Real criticism, or plain ass-licking?

Javier, I agree with you that PQ has a special quality that makes it better than other photography fora . Apart from the high quality of the work of many of the photographers on PQ there is, as you mention, a good mood around excluding the verbal aggressions that are daily experiences elsewhere.

Whether that "good mood" has become excessive recently is a good question because if it should happen we loose one of the real reasons for being here, which is to receive good and constructive, sometimes professional, critics of our photos. It is only by such constructive criticism that we learn and progress as photographers.

So I join Javier in asking for real criticism on my photos - like many of those I already have benefitted from.

Javier, good post. And, I'm pretty much guilty as charged, which is to say that I usually resort to silence if my "critique" is less than positive. That leaves me looking only for images that I like so as not to "harsh the vibe".

I'll try to do better. I actually like doing real critiques when I have the time to truly study an image. I do worry a bit about language differences, though. Written critiques are nuanced things that Google translators often botch. I've no real solution to that problem.

Like Anders, I also invite real criticism on my own images, although, being human, I'll offer some feeble defense once in awhile. :) Be not deterred!

Thank you for a fine post.

You're right. There are other sites where you always get at least one negative opinion about your picture... It doesn't matter how good you think your work is.
For example, www.ojodigital.com.

Indeed, all comments are negative on some of my pictures. Is it more "real"? Probably yes.

See you!!

Patricia, it's my humble oppinion that this site should be just English. I try and use English whenever I can, however, I understand many of the spaniards here just don't get a word in English, so I try to be polite and write to them in Spanish.

That's something I've really found no solution for, but it's a matter of a fact that I enjoy your English posts in other's photos. I think we all can tell wether someone is just "attacking us" or it's something that the translator f*ck*d up. Content of the critique remains anyway, and whenever someone doesn't understand something, he/she can ask for help (I've been asked many times to translate comments from others to Spanish).

English is not my main language, and it's obviously sometimes hard for me to express -exactly- what I want to say in English, but that won't take me back to write it in my own words, and maybe adding a note stating that I can't express myself correctly if, on a "reread" I find I sounded too harsh. So far, I guess I have succeeded in doing so (but it's you English-speaking people who should tell :-) ).

I hereby offer my translation services for anything you might be in doubt about the google-translated meaning, and will try to do my best (I've done so privately in the past for many people here :-) ).

I'm glad, at least three of you share my point... I was beggining to think I was getting paranoid, or maybe too "egocentric" about it, it's really a relief :-)

Matias: ojodigital should not be treated as a reference though... that's one of the sites where I state people think they are photography god's, or something... oh, and don't get anywhere far from mellado's book way of post-processing pictures, or you'll get dirty comments :-)

Thank you all

Hello Javier and others. I have not been here very often lately, because of work, family and other, and because my photo activity is really low now. However, I have tried to keep showing you some of my latest work I find interesting to share (if I can call "work" to those two photos I have posted in months)

Photographic forums like this one are not easy to manage. Photographic skills and interests are so different and what's more important, artistic and aestethic backgrounds are so diverse. Criticizing photographs is not an easy matter, as it is not art criticizing in general. Most people in PQ has got the minimum level to get some interesting photographs from a technical point of view. No big errors, no major faults. But it is precisely from here on where our capacity to criticize begins to fail. That's because we're not in search of a true critique, I guess, but we are looking for some deeper guidance or advice, kind of "Am I getting any real meaning on my images?" And we probably lack the aesthetic, artistic and formal background to be able to do a real constructive critique and help others to progress.

To go farther on our art (because art it is, and that does not prejudge we are artists or not) we need to look deeper. We don't need empty critique like "Very good image", "Nice Light", "Good DOF" or so. It is clear that when I publish an image I *know* DOF, colour, framing and all about my image. Telling someone "this would be better framed like that" is the kind of comment I hate, and I have done it myself so many times! I am sure if Cartier-Bresson, Edward Weston or any other ever published anonimously here or in other photo sites, they would be criticized about DOF, framing, contrast, colour or whatever, but without any perception of the artist behind the image.

