Top 10 Most Annoying Photo Critique Comments
As far as photo forums go I have to admit I’m a dinosaur. I’ve been posting on photo forums since they started to pop up on the internet. Granted I’ve done so selectively, yet trying each that comes around and over time I’ve settled into a few that I feel best meet my needs. Things are constantly changing and more than likely in a few years much of this may turn out to be a fad and disappear. Lets hope not. Still since 1993 one thing has held constant… the following annoying photo critique comments:
10. Any single word critique (Wow, Beautiful, Fantastic, etc.)
Its not that these are bad, but tell me what you liked and inspired your initial reaction. I or any photographer for that matter will have a better understanding of what about his/her photo strikes a nerve with you the viewer. Usually I take these types of comments with a grain of salt if I know the person. Ultimately I can’t fault people too much for these types of comments as there are too many beautiful photos to view and too little time. Heaven knows I’ve been guilty of being lazy and doing this from time to time.
9. Misidentification of a photographed person, place, animal or thing
This is almost always an innocent mistake, but it doesn’t mean its any less annoying. Not everyone is exposed to the same things and sometimes we rush through viewing photos a little too fast. Either of which would contribute to this type of mistake. Ultimately though if you can’t spend the time to think about what you’re viewing or recognize your own limitations of knowledge then you should avoid specifying a place, person, animal or whatever the subject may be and go to #10.
8. Being addressed by the wrong name… “Great shot John”
If you can’t spend the time to figure out what my name is, how can I take your feedback seriously? If you’re looking over my login name, profile and/or image so quickly you can’t get my name correct then I doubt you took the time necessary to take in and absorb the hard work I put into one of my photos.
7. Not recognizing that a night photo is… a night photo
Although I understand how this happens I still find this extremely annoying. Usually a night photo with a long exposure will show unique characteristics (color shifts, star trails, etc.), but many with an untrained eye will miss these blatant signs of a long exposure. There is nothing worse than hearing that my photo is underexposed or that I should have taken it at a different time of day when it was a long exposure taken at night.
6. Armchair photographer misdirection “I’d have moved back/forward/right/left…”
I give everyone the benefit of the doubt with such comments as most people are just trying to help, but we all have received comments like this and rolled our eyes. Why? Well usually because moving back or to the left or to the right would be impossible. There have been too many photos to count where I’ve received such feedback and had I tried what was being recommended I’d be dead. Personally I try to avoid falling off cliffs, rolling down mountains or drowning for the sake of the absolute perfect photo. Well…so far.
5. “Not enough detail in the shadows”
This type of comment usually comes about from someone reading too many photo articles and taking a recommendation as the law. Just because its possible to have detail in the shadows it doesn’t mean you have to. More times than not every scene has black in it. Lack of color data doesn’t automatically equate to a bad thing. A creative photographer will use contrast to his advantage by arrange dark areas around his subject so that it stands out.
4. “Too bad your highlights are blown out”
Once again blown out highlights aren’t necessarily a bad thing. Just because its possible to have detail in the highlights it doesn’t mean you have to. If an image is meant to be high key then blown highlights are to be expected. For many images its not a bad thing to have a solid white value in your image as long as its not overwhelming your primary focus.
3. Missing the point and the focus of my photo
Not everyone sees the world the same way and that is what makes photography so great. Conversely viewers don’t always see the world the same as a photographer and that can lead to disconnect and some frustrating moments. These things are bound to happen, but what annoys me is when the extra efforts taken to minimize the opportunity for this type of disconnect are completely missed. If I’ve provided a description or added a title to the photo please read it. I put as much thought into these things as I have my photo and it’ll likely provide some insight.
2. “Nice Photoshop work” / “Color treatment looks unnatural”
Although I find this to be annoying I’ve learned to take it as an extreme compliment. This is all a matter of personal photographic philosophy, but for myself I strive to capture and present exactly what I see to highlight the natural beauty of our world. If the scene looks unreal or unnatural that is a reflection of the beauty that person has yet to see in person and the accuracy by which I’ve captured it. In that sense I consider it a compliment that I’ve helped expose that person to a new view of our world. Still after working long and hard on an image (planning, travel, execution, post-production, etc.) its tough not to have an initial negative reaction.
