Posted By Jenna on 06/06/2008 8:43 PM
We all look at, and see, a photograph differently. Just for discussion, here’s how I judge or critique a photo. Of course, this is just what I think about it.

When I look at a Photograph (and we‘re not talking about “record“ shots, or snap shots), I look at 4 things:

1- Is it an appealing picture? Does it follow the basic rules of composition (rule of 3rds, leading lines, etc.) so that it’s pleasing to the eye? Or, if the basic rules were broken on purpose for effect, did it work?

2- Is it a “proper” photograph? Is it properly exposed and focused? Is there too much or not enough cropping? Are the colors right? Is there too much or too little contrast, too dark, too light, etc.? Basically, how does it stack up technically? Again, if it was purposely adjusted so that it wasn’t “proper”, does that make it better or worse?

3- If a feeling or mood is trying to be conveyed, did it work? Did I go “Wow!”, “Ooooh”, “Awwww… ”, or “Ugh!”? Or did I stare at it and say, “And the point of this shot is….what?”.

4- Is it interesting? The final and toughest test. I look at a photo and if I say to myself, “Gee, I wish I could’ve been there to see that in person.” then I think it’s a great photo. If not, to me it fails as a Photograph. (In other words, boring.) It doesn’t make any difference if it’s a landscape, sports, macro, nature, portrait, or even the subject really. We’ve all seen them: dull subjects presented in dull ways… verses dull subjects presented in interesting ways- and vice versa. (The best, of course, are interesting subjects presented in an interesting way.)


While this is how I judge photos, please know that very few of my own photos pass my critique.

Your thoughts?