique according. Feedback for Russ's recent images from CR7 immediately come to mind with perspective to his image and what critique was posted. Some of the feedback seemed to be based on the reviewer's technique and style and how the image could be altered to fit his style and not how it may fit or deviate from the poster's original goal. With this in mind, one should post with what the vision and goal is, and consequently be able to accept or pass off comments and critiques they receive.

+1 Kurt, Jesse, and Grant.

But seriously, I would suggest to move a little to the left next time, pull out some of those shadow details, and definitely crop this way.

Good read...

Sorry im late to the party--interesting discussion!

To be totally clear--I most definitely am NOT against breaking the rules!! Break them all you want--but know them first--and have a solid reason to break them. If your reason is "cause it feels right to me", well at least that's a start, but I would argue that coming up with something a little more detailed might make you a better artist/photographer--knowledge is power! I sympathize with a lot of what Jesse said--but from my perspective--the "fundamentals" are a form of rules, so it sounds contradictory to me to say 'ignore them, but ground yourself in them'.

It must be something in the air, cause like several others here I'm pretty close to taking a step back from NPN, it doesn't serve the purpose for me that it once did (Ironically, Jesse is the one who directed me here in the first place). Let the air clear a bit, then come back with a fresh set of eyes.

The "fundamentals" are HOW to make a sharp photograph, how to control exposure, etc. - the groundwork that we all master (to some degree) in order to effectively use our tools. However, the "rules" that have been set forth by the masses tell us how to translate and/or combine these fundamentals into making "good" photographs ... with very little regard to WHY ... which is reflected in the habits of the critiques found in places like NPN. It's really that simple.

Nobody is saying learn rules, and then break them. That's just more of the same problem ... empty methods and empty purpose. You learn the HOW, and then you choose from the myriad of opportunities within that HOW in pursuing your own WHY. Form follows function. Sorry, but there is not one single rule involved in this process ... only common methods ... methods that we can combine/twist/distort to our own liking as we pursue our own purpose in photography. If anyone or anyplace is burdening you with rules as you develop this process ... walk away.

That said, while this "rule" mentality permeates much of NPN, there's also some good critique ... smart photographers ... and a bit of the WHY that is being shared and enjoyed. It's definitely a minority cause, in my opinion, but maybe worth building up ... instead of ditching? Some of my favorite photographers have left this place for these very reasons, but we are also lucky to have some that are still here encouraging us to break free from the common problems of today's "everyone and their mother does it" nature photography. Guy Tal, anyone?

I'll say it again, because it's important enough that it should be the only rule we all buy and sell ... FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION. Learn how to do it ... learn the freedoms it allows ... learn to see how others are doing it (if they are), and let your critiques follow suit ...

If you're frustrated, that is.

Some of you are probably wondering why I'm chiming in, as I have completely abandoned the thing that once was my outlet. Chief among the reasons for dismissing nature photography completely was....drum roll... the proliferation of the latest gadgetry, facilitating what seems to be a rapid advancement for many, who are (please bear with me) doing the nature photography community a disservice. Why you ask? Consider this: You have been involved in nature photography for years, been through the classes, the darkroom, the 4x5, the Velveeta sessions, and then made the switch to digital - a truly amazing sea change for most of us. You've spent years perfecting and crafting your art - and you've been everywhere. Then, Canon and Nikon start ramping it up - making ridiculously large-sensored cameras, that rival the transparency. Pretty soon, the Internet, the shoreline at Maroon Bells, is wrought with photographers - tons of them, all jockeying for position to get the SAME photograph (bear with me). While this isn't BAD, it's just getting more POPULAR. I blame the camera companies.....

So, when you go to art fair here in Colorado, what do you see every time? Aspen trunks? Maroon Bells? the gratuitous Mesa Arch sunrise? Go to an art fair next summer and you'll see what I'm talking about. Its downright uninspiring to me. And that's me - not you, but me. I'm just stating this fact, because this phenomenon is what this thread is about - the subsequent despair as a result of poorly and hastily crafted critquing, as Jesse points out - a lack of knowing HOW to do it. To come full circle, the cameras, with their built-in HDR (what good is that?) - to a degree, absolves the photographer from having to focus on the other 50%, which is post-processing and printmaking. No wonder why so many of us don't know how to critique. Its because we're lazy, and instant gratification is such a big part of our modern lives.

It will be interesting to see the future of nature photography at large - already I'm seeing buzz about a new Canon 5D. I'm sure it will have all the best stuff, and more. It will only speed up the process, not slow it down. To be continued...

