[LargeFormat] Critiqueing Photos

[Paul and Paula Butzi]

> Being able to take on board criticism is probably quite healthy and 
> you can learn from it even if you don't agree with it. I like to get 
> feedback on my work - however am fickle in that I usually am quite 
> keen on a particular photo for about three weeks after it has been 
> taken (trannies) or printed, then I am indifferent to it and think it 
> nothing special. We are probably our own best critics.

I certainly agree that being able to accept constructive criticism is
healthy and that you can learn a lot from it even if you don't agree with
it.

I disagree pretty strongly with the statement that 'we are probably
our own best critics.  My experience is the exact opposite - we're
often the worst possible editors and critics of our own work.

I've been a member of a small group of photographers that meets 
every other week to do nothing but review new work. It's been
an artistic lifeline for me - and I think my photography has improved
substantially because of the feedback and motivation the group 
provides.  My final print quality has improved dramatically, and
the *content* of the prints has gone through quite a change.
Most importantly, one of the things I seem to be learning
is to be a better realistic judge of my own work.

Recently the group I'm part of has gone through some changes,
and I wrote up a brief document describing it.  You can
read a copy at http://www.groupf56.com/nwrg.htm

Deep, meaningful, constructive criticism that helps the artist
is possible, but it depends on trust, familiarity, and good will.
I'd write more but it would be duplicating what's on that web
page.

It might be interesting to discuss what things make for good
(read 'helpful to the artist') criticism.

-Paul