1. “Nice HDR” / “Is this HDR?”
I realize this is a neat area to explore as of late, but for some reason there is nothing I dislike more than HDR images (See Why I Hate HDR: Photo Technology Porn). For those that don’t know HDR stands for High Dynamic Range and is a software approach to blending multiple exposures of a scene into one, providing a broader dynamic range to an image than would normally be seen with a single exposure. There are only a few people I’ve seen pull of HDR well and the rest look far from decent. I’m a bit of a photography purist in that I strive to nail my exposure. Sure I’ll use PS masks at times to balance an exposure, but no more than to recreate the effect of a graduated neutral density filter. HDR just looks artificial and thats the exact opposite of how I strive to display my images.
That sums up my Top 10. Did I miss anything? What’s your most annoying photo critique comment?
Addendum (added late 3/19/07):
And before you take this too serious take note I appreciate every critique received. Top 10’s are always controversial and many of these points strive for the ideal, but at the same time are ripe for ridicule from the perspective of the photographer and critiquer. Somehow photo critique debates always get a little hot and heavy. Photography… critiques… its all good fun. I love sharing the experience with others, but at the same time we all have our pet peeves. If you can’t laugh at yourself then who can you laugh at. Thanks for reading and adding your two cents.
Update (added 4/29/07):
Check out “Photo Term Series Post #1: Aerial Perspective (disambiguation)” the first of an on going series of Photo Terms & Definitions that might help add more substance to your photo critiques.
| Stay Connected with Jim | |||
 | Join Me On Twitter |  | Become a Fan on Facebook |
 | Listen to EXIF & Beyond |  | My Latest on YouTube |
Nope, you’ve just about summed it all up, Betsy! Of course, if I had written this, I might’ve shifted the keyboard a few inches to the left and maybe also tried to not overexpose the white in the middle column of the screen. Also, there’s not much detail in the grey background on the sides. But, I do appreciate the point of this article which is clearly to make fun of and ridicule people with attention deficit disorder. Oh yeah, and by the way, did you use photoshop to check your grammar? If not, I’d be willing to bet you masked a couple essays together here, but your editing skills make it seem to bloody seemless! lol. rotfl. (imho)
But seriously, Jim. A great post. Being the snake guy that I am, the two that get under my skin the most go along the lines of: a.) “Snakes, EWWWW!” and b.) “Are the poisonous?” On the latter, at least I can type, “No, they are not venomous” and set that term straight. But with the former, it’s a clear sign that my photograph/subject didn’t get through to the viewer.
I think what bugs me most – though I do understand it and my irritation is likely a result of my amateur status as a photographer – is that I often get advice to basically make my photograph look like every other photograph I’ve ever seen of the same subject. More than anything, it just signifies that what I’m trying to do isn’t working for many people, but dang it – I don’t want to shoot the same photographs everybody’s already seen! Still trying to find that balance. Find my own ‘voice’ and still sing in a key people can tolerate. lol. rotfl. (imho)
Oh yeah, and one more thing: the smiley emoticons and shortened abbreviations. Those get on my nerves, too. :’) Especially the dang abbreviations: lol rotfl hfstsisfwicbinb. etc. And though I’m guilty of it myself, the overuse of exclamations can get under my skin. For example:
“Wow, Jim, this is really an interesting shot! What a fantastic subject! The white of the feathers is a little blown out though! Still, an amazing bird and a great capture! I do hope you have a good day! I have to go to the bathroom now, but will be back soon! Too much beer last night!”
- or – the dreaded string of exclamations:
“Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
Anyhow…
Thanks for bringing a smile to my face at seven on a Sunday morning after a rather long St. Patty’s eve!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (lol)
~ janson
[Reply]
Jim,
“Granted I’ve done so selectively, yet trying each that comes around and over time I’ve settled into a few that I feel best meet my needs. ”
I’d really love to hear which photo sites you ended up submitting to.
As far as comments go, I find them just like email, lots of SPAM trying to get their name on sites, with a few great comments. Don’t let the SPAM comments even get to me, and feel appreciative of those that are real.
