This leads directly from my last post, as I got to thinking more about the idea that the framework (the website) is not nearly as influential to the way we look at and discuss photography as the user. Certainly the Internet and the overflow of digital imagery that we are now experiencing has a big impact as well, but even outside the realm of cyberspace, this is a problematic area.

Let’s take my situation. I attend a TAFE college (Technical and Further Education) in Australia, where I am studying for a Diploma of Photography (I refuse to call it by it’s new name of Diploma of Photo imaging – yuk!) At one point in my first year, I asked one of our lecturers whether we would be having any classes on how to properly assess and critique photography. Granted, this is not a university and I may have been naïve to think we would study that sort of thing, but his answer was illuminating. He said it had been tried in previous years, but that there had been all sorts of problems, and they had dropped the idea on the premise that students couldn’t deal with critique on a serious level.

Now, I have to admit, that this stance has serious merit. There are people who simply cannot take criticism of their work. They only want to hear that a particular photograph is fabulous. I understand that of course. We all want to hear that. But if high praise is all we are willing to hear, doesn’t that say more about our egos than our photography?

I think one of the biggest problems is that we are not at all taught how to critique photography. When I was studying for my BA in Communication, we had to critique other student’s writing. Writing is very similar to photography in many ways I feel, in that there is an overall impression, there are details, and there are methods that have been used to create particular effects. All of these can be discussed and evaluated. We were directed to discuss various aspects of a student’s work, and avoid unsupported positions on the work. It was difficult but very rewarding, and it was very clear over three years how much better we all got at it. And I think we should be able to attempt the same with photography. Whether this is in an educational setting or on the internet, or at our friend’s house is irrelevant. What is relevant however is to be aware of the process. Without being very conscious about how we view and critique an image, we are likely to “jog in the spinach” as the charming Danish saying goes. If we limit ourselves to the subjective spectrum between I love it and I hate it, it is just a judgment and nothing at all to do with critique.

Photographers, much like writers, are a very sensitive bunch it seems. I can imagine a photo critique session in my class ending in tears very easily. But that’s mostly because there is not the will there for us to learn how to do it properly. It can be taught and it can be learned. But if we are left to discuss photography only using our own natural temperaments, differing standards and social skills, the result will always be patchy at best, and probably not much use to anyone.

Richard Tugwell is also looking at this whole question on his blog – in a much more systematic way than I am. Follow that thread here.

After writing this, I thought of some of my fellow students reading it :). And so I thought I should make clear that I don’t separate myself from any of this. I haven’t learned how to critique imagery in any formal way, although I have practiced it on several web forums. Some people might think I am too tough a critic, and that may be so, but my viewpoint has always been that if you are your biggest fan instead of your own biggest critic, then you are doing whatever you are doing for the wrong reasons and you will learn at a much slower pace. That is my theory and my theory only.. hmmp hmmp…
 🙂

[tags]critique, criticism, discussing photography, art criticism[/tags]