In those late weeks I have read and reread the books by Brooks Jensen that Mamen (Amilcar Barca) has introduced to me some months ago. There is much to learn there, and above all, this man is so fun to read! He gives many clever advices about how to progress oneself in photography, how to criticize other's work and lots of thoughts about photography, art and life. I reccomend reading this guy and visiting www.lenswork.com

Maybe we should refrain to publish occasional images that are so casual they doesn't really contribute to the progress of the community. But, on the other side, some people likes to post images just to show what they are doing, without any other concern. I mean, interests of people here are so different that is really difficult to say what or how should we criticize.

So, after getting myself lost in translation like Bill Murray, and writing some confusing thoughts, I must say I have no clue about what should we do. Maybe getting some fun is the only reason we are here. And yes, we all know that when we *really* really raise our level of exigence in criticizing other's photos, we usually are not very appreciated in the community. The best way to get many people posting on our photos still is writing on theirs images silly comments like "Good colours, nice contrast, great composition, nice work - Juan", on as much images as we can. We are human beings after all, and so sensible to empty praise...

But best of all is, we still find some good people around looking in the same direction as we do, and that's why come here again. Our struggle joins us from around the world. That's good enough for me.

Sorry my english is not half as good as Javier...

Javier, I think part of the problem is relying on this or any other site on the net as your only source to help you improve your photography and also taking the critiques from these sites at face value.
You yourself are the key to improve your photography by being critical of your own work and comparing it to the work of others. This site is simply a nice aid.

I myself have received my share amount of benevolent critiques, and while it might seem that they themselves have done nothing to help me improve my photography, they are in part responsible for me not giving up when results are far from good.
I'll be forever grateful for some way too-nice critiques I received from Alberto years ago. I was shocked that someone as good as he was could think that my photography was good in any way.
His generosity kept me shooting, and that combined with my true desire to improve helped me become a better photographer.

You yourself can be a pretty good critic of your own work. Stop taking photos for a while and look instead at the work of the masters and compare it to your own, buy as many fine prints as you can afford, read magazines and essays and think about what makes you press the shutter and what you want your photographs to say and whether they are conveying the message or not.
It is only then that this site becomes relevant. It gives you a wonderful chance to test what should be the ulterior motive behind your photography: did others get the message behind your photos?

As you see, this goes far beyond too-nice vs. meaningful critiques and requires that you to critic the critiques.
I'll give you an example of what I mean with two of my own photos:
- http://www.photocritiq.com/set?setid=105;photoid=42294 - Success - others got the message of order in the chaos behind the photo.
- http://www.photocritiq.com/set?setid=105;photoid=42123 - Failure - nice critiques, but what does the photo say? I wanted to convey a message of beauty in the union of the spiritual and material worlds, but no one seemed to get it.

I haven't lived in Spain for quite a few years now and I am not sure which books or magazines you have available there, but if nothing else you can always mail order some from the UK or the US.
Like Juan mentions, Lenswork is an invaluable source of inspiration.
For books, I can recommend a few favourites:
- Take your photography to the next level by George Barr
- The Making of 40 Photographs by Ansel Adams
- Fine art printing for photographers by Uwe Steinmueller

Mamen

First and foremost, I do not believe my critique of a bad photo has ever turned anybody into a good photographer.

I like to think positively.

Thank you.

Juan: comments like "this would be better framed as ", or DOF, color, etc. about my own pictures, usually makes me think twice about them. I then might agree with the comment, or might not... and can make my own mind about it. But seeing other's point of views about your photos (and that includes good comments too, of course!) has always been a great part in developing my technical skills in photography.

Yes, at the time of making a picture, I am quite sure of what I want to do... then at the time of developing and selecting, I might find errors, but the photos might be "above the bar", so they get selected... those errors are something I will try to learn from in future shootings... and then, there's other people's point of views.

