# How do you evaluate a photograph?



## weepete (Apr 3, 2020)

So, on the back of a recent thread I thought I'd ask what process you use to critique a photograph?

The idea is we can get an insight into how other people view our shots, what criteria they apply and get a better understanding of what other people can look for in the shots we put up for critique. Please consider what you look for beyond just liking a shot and let us know spesifically why you like it.


Personally I first take in the whole shot, then I consider the subject. I ask myself do the techniques used add to the feel of the shot? Then I consider balance and I note how my eye moves through the frame noting any areas that are:
a)  not the main subject but draw the eye putting the image off balance
b) leading lines taking the eye out of the frame

I'll look over the image several times for this not thinking too much, just noting where my eyes go.

Then I dive into the more technial stuff:
Does the processing fit the image?
Is my eye drawn to the areas I think the photographer intended?
Is the image cohesive?
Does the shot evoke a mood/feeling?

Lastly I look at the finishing:
Is the shot level?
Are there any areas of bad cloning/pp?
Is the sharpness acceptable for the subject?
is there enough detail?
What strikes me about the image?
Are there areas that I think are done particularly well?

That's roughly my process. What's yours?

PS @Designer I'd be particularly interested in hearing yours as you brought this idea to my attention!


----------



## Jeff15 (Apr 4, 2020)

This is all very well Pete but most shots on the forum I would consider as observation shots. Now competition judging is a whole different ball game...


----------



## Space Face (Apr 4, 2020)

As far as can read into what Pete is saying, it's nothing to do with competition judging. 

My view has always been, that on Forums, unless specifically requested (ie Just for Fun etc) a picture is posted and open to crit.  This is often written into a Forums rules.

I'd agree that a lot of the photos posted on here are 'observational' with scant regard to composition, image quality, sharpness and the other points Pete identifies.  As a result some are pretty dreadful.

Crit should be given so as the OP can learn and improve their photography skill sets.  However, I have learned over the years that some people don't like being told their pictures are substandard and as I said before, take it as a personal insult, which should never be the case if the crit is given in a constructive, helpful and detailed manner.  For example it's pointless saying 'it's out of focus' or 'it's soft' without giving advice as to how this may be improved.

Similarly just repeatedly saying 'nice shot' as a post count boost is pointless imo and helps no one.  That said, some do like their ego's massaged, regardless of how bad their photography skills are.

I'm fairly new here and haven't given crit as much as I normally would for the reasons I give above.  I do find it an endless source of frustration tho to see poor/ish shots that have potential, being praised as good, nice, fine etc.  This can leave the OP thinking a bad shot is good and there's no need to do any more thereby not improving.

I also appreciate that different folk want different things out of photography and what gives one pleasure may not be reciprocated by another.  Some are happy to soldier on and capture what gives them pleasure and not care about the finer detail and technical side of things but I believe most would like to improve and refine their abilities.

For me looking at a photograph, I take into consideration mostly the points Pete has raised.  It's important to me as a photographer to produce the best images I can in the prevailing circumstances but I'm always willing to learn new tips, methods and techniques.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 4, 2020)

Well-stated, Space Face.


----------



## Space Face (Apr 4, 2020)

Space Face said:


> As far as can read into what Pete is saying, it's nothing to do with competition judging.
> 
> My view has always been, that on Forums, unless specifically requested (ie Just for Fun etc) a picture is posted and open to crit.  This is often written into a Forums rules.
> 
> ...



Thank you.


----------



## Designer (Apr 4, 2020)

weepete said:


> PS @Designer I'd be particularly interested in hearing yours as you brought this idea to my attention!


Thank you for asking, but since I've been specifically asked by the mods to "stuff it" (not that exact wording) once, and been asked to "never comment again" on two posters' threads, I choose not to pour gasoline on the fire at this time.  Let me think about it for a while.


----------



## Space Face (Apr 4, 2020)

Designer said:


> weepete said:
> 
> 
> > PS @Designer I'd be particularly interested in hearing yours as you brought this idea to my attention!
> ...



Surely if a poster does not wish to see your comments they can ignore you?  Seems a bit odd being asked not to reply to specific members posts.


----------



## Designer (Apr 4, 2020)

Space Face said:


> Surely if a poster does not wish to see your comments they can ignore you?  Seems a bit odd being asked not to reply to specific members posts.


