Great Critiques - Critiques from the Great

[Ken Lee]

Did anyone ever get their work critiqued by one of the greats - or did anyone ever get a great critique ?

When I first started with the view camera back in my teens, I asked my teacher Fred Picker (before the days of Zone VI, when he lived in White Plains, NY) if I should get a critique from any of the (then-living) greats, like Ansel Adams, Brett Weston, Paul Strand, etc. He recommended against it, suggesting that their comments might be too abstract for me to grasp, like "You need more Love in your images".

I took his advice, and have never had a critique, save one, from Barbara Morgan, famous for her photographs of dancers like Martha Graham. She lived in the same area as Fred, and was gracious enough to look over my "portfolio". She suggested that while I had a good grasp of technical matters, there was room for growth in the area of "lyricism".

They were both right.

[Walter Calahan]

David Hume Kennerly

I was in college. It wasn't pretty.

John Leongard

After college. It wan't pretty.

Since then I've realized don't pay attention to the stars, pay attention to your heart.

[Ash]

I've never had anyone famous critique a photograph I've taken. I've had friends who have been brutal. That was enough to make me want to be a better photographer. A couple professionals have chatted to me over a few neg scans and that has helped too.

I agree with walter. Usually you get a critique and it aint pretty.

I never listened to the crit from the photography tutors at college. I found it was shallow, and didn't help in the slightest. Probably why I stopped turning up to their classes.

[brook]

Not a photographer, but I once payed several hundred dollars for a portfolio review by someone well known in the art buying world. I didnt make a new negative afterwards for at least a year.

[Mark Sawyer]

I've had critiques from a few well-known photographers, but they offered mostly advice on how to be more like them...

I've had critiques from a couple of successful fine-art photography gallery owners. Both suggested I go to digital to speed up the work flow...

I can't say that I've ever had a "great" critique, but the best I've had came from art/photo students who were still at the stage of just being excited about art and photography.

I've often thought the one thing this forum is missing is a place for members to post a piece or portfolio, and hear what others thoughts and feelings about it are...

[Brian Ellis]

John Sexton gives the world's greatest critiques, hands down, no contest, nothing else is even close. His portfolio critiques alone are worth the cost of his workshops.

[David Karp]

He does do a nice job, and all without being an a__.

[tim atherton]

One of the great curators/critics (and also a damn fine photographer) - John Szarkowski has always been been extremely generous and gracious about my work. Honest, encouraging - even enthusiastic. And willing to put up with the annoying references for grant applications every now and then....

[Brian C. Miller]

Interesting, there is an article in the March/April 2007 LensWork about critiques, "Some Comments on Print Commentaries." Brooks Jenson relates how he had some of his photographs critiqued at an Owens Valley Photography workshop taught by Ray McSavaney, Bruce Barnbaum, and John Sexton. Essentially, their critiques boiled down to either they liked it or not. And for every man, there is an opinion.

He thinks that the person making the critique should take the position of a docent, acting as a tour guide of the photograph. Jenson started the example photograph's critique with the photographer critiquing the photograph. So I wrote him a letter:

Hi! I just picked up your April 2007 issue at Glazer's Camera store in Seattle. Your discussion of critiquing photographs is interesting, but then your example is of a photograph which needs to be explained even before it is viewed. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of interpreting the photograph? The viewer's interpretation is now biased. Also, the image on the magazine's page is small, and the details are hard to pick out while riding a Metro bus.
I would prefer that the articles reference the work shown in the magazine, especially illustrating a good critique. The picture should have been critiqued without any initial input from the photographer, like Sister Wendy Beckett's BBC program. Then the critique should have been discussed with the photographer, not directed by the photographer.
What is seen in the photograph is an old woman, sitting down. She holds a stick in her hand, and there is a chicken and a large pot to her right. I can't see if her eyes are open or shut. It is evident that she doesn't have much income, based on the condition of the house. Now, what about the scene? Is the stick used for shooing chickens? Is it some kind of cane? There is nothing that really immediately suggests it's use. Based on her relaxed expression, she seems contented. That's about all that I can glean from the photograph.

And he replied:

Brian,
Thanks for your comments and for thinking about this issue in detail. My only response might be that the photographer himself can also be a docent in the process and help us understand his own image. In this case, his comments add to the discussion about the image -- and that, after all, is the entire purpose of any discussion that introduces words and conversation about a photograph.

[Brian Ellis]

"Brooks Jenson relates how he had some of his photographs critiqued at an Owens Valley Photography workshop taught by Ray McSavaney, Bruce Barnbaum, and John Sexton. Essentially, their critiques boiled down to either they liked it or not."

I've had critiques by all three and that was definitely not the case with any of them. In fact IMHO the hallmark of a good critique is one in which the peson doing the critique never says "I like it" or "I don't like it" or anything along those lines. That kind of a statement made while critiquing is IMHO the mark of an amateur since liking or not liking has nothing to do with the merits of the photograph. Anyone who's interested in critiquing might read the book "Criticizing Photographs" by Terry Barrett. It's the best book (actually I think it's the only book) I've seen on the subject.