Mamen, since you mention Alberto, let me tell you that precisely, he was one of a kind on making constructive criticism out of bad photos. I'll never be grateful enough to him for being sincere with my pictures... not just in comments in PQ, but also in "real life". He stood at my house several times, and sometimes, in the morning, he would spend some quality time with me, pointing down errors in photos I had selected and I hadn't noticed of. Whenever I do landscapes now, I can see those errors he pointed me at when framing with my camera... and correct them and see it makes a better picture (that's without even pressing the shutter button on the camera).

I think his constructive criticism on my bad photos (regarding Klaus' comment) has indeed made me a better photographer.

And not just his, just brought him up because Mamen mentioned him, but that used to happen a lot one year ago... and I can't believe I've got that better photographer in one year, to the point that now, 90% of the comments I receive are good ones.... even in some of my own shots where I myself can find tons of errors.

Self-criticism is good, of course, and lectures are even better... I don't hesitate to buy books about photography subjects that interest me, and learn from them (currently I have three books in my desk about model photography, posing and lighting, since it's what I seem to be doing the most lately), but there's nothing like a third-person point of view, when it is sincere, and constructive, to make you really think about already-shot photos, IMO.

Klaus, please let me tell you (and I don't want to sound harsh or arrogant on this one, excuse me if I do): if your critique (since you are a very good photographer, IMO) of a bad photo has never turned anybody into a good photographer... a) either the photographer just won't listen... or b) you don't really know what *constructive* criticism is.

Let me remind you, this site is called "photocritiq" for a reason... it's all about criticisim and photography... the name says it all.

If you want to use it as a "photography host to show off", that's fine, but it's not what the site is about, starting from the name.

Good criticism on good pictures is ok and servers a purpose too... but when you see the "Critique -> Photo critique" page and you need 7 pages (except for last Patricia's comment yesterday, which is a great one) to see a comment pointing out any error in a picture... well, it kind of loses any value to it, since you begin to think comments are just some kind of ego-praisers (or "plain ass licking" as stated in the title of this blog), and you would never get a really sincere oppinion from those people.

Best regards

Javier, en parte llevas mucha razón, últimamente las críticas han derivado algo en un "pasamanos", unas veces por falta de tiempo, otras por ignorancia y a veces por no entrar en polémicas desagradables. Juan, lleva también mucha razón al decir que no siempre es fácil hacer una crítica. Todos hemos recibido alabanzas y pocas críticas, espero a partir de ahora y en la parte que me toca, poner mi granito de arena y ser algo más crítico, igualmente, me gustaría se hiciera lo mismo conmigo.

Javier, I think you misunderstood my ramblings ;-)
I agree with you, I just think that technical critique should only come after 'meaning' critique, when a photo doesn't send to the audience the message intended by the photographer.

Of course criticism from other PQers is helpful but, as you mentioned, you learnt quite a bit from discussing photos with others in person. That's my exact point - a true photo critique is a two way street, a sincere dialog where both the photographer and the person critiquing exchange views and opinions.
Having such a dialog in this or any other sites on the net is almost impossible, and so we all get some not very helpful critiques, for different reasons.

What I am saying is that this situation would not be that bad if we all focused on 'meaning' critique first, and this site is an excellent tool for that.
Seeing if your photos send the message you intended for them to convey is in my opinion more important than nailing the technique behind a photo. Many technical 'flaws' in any photo will be forgiven if the message sent is strong enough.

This critique from Juan is a perfect example of what I mean. He really understood what the photo was saying. His recognition of my feelings hit me hard and makes his critique a treasure, even when he didn't mention any technical details in the photo that I am sure could be improved.
Those technical details no longer matter, the photo succeded in spite of its flaws.
http://www.photocritiq.com/set?setid=2524;photoid=42518;xmlQ=1

Cheers,
Mamen

Mamen, I understood you. I know what you are saying... but there are many photos which just don't have a deep meaning. Scenery/landscape pictures usually don't... model/portrait photos tend not to have one, either... most macros do not have, or need a meaning.

I don't like limiting my critiques to a style of photography either. There are plenty of photos (most of them, actually) done "just for the sake of it", just because they are beautiful images, and pleasant to your eyes.

In those ones, good technical skills are usually the most important thing. There's just no other thing, and technique is what will make the image more or less beautiful and pleasant to your eyes.