~Tony
[Reply]
Nice one, Jim! I’m guilty of #10 myself, but that’s because I react immediately when I see a great photo. I write what comes to mind, and do so when I’m wowed. Usually, I just fave photos. A fave speaks more than a trite comment, imo.
[Reply]
This is getting weird. You are the third or fourth independent photo person I know to complain about photo critiques. The first one was part of an article in the most recent “Lenswork”. The next two were two friends at the MFA program at the Academy of Art, SF, and now you. All of this beckons the question why do critiques? In my mind there are usually three reasons for bad critiques:
1) The critiquing person has no clue about photography. Especially people without any serious fine art background (“I own all Cartier-Bresson” books doesn’t count) do not know what to look for in a photograph and if you ask two “uneducated” people, you will get two very different answers. If you ask two “educated” people, the answers will, most likely, be very similar.
2) The person cannot articulate his opinion. This is similar to 1), but can also mean that even a knowledgeable photographer ends up telling you “I like it” or “I don’t like it” (which, btw, would be highest on my personal “most annoying comment” list).
3) The person does not want to hurt anybody’s feelings. I think this happens a lot at art schools and as a result you don’t get any harsh, but constructive feedback.
Overall I think that anyone who can push a button considers himself a photographer. Today, all you need is a cell phone to be a photographer. As a result you have millions of seriously uneducated people who think they are something and try to impress their opinion onto others. Consider painting! No one would dare to consider himself a critic just because they can dip a brush in a pot of color. In painting it is understood that you need a certain education to truly understand the art. Why is photography different? Because everybody is a photographer today…
Anyway, that’s my rant I had to get off my chest.
All the best,
Oskar
[Reply]
Jim,
Great writeup! Personally, I would have moved number 10 up in the rankings. This is one of the reasons I stopped participating on photo.net (along with most of your other reasons too.), to many people who would comment on my photos with one word comments. That doesn’t help me as a photographer! I am still searching for a place to get meaningful and thoughtful critiquing of my work…haven’t found it yet. Guess I’ll have to build it!
Two questions:
1) What forums do you regularly participate in?
2) What critique did you recently receive that trigger the posting?
[Reply]
WOW ! GREAT!!!
[Reply]
Thanks to everyone for commenting on this!
I’m not surprised this resonates with other photographers. Every forum I’ve taken part in threads have been started on elements covered in my blog write up. I’ll have more to say on the various forums later this week. I had been meaning to write about this for sometime. There wasn’t one critique per se that triggered this more a rolling consistency of critiques received. It’s something I had been meaning to write about for sometime.
A real quick plug for a forum I find to provide the best critiques is naturephotographers.net, but they’re quite niche oriented towards landscape and wildlife photography.
More to come on this… but keep the comments coming.
[Reply]
To extend the discussion a bit further, if you will…
I am most definitely one of the ‘educated’ people in the big, wiggly world of photography. I don’t consider myself a photographic artist. Nor do I consider myself particularly gifted and/or talented. I’ve never had formal lessons and only know what I know through practice, experience, and dialogue. I do, however, have a deep love for wildlife and photography and take both of these very, very seriously. The act of going out in the field, finding animals, studying and photographing them, and then learning from the experience is one of the few things that sustains me on a day-to-day basis. The last stage is to then share my images and engage in dialogue. On the flip side, I love to browse others’ works and to hear their stories, to share and learn from their experiences. I come from a dialogic camp of literature that perhaps values the verb over the noun, commentary and community (dialogic interpretation) a bit more than the Monologic Perfection of a Work of Art.
So, here’s my first question: If a simple “hey, I like this a lot” doesn’t help you as a photographer, does it necessarily hurt you? Let’s say you get five comments on a discussion thread you post. Of those five, one is useful (in your opinion) and the other four aren’t. Does the slacktitude of what you value in the four bad comments negate the usefulness of the one solid comment? Or do the four loser comments just shut down the whole system…?
What I don’t understand is the near-violent reaction to those who aren’t “Artists” – those who don’t already have the lexicon and the technical know-how. Those who are just beginning. Those who are ‘uneducated’. Can’t you constructively respond to those comments to help those writers develop their own skills? But, that’s assuming the “community” isn’t elitist and for Serious-Artists-Only – and that’s a fair consideration in have in any given writing/art criticism community (I’m not necessarily ‘anti-elitist’ all the time – - sometimes you only want the ‘experts’).