This was an area in which I really struggle to stay engaged with NPN. The last time my renewal came up, I almost decided to leave NPN. NPN certainly helped me a great deal in my photography early on. But now for the money, I didn't feel like I was getting much from my membership here. Not that it costs that much - equivalent to just 10 sheets of 4X5 film/year. I just didn't feel like I was growing from this relationship. I understand the mechanics, the technical and the artistic aspects of photography. I'm now working on developing my own style, something which I hope I will constantly create in my life. To do this, I learned I needed to widen the scope of my knowledge and increase the depth in some areas. I decided to do this on my own by building a library and studying. My library contains books on topics from modern art, Japanese woodblock, classical western European and masters of 20th century landscape photography and technical books from basic photography technique, composition, color theory, and some books outside the realm of photography all together.

I personally feel that there is one model of the successful NPN photographer and that model is structured on Galen Rowell's style and the sort of content found in Outdoor Photographer magazine. I don't find this trophy hunting style of photography to be all that fulfilling to me. In fact I find it about as absurd as Michael Fatali's "waiting for the light" metric on his website.

I've argued many times that the separation between "ESS or Landscape" and "Man and Nature" is needless, is not helping photographers develop into better photographers and illogically it puts one style of photography with a fairly limited audience and market but huge pool of practitioners in front of another style of photography with a wider commercial appeal that could help our members make photography a bigger part of their lives. In reality, both are landscape photography. It could be said to an even greater degree about the EPJ section of NPN. If people don't view your photo, they can't provide a critique. I've argued this on occasionally for years, and it has fallen on deaf ears.

While Outdoor Photographer (and NPN) goes deeper and deeper into the realm of golden hour, "pristine" landscape, the rest of the media world like Sunset Magazine has gone more towards experiential photography with people and well managed light in the landscape as a core of their work. And while a group of friends around the campfire might not be your idea of fine art photography, I can tell you that my work office has hundreds of landscape photographs printed LARGE on the walls and I can think of only a couple that do not include people in the landscape.

Not that I'm saying that is my style, just that NPN could break down some barriers that I think would help our members become more successful from a commercial standpoint. I think NPN kinda tried to experiment with this idea by creating the anonymous gallery, but it just wasn't successful.

When I thought about leaving NPN, I thought about the friendships that I've made here and the insights that I've gained from viewing others work and I decided that it was not time to call it quits. As photography forums go, there is no doubt in my mind that this is among the best on the web.

But NPN is a far cry from getting an honest expert critique from a qualified critic and it really isn't designed to foster creative individualism. But that doesn't mean that we can't make more insightful and meaningful critiques and create our own platform for collaboration and creativity. Our annual winter meeting is a ton of fun as are other informal events, but perhaps we can do some additional events specifically around critique.

The greatest gains in the critique process don't come from receiving one, but from offering them to others. In receiving, we have little control over what's offered; extracting value is the recipient's responsibility, but the gains are proportional to the quality of what is offered. And as we've discussed above, quality can be lacking. But in giving a critique (when done thoughtfully) we spend much more time considering why something is effective or not, and it's that careful, deliberate analysis that moves us forward. I enjoy giving deliberate critiques because I hope that they're helping the photographer better express what he/she is trying to express. But there's no doubt in my mind that I'm the main beneficiary of my own critique.

So if you're unsatisfied with the status quo, do something about it. Even a failed attempt is better than despair. But don't do it hoping for appreciation; do it because it will make you a better photographer.

Chris... are you really suggesting that camera manufacturers are responsible for you leaving photography? I truly mean no disrespect, but that's just sad. We're human beings. We have brains and free will. What others do certainly impacts us, but to let it be the determinant in a decision like that is unfortunate.....

Hey Rick, no worries man, trust me on this one - the 'dumbing down' of our society has an effect on everything we do - now, as esteemed nature photographers, we should be able to see past this BS. But's that you and I - its the 1000s of other GWCs out there - yeah yeah yeah I know, forget about them... Mainly observations - I should have not been that implicit about the 'cameras fouling my interests', yet it was the idea of making a hobby of mine a business that really put the nail in the coffin.

I don't have a lot to offer on this one. Heck, I don't have a lot to offer on most subjects as I don't feel qualified to judge others work, etc.

If you have a passion for photography then follow it. That's all I can offer. If you have a passion for anything you are blessed.

I have just taken some time off from NPN (which is why I'm replying so late to this). I left for a bit because, to borrow Joshua Hardins term, a "photo god" posted some comments, that struck me as insulting. I thought they were insulting to many of us who come to learn from the more seasoned and more talented photographers here.
But, I digress...
I have posted photos here for critique, and have received some good, useful criticism, which I appreciate. I have also learned a lot just by "lurking" and following other threads.
However, I have found that the most useful critiques and help have come from one or two people whom I e-mail photos to, instead of posting them here.
I'll keep being a member since I'm still learning a lot, and I hope to never stop learning. I'm sure some may think I should go for a lifetime membership...

Just the 2 cents worth from someone who wishes he knew all the rules, so he could also break them!