There are those which don't need technical skills to transmit a feeling, but those are not the most common, actually.

Regards!

Javier, reconozco y te doy toda la razón en lo que expones ,a mi no me importa si ven una de mis fotos y la encuentran horrible ó mal hecha me informen al respecto. Mi problema es que no entiendo de técnica fotográfica y cuando observo una foto, simplemente,y de forma completamente subjetiva, me gusta ó no.
Si me gusta o me inspira algo, le añado un comentario en lo concerniente a la composición, color etc, si esa imagen tiene algún gazapo técnico yo ni me doy cuenta, para nada hago la pelota a nadie.
Si una foto no me gusta no digo nada pues puede ser técnicamente perfecta y cometería una injusticia afirmando que no me gusta.

Un abrazo
Carmen

I think we are talking at different levels here. There's a first critique level where we just expect that people will help us to identify the technical flaws in a photography: exposition, composition, and so forth. But on a next level, we don't expect a technical analysis. When Mamen titles his image "Memories in a rainy fall afternoon", we should think there's more than a window and an aged wall there.
Are we only looking for technical critique? This can be perfectly right. Are our technical skills really at the good level to allow that critique? Here I must say that this is not always the case.
But faced to photographic critique, is the second level what interests me the most. I go back to the point I stated on my first post. Let's imagine we see a photo from Lee Friedlander like this one:
http://www.masters-of-photography.com/F/friedlander/friedlander_dede_and_billie_pierce_full.html
but let's imegine we don't know it is from Lee FriedLander.
I'm sure that many of us would be tempted to criticize it on the first technical level: framing, b&w conversion, maybe cloning of some details on the background... But when we know this is an image from Friedlander, we think differently, because we know he's a master and we know his style. Then we open our perception to see what the master is trying to say to us, and we don't think in technics anymore.
One of the problems with modern digital media (cameras, PS) is how easy we get a correct photograph and how easy we feel free to propose any kind of alteration to it. But this over-technification, in which we're always looking for perfectly exposed images and biggest sensors to get every bit of detail, sometimes prevents us to read a simple photo title.
To many of us, probably many photos from Robert Adams would let us perplex, thinking this is a failed phoograph, and we only would accept it as a masterpiece after knowing who's the author. Look this one:
http://www.masters-of-photography.com/A/adamsr/adamsr_columbia12_full.html

Maybe on a forum like PQ the critique must exist at both levels (technique and aesthetic), but before clicking "Post comment" we should ask us if author is looking for a technical advice or something more deep below the image surface.

Hmmm.....well this conversation has migrated into something far afield from what I read as Javier's intent. I agree with Juan that we are talking at different levels here. I actually disagree with much of the remainder of his post.

Our goal here should be to encourage a lot of honest critiques. An honest critique should include whatever struck the viewer as noteworthy, whether such was the photographer's intent or not. (It is not possible to know another's intent.) That includes not only the shot selection but also the way in which it is presented here. What is offered by the critiquer is not a binding judgment but an opinion. Since we post here, presumably we are interested in those opinions but certainly not bound by them.

When you start layering in the need to interpret intent, I think you are making "the perfect the enemy of the good", to paraphrase Voltaire and you may end up shutting down useful critiques to boot.

Javier's initial point was that we have devolved to offering quick, positive one-liners as a way of paying our dues and getting our share of return flow of quick, positive one-liners. I agree with his observation.

I also agree with his subsequent point that we all mostly photograph small things of little to no transcendental importance. Craft here is paramount and helpful comments on how to improve craft should be encouraged.

They're just pictures, folks.

Patricia, you nailed it... not to say Juan is not right though, some photos are beyond technical-correctness and have some deeper meaning, or try to make you think about what they want to transmit the viewer... in many of those photos, technical correctness is beyond the point of observation.

However, Juan and Mamen suggest that all photos should be criticised by that measurement, and I think (and Patricia seems understood my point) those are the least of them, but are definitely easy to identify.