I teach college composition, writing and argumentation and deal with this all the time. But rather than simply blocking out, negating or shutting down those less-aware of the value of a constructive critique, the goal of the writing community is to get perspectives from all across the board. In a writing workshop, it’s not just about what you write and what people say about it, it’s also about how to learn becoming a better reader – a more critical (positives and negatives) reader. One can’t develop writing unless one develops reading.
But then this brings about audience analysis: who are you shooting and posting for? Only for those who share the same values of photography (‘Art’ with a capital A) or those who may share values in issues like love-of-outdoors, etc (‘art’ with a lowercase a). Perhaps that’s where the break is. Perhaps if we only want productive comments on our own photographs, in our terms and values, that’s what helps shut down the extended community?
I, myself, wish to be a better photographer. I take it quite seriously and I use forums to learn and engage with others. But even more, I love the wildlife and ecological contexts of these photographs. I love the experiences people have had – the stories that go with them. How they got their shot, what type of animal is featured, etc. Is it not possible to function on both levels in any given thread? Does a poorly-developed response (in terms of technical, photographic issues) from somebody negate all the others on a thread?
I’m not really talking about they “hey, that’s kewl” responses. Those don’t engage conversationally. Nothing can come of a comment like that, other than the appropriately-shortened ‘thnx’. But I know I was slapped down a few years ago because I asked what DOF means (not, mind you, what ‘depth of field’ means – just the abbreviation). As if learning and engaging is a negative value. As if one’s world is holier than another’s. As if one’s education is more important than another’s.
So what’s the end game? Do we use the forums to simply receive comments on our own work, responders-be-damned? Or do we use them to develop a community that fosters dialogue, education, and enhanced skills?
Just a response – and I would love to hear your opinion on this.
Respectfully,
janson the uneducated! :’)
[Reply]
Addendum: the first line of my previous post is supposed to say that I’m “most definitely one of the uneducated” etc. lol. Talk about proofreading…
~ janson
[Reply]
Janson cool blog by the way
You bring up great points. I’ve always said you get as much as you contribute on photo forums. I think there are a few benefits people get from photo forums:
1. Ego Stroking (the most immediate)
2. Education / Knowledge Sharing
3. Storytelling
4. Socializing
5. Advertising
6. Inspiration
No matter what the forum I think its always nice to see that your photo resonates with people and if that means you get one word critiques “Beautiful!” or whatever so be it. I think the problem arises not with the level of expertise of a commenter, but with the lack of descriptive comment or question. Even a novice can provide insight. Tell me why you found this image was of impact. Understanding those types of things makes me a better photorapher by finding new or improving up on existing photographic subjects.
Ultimately we take part in forums not because we want to throw an image up into the void, but because we seek feedback and interaction. Photography can be a very solo venture, particularly these days with post-production on a computer, and one of the great things about the Internet is that its changed that dynamic. While I’m conducing post-processing I can simultaneously discuss a photo I’ve taken. Although as most know that can be a negative as well… namely as a time suck.
The life of a modern photographer is a tough balance. Ultimately feedback is better than no feedback so with my mildly humorous take on the 10 most annoying critique comments I hope it spurs people to be more engaging on forums versus stepping into the shadows and becoming a photo forum lurker.
[Reply]
I appreciate everyone who comments on my posts. No matter what they say, at least I know who is looking. I’ve noticed that some will post an image and get 200 views, and only receive a comment or two. I consider that to be annoying.
[Reply]
I am not an uneducated man. I hold three degrees, including a Docctorate in Veterinary Medicine. I have a great love of images. I am most definitely one of the “uneducated” in the realm of the arts (Arts?), particularly photography. But Emerson said, “Every artist was first an amateur.” I enjoy comments of all kinds at this point, because they inspire me to go and take more photos. Nothing will improve my photography at this point like more work in the field or studio. I find it interesting that any appreciation of someone’s work could be, in turn, unappreciated. Mostly because at this point I receive so little.
[Reply]
Agreed.