Apparently those two cannot simply ignore my comments.  Since I don't care if they ever progress, I will oblige them.


----------



## Jeff G (Apr 4, 2020)

I am probably one of those who annoys others by just posting "nice shot" etc., but when I say it, I mean it. I'm ok with that.

I'm not a professional so my criteria is probably quite different than most.

I look at whether or not I like the photo. If so/ if not, why?

Does something feel off?  Balance, color, focus,

Does the style technique suit the subject matter.

Does it invoke a good/negative feeling or memory

You can be very technical photographer, and still not shoot interesting photos, same goes for being very artistic, if you don't have the basics down, you won't be able to share your vision.

For me photography is more art than skill, but I definately appreciate those of you that have honed that skill and share that knowledge with the rest of us. When you stop learning it's  time to move on.
(I'm just a slow learner)


----------



## zombiesniper (Apr 4, 2020)

I post a lot of "Nice shots"

Sometimes because it's a nice shot and sometimes I see the progress someone is making and we just need to let them learn on their own. 

However I do give feedback "unless someone says CC welcome. That's being F'n lazy"
I will aid when I think it may be needed for someone to progress. NOT when I think someones image isn't to my liking.
The other thing I have stated before is that some things are facts, "can't shoot a 1000mm lens at 1/3 sec and expect a crips image" others are opinions "I think it would look better in black and white". Fact can aid you in getting better images......opinions will aid you in getting their image.


----------



## waday (Apr 4, 2020)

Space Face said:


> Similarly just repeatedly saying 'nice shot' as a post count boost is pointless imo and helps no one. That said, some do like their ego's massaged, regardless of how bad their photography skills are.


While not a frequent “nice shot” poster myself, sometimes I’d like the OP to know that I like it. So, visiting and saying “this is nice,” is my way of being friendly. It sure beats not having any interaction when posting a shot, IMO.

And... Sometimes people don’t actually ask for critique, rather they just want to share. So, knowing the OP is important, because giving critique in those instances could be considered rude (depending on the person and situation).


----------



## limr (Apr 4, 2020)

How do I evaluate an image?

Sure, I'll think about the same technical issues as weepete metioned in the OP, and I'll try just as hard to figure out what has gone well as I do trying to figure out what went wrong.

But all of that comes after that first initial impact. How do I first react to a photo? Does it give me an immediate emotional response, either good or bad? 

That's when I try to figure out what I'm responding to.

There are a lot of photos that I see that should, on paper, add up to a strong positive first impact, but basically still leave me cold. There are others that I love at first sight but are technically flawed. 

However, I am not trying to flog the whole "technically good, artistically boring vs flawed but emotionally impactful" trope. There are plenty of other shots that would have been just meh, but the technical skill of the photographer made it into a very interesting photo.

A question I often ask myself is, "Why was this photo taken?" and then "Why was it taken/processed in this manner?" I don't like pictures that were taken just to show off some technical element. I don't like processing something in a certain way just because we can. If I can't figure out the reason behind the photo - either the subject itself or the presentation of the subject - then once again, I am left cold.


----------



## Space Face (Apr 5, 2020)

waday said:


> Space Face said:
> 
> 
> > Similarly just repeatedly saying 'nice shot' as a post count boost is pointless imo and helps no one. That said, some do like their ego's massaged, regardless of how bad their photography skills are.
> ...




In that case why not say why you think a shot is good, what does if for you,  expand slightly. 

I don't think it's rude at all to give positive crit in the manner I detail unless specifically asked that none is given. The point was on every other photography forum I'm on if a picture is posted it's open for crit as was confirmed by a Mod on here if I recall correctly the last time the subject came up. 

As I said in my original post, I am aware that some folk don't like it and are stuck in a bubble thinking poor pictures are better than they are.  That's fine if that's what you want out of photography but I think most would like to improve.  I certainly learned that way.


----------



## 407370 (Apr 5, 2020)

Generally speaking I dont post unless something about the pic grabs me. There was a pic of a childs grave and 2 different interpretations of the same pic. The first example was awful and the second one broke my heart so that was what I said in the post.
I dont enter photography competitions for the exact reason that I dont give a hairy rats crack what most people think about my photography. There are a few people on