There was this case in flickr. There is a photo group there where people votes if a picture is "good enough to stay"... and they booted one of the "classical" pictures I like a lot: Mario's bike, by HCB.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrerabelo/70458366

But that's what I said in my post, separates a site like PhotocritiQ from those "other sites" (like ojodigital, or flickr, or many others)... there's a sense of good taste here for photography that you cannot easily find in other forums... most of us can easily distinguish on a photo that can indeed have a deeper meaning, or a photo which needs better technical skills.

Should HCD be excluded from criticism just because he is HCB? Of course not... however, should all photos be measured by the same standards? Also not.

There are many styles of photography... from the "most artistic", to the "most documentary", there are macros, there's fashion shots, landscaping, street photography. There's studio shots where what makes a good photo is basically the correct use of lighting and a good subject in the middle... do those tell a story, or have anything deeper to find in them? In most cases, they don't. Are those bad photos, or should they be excluded from criticism? I don't think so.

The big fact is, that there are plenty of good photographers here. If I needed people to come and tell me how good my pictures are... I'd just show them to my non-photographer friends. Not to say with this, good critiques are not right.. but only when they are sincere... when they come from someone which will never make some sincere criticism about a bad photo (or, a photo with errors, not necessarily bad), they lose their "encouraging" value, they are just critiques I could get from someone non-photography-related.

And not to forget... Carmen, you don't need to like a picture just because of its technical correctness... I expect people to critique my photos regarding what -they see- in them... by -THEIR- point of view, which I hope is different than mine.

If I put a photo online here, is because (most of the times), it has "raised above my bar"... does that make it a good photo? Not at all... it only makes it "good enough for me"... and I want to think what other photography-savvy people think about it... be it good, or be it bad.

Come on, we are all (well, most of us anyway) grown up already... can take bad critiques... don't worry, I won't take it personal :-)

PS: I like the fact that we are discussing this, shows some interest in the subject, and I'm learning about your points of view here... see? you can learn some photography here, even if it's not in photo comments... gotta love PQ :)

Hmmm
Pat, Javier, I do finally agree with you, whithout overlooking my points.
Several points raised by discussion:
- Most of us are looking for critique related with craftmanship and that is considered important for progress. This critique should be honest and direct and not simply an ego praise.

- Most of the time we post images to be criticized on the "craft" level, but from time to time we can post images on the "meaning" level. As our critiques stay on the "craft" level and the "meaning" level goes unnoticed, those images come and go unnoticed. Some of us regret this situation.

It is true that many of the greatest photographs doesn't seem to have a "deep meaning" (as Javier has used the term) associated with them - I would even say most of them. Is not the discussion on the "hidden meaning" of a photograph what we're talking about. It's about the coherence of our work, the coherence of vision, the fact that no one else has our brain and our experience and so no one is able to see the world as we see it. To me, this vision is far more relevant to photography than craftmanship: some photographers with a Lomo would make better work than some others with a D3. That's my problem with "craftmanship" criticizing: we feel ok by simply having done it correct.

So, I would add that if we're talking about craft we should take away what goes with aspects more related with subjective views as is framing: we risk imposing others our own aesthetic rules. I deeply think each one should find his own aesthetic rules, and when criticizing we should encourage the developing of a personal vision.

I'm not sure if I have succeed in clearing my point... would be better face to face and with a cold beer at hand :D

Juan, come to Murcia, I'll pay for the beers! :D

Yes, your point is clear, and well expressed... it's just, "not that way" for some styles of photography. That's why I said I agreed with you, and got your point... I just don't make it valid for every photo out there.

And it's my belief (that might be wrong, but it's mine), that craftmanship is the first step for good photography. Acquiring a great technique (and eye), makes you "more able to take what you wanted to take". Good photos might be taken out of luck... but if you look carefully at the classics, most of those photos are very well thought and very very well executed (even when speaking about 1930-1960 cameras)... not just at shooting time (that too), but also at developing time (go ask Ansel Adams for his laboratory weeks for just one photo :-) ).