Actually what gets me more than any ‘valid’ critique are the two supposed ‘critique’ forums that are basically either “Pat on the back” love-fests, where no matter how mundane the photo is, everyone chimes in with “great shot!” This is also the place where if you even think to mention to someone, “I might suggest that you consider…”, you can almost hear the ego snapping in to pieces and falling to the floor like shattered glass. The other is 180 degrees opposite – the Sport Critique forum. This is where the sport is more like how much can you rip on the person and tell them everything that’s wrong with their photo, and nary a word about what they did right or what’s to like.
[Reply]
Brian… I want to be clear I always appreciate a comment on a photo. I suppose over time its easy yearn for something more if the comments take a similar form. As I mentioned to someone else today an image being put out for critique is an invitation to not just share an immidiate reaction but to ask a question perhaps to inquire about a technique used, trip planning, location, etc. Forums are what you make them that goes for submissions and critiques. On that note everyone has their own reason for submitting. True we post an image because we like it, but usually deep down we seek critique to validate if that is a sentiment shared by others. I know personally I learn alot why an image I like isn’t received as well and find out an image I thought was weak turns out to be received better than expected. It’s all about learning…. sometimes learning about yourself and less about the image you post.
[Reply]
Gary thanks for the feedback. As you’ve aptly pointed out its not only a challenge to give/receive critiques but to find a forum that fosters the right environment for them.
[Reply]
I’m loving this dialogue.
One of the commmon themes I see coming through is about the level of dialogue participation, not so much in the level of vocabulary. To go with your model Jim, the problem can be in the dead-ended quality of some of the comments: “hey, that’s kewl.” What can be said but “thanks”…?
Imagine six people in a room workshopping their photographs with each other. Now imagine in that room for an hour and all anybody says is, “Hey, that’s great.” “Thanks. I like yours too.” “Kewl.” “Yeah, cool.” “No, kewl.” “Yup.” It would be maddening.
On the flip side, imagine yourself in the negative fest room for an hour. “I don’t like this.” “Well, I don’t like yours either.” “Actually, this could’ve been great, but it isn’t.” “I disagree.” “Bite me.” “Where?” “Right here, pal.” And so on…
I love your list posted a ways up the page:
1. Ego Stroking (the most immediate)
2. Education / Knowledge Sharing
3. Storytelling
4. Socializing
5. Advertising
6. Inspiration
Though Ego Stroking and Advertising aren’t necessarily factors most people would want to admit to, I do believe they play very present roles in most (if not all) forum communities. Perhaps part of the way to foster a functionally productive community (for all parties) is to try to encompass (or at the very least tolerate) each of these dimensions?
In writing, the most rounded, productive discussions/debates seem to be those that encompass three major factos: the issue/argument itself, the speaker’s position and a consideration for the audience’s. If we lose the value of any of these three, the arguments tend to shut down eventually. I like the idea of applying your Six-List to my own participation in forums.
BUT, without getting all lectury (how’s that for a word?), how do we help foster this view on forums we’re currently participating with, rather than simply finding forums that already fit this model? Lead by example? Post yet-even-more guidelines? A solid community now will likely grow, and with that growth will come those who aren’t quite on the same page.
This is a fantastic discussion.
~ janson
[Reply]
It’s been my observation that the critique says a lot more about the critiquer than the critiqued.
[Reply]
[...] JMG Galleries Blog [...]
[...] As a follow up to my Top 10 Most Annoying Photo Critique Comments post I’m going to be posting a running series on photography terms and definitions. Some of these terms will be pretty straight forward and others will be new to most. The idea is that perhaps this will boost the vocabulary of those that make critiques and provide greater understanding behind much of what we see in photography. [...]
Great list – both satirical and honest enough to make us look at ourselves in a new way. Your post on the Fred Miranda site of this has led to a pretty extensive discussion on the merits of critique in photography, and by extension, in the arts as a whole. All are free to peruse the draft copy of a paper I put together on the subject of critiquing photos on my regional website at:
http://www.scphotogs.com/articles/critique.pdf
[Reply]
Top 10 Most Annoying Photo Critique Comments
A humorous yet compelling look at the top 10 most annoying photo critique comments. The blog comments are also a worthy read.