Best regards

Give me some lead time and I'll join you guys for those beers ;-)

I think we all agree on the basics and, as Juan mentioned, we are just dicussing photo critique at different levels.
Quick, nice critiques to photos far from good technically are as unhelpful as quick, nice critiques to photos maybe good technically but with something else behind.
Some people like Javier miss accurate technical critiques, I miss critiques that relate more to the message behind the photo and less to technique.

This being said, I am the first one to blame for offering quick critiques (or, like Pat, no critique at all for photos I don't like) way too often without digging deeper into the meaning of the shot. I think I (and probably others in the site) do this just trying to be supportive and we end up forgetting the purpose of the critique itself.

Thank you Javier for raising up this topic for discussion, it is a good reminder of the reason why we are here and I like the fact that we can discuss this openly.

Cheers,
Mamen

Javier estoy de acuerdo contigo en muchas cosas. Pienso que aquí hay sobre todo muchos fotógrafos que son amigos en la vida real, y entre ellos no se critican una foto ni de coña. Todo está muy bien y no te digo la verdad, aunque la piense porque eres mi colega. Eso tiene su lado "guay", pero por otro lado no aprendo mucho que digamos.
Yo no comento muchas fotos, pues prefiero no comentarlas a ser mosca cojonera y que me tomen más manía de la que ya me tienen algunos, pero si creo que estás equivocado en una cosa, y es que tienes una idea preconcebida de ojodigital, que bajo mi punto de vista es equivocada.

En ese foro se aprende muchísimo más sobre fotografía que en esta página. Además de tener muchos apartados de todo tipo de técnicas, retoque, etc. etc., hay muchos más integrantes, no amigachos, y no se tiene tanto reparo en criticar. Lo de que hay muchos que se piensan Dioses allí, yo creo que como en todos sitios, ¿o es que acaso en esta página no hay fotógrafos que no se les puede decir nada, pues se piensan el ombligo del mundo?

Seguiré poniendo fotos aquí, comentaré algunas fotos, pero si quiero que mis fotos sean criticadas con objetividad, las pondré en "ojodigital" o mucho más en "caborian", donde realmente y sobre todo este último, se critica y te hace evolucionar.

Saludos.

Pd. Siento no escribir en inglés, pues no tengo conocimientos suficientes para escri birlo bien.

"You yourself are the key to improve your photography by being critical of your own work and comparing it to the work of others. This site is simply a nice aid." This says it all in a nutshell, couldn't agree more. I would never comment on a photo I didn't like unless the photographer specifically asked me to. I enjoy posting some of my photos here at PQ because most of the photographers here are good and I feel that my images are in good company. If you really want an honest opinion on one of your photos, contact one of the photographers here that you respect and ask them, nine times out of ten they will respond and tell you what they think. You can't be passive and improve. My opinions only.

Fran, (I gues you don't have a problem reading English, so let me answer in English so everyone can follow)... I don't have experience uploading my photos to ojodigital, or caborian... but I read them from time to time.

Caborian is one I like, much more "moderated", but OD... well, I've seen truly pieces of art there put down because "excess of blacks" or "blown highlights". Those are things that are not necessarily bad to a photo, and might bring your attention to this or that point in the photo. OD people (with exceptions) is far too obsessed with technique, and is one of those forums where Juan Riera said if you uploaded one of the classics, it'd get put down because of "technicalities".

Many people there (again, with exceptions) have just read a few books about technique (specially post-processing, not even photography technique) and think they can talk "absolutes" with "manual lessons" and "rules"... I hate that, and I think most of the best photos I've seen get very far from "the manual" and the rules. Following the rules, and using the manual, can make a picture look correct... breaking the rules, and going for your own view, is (IMHO) what can make a photo outstanding... or a complete failure.

As for Tim's comment... with all my respect, I still want to believe that this site is called "photocritiQ" for a reason, and not "photoshowoff", or "photohosting", and that's what I feel we are losing.

Of course, criticism for other people cannot ever be the ONLY motivation to improve... I have always tried to find my own style when making pictures... putting my own view, and making my own private criticism... I do that even before uploading any single photo. When I select and catalog my photos, I'm the first one to try and find my own errors when making or postprocessing them... and will account for them in future shootings... but again, I'm no "know-it-all" guy, and need some other sincere point of views.

Yes, you can ask for oppinions to a specific person... but doesn't that bring down the usefulness of a site that, again, (sorry for repeating my self so much, but I think it's important) is called "PhotocritiQ"?

I'm not using this site as my portfolio... I upload here a huge number of photos that would never make it to my real photographer portfolio... and I do because I want to listen what other good photographers want to say about it... if all I get are "good photo" comments, then, as I told Federico in a comment some minutes ago, either:

1) I'm not getting real critiques... so I could aswell show the photos to my dad, or a friend, and get a nice ego-boosting by them saying how good I am.

or 2) I make so great pictures that I should be dedicating to photography and making millions out of it, since every time I press the shutter on my camera I am making a piece of art from which others can only say good things of.

Since I know point 2 is absurd and far from right... then I think point 1 is the key.

And the fact is... that did not happen just one year ago, in this very same site... so something has changed... maybe it's just the natural evolution of a site, but if it is like that... I'm just stating that I don't like it (and I have the right to express it, in my blog posts, so I do).

Best regards!

Nobody will say you how to learn photography, at least you pay a specific studies. However, it is true that you can improve here.

Most of us are not photographers, and, probably, do not agree with most part of the content of the initial comment of Javier. Particularly, I find the title rude to my taste and to my style: Please, do not ofend. Also note that, unavoidably, you will find humans relationships and you can not only circumscribe your participation in PQ to the technical aspects of the images.

Nevertheless, the main objetives of this web could be changed and the moderators do not permit comments such us 'I like very much', 'well done', and so on. On the other hand, it could also be mandatory to have some kind of good credits or guarantees to be accepted in the web. Most of us should leave this site. Please note that I am very sceptic!

Finally, I beg your pardon for my 'spanglish'.

Pedro, I think you have completely misunderstood the message. I'm not asking for only technical criticism, or trying to avoid any other kind of comments (like those one-liners), at all...

And definitely not asking any moderator or admin here to check messages, or ban any kind of people. I'm not a photographer myself (other than I shoot photos), do not do photography for a living, or even intend to do.

I'm just simply asking for criticism, on, at least, my photos... which is what the site is about.

As you yourself say, "the main objetives of this web should be changed", no, really they do not, this is what the "about photocritiq.com" page says:

=============
"photocritiQ.com is for photographers to exhibit their work to one another (as well as to the rest of the world) and to engage one another for mutual self-improvement, advice, encouragment, and support."
=============
( from http://www.photocritiq.com/faqabout )

PS: I'm sorry if the term "ass-licking" sounds offensive to you... it doesn't to me (as in, it's not something good, but not a curse word either, IMO).

Javier.

Evidentemente, cuando una página web de fotografía se lanza, tiene que decir algo así como lo que dice esta. La experiencia marca luego otra cosa. Los que llevamos varios años por ellas lo sabemos muy bien. También con el tiempo he llegado a la conclusión de que cada vez hago peores fotografías, y es que uno mismo acaba siendo el mayor crítico, el más exigente, de lo que hace. Y es algo que se aprende de sitios como este y otros similares, y en este caso hablo en sentido positivo. Yo estoy seguro de que no pasaría los estándares mínimos para colgar una foto aquí, pero mientras esté la cosa como está y me apetezca, ahí seguiré.

Es cierto que uno acaba preguntándose -tras los comentarios positivos- si realmente hace buenas fotografías. Yo he llegado a la conclusión final de que las hago porque me divierte, y las comparto por la misma razón. Nunca llegaré a nada en esto, fuera de algunos buenos recuerdos familiares. Creo que esa es la media aquí y en muchas páginas webs. Por eso no me gustó el título que pusiste a tu artículo, aunque a mi edad ya me asustan pocas cosas.

Entiendo tu inquietud y me parece que has puesto, en gran medida, el dedo en la llaga. Sigue formándote, contactando personalmente con buenos fotógrafos, pero entiende que -como dice alguien en algún comentario- tu eres tu mejor aprendiz.

Un cordial saludo.