Hilarious! I think I can relate to every one of those. I try to refrain from commenting on the technical aspects of people’s photos, because I know how annoying it is when you display an artistic piece and you get a bunch of wannabe know-it-alls telling you the technical downfalls of the image.
[Reply]
Fantastic! Amazing!
Number 6 seems to be one of the most popular. However, I would have used the subject of cropping instead of moving forward/back.
Opinions come so easily, don’t they?
[Reply]
They do indeed Tom! Thanks for reading and commenting.
[Reply]
[...] I had to laugh at myself when I got to that point. Jim Goldstein had published a post entitled Top 10 Most Annoying Photo Critique Comments back in March, and at that time, I was midway in my own journey to comment frustration. I didn’t share Jim’s opinion, and he actually took a lot of flack for what he said, but here I was, just three months later, being fed up with comments altogether… [...]
Wow. If yo cannot take shitty comments you should perhaps not pay so mucha attention to reading them. This was a sad, seemingly bitter, post about zero.
Also, it makes me think that a photographer that can spend this much time writing bullshit cannot enjoy their job that much. Rock on.
[Reply]
Great article John!
Makes me think of that movie “Grumpy old men”…
/Jab
[Reply]
Your Top 10 list here AND the list in comment #10 above explain why I’ve stopped participating in photosharing sites. They’re mostly shallow and a waste of time. I used to participate in one called RedBubble, which I thought was different. It just became a social networking, ego-stroking site where you could depend on your “friends” to deliver the “Wow! Great!” comments and the folks who thought they knew it all to try to bring you down a notch. Heavily retouched photos were far more common than “pure” photography, which I prefer, too. Why cook up an image in Photoshop when you can work a little harder and get it right (or almost right) in your camera?
Anyway, I sound like I’m ranting, so I’ll cut this short. Great post, right on target. But the list in comment #10 says it all.
[Reply]
Great article, John! =P
I’ve gotten a few of those and I don’t excactly mind them, but I’d rather take “real” critique.
The funniest/worst critique was the one of a nightpicture of mine. It looked “underexposed”, had alot of “hot pixels” and “lacked details in the shadows”. Oh and the “sun” looked overexposed.
[Reply]
Agree on the HDR. If anyone can say “Nice HDR”, its a terrible HDR. When you get away with using HDR, then THAT is a NICE HDR!
[Reply]
Hi Jim,
I am a bit newbie in photography, but after reading all these 10 points and having it in mind, I would not have any other space for critic of your photos. These 10 points are so broad, that if people should consider it all the time when they want to leave comment/critic, they would not have anything else for criticism.
I.e. point 6. When I take a look on your picture I have no chance to know what was behind you, whether you could move or not. So, I will suppose that you could move and I will leave my comment.
On the other side, I understand it is exhausting to explain it all the time.
Ondrej
[Reply]
This reads like a list by someone who's had one too many negative comments. Just thank the people who take the time to comment on your work and move along. A list like this shows astounding arrogance.
[Reply]
This reads like a list by someone who's had one too many negative comments. Just thank the people who take the time to comment on your work and move along. A list like this shows astounding arrogance.
[Reply]
Does it get really annoying when you post an art piece that you put so much work into and no one critiques it at all?
[Reply]
[...] the best critiques you can give by avoiding annoying and overused comments and critiques and other’s will more likely [...]
There's nothing wrong with HDR. There may be something you find distasteful about someone's choice of tonemapping parameters, but that's a different matter.
[Reply]
[...] the best critiques you can give by avoiding annoying and overused comments and critiques and other’s will more likely [...]
Jim, great post. I am a recreational photographer still developing my skills. I greatly appreciate anyone who takes the time to give specific feedback that will help me improve. Your 10 points are spot on!
[Reply]
[...] the best critiques you can give by avoiding annoying and overused comments and critiques and other’s will more likely [...]
[...] had to laugh at myself when I got to that point. Jim Goldstein had published a post entitled Top 10 Most Annoying Photo Critique Comments back in March, and at that time, I was midway in my own journey to comment frustration. I [...]
Wow! Fantastic top 10!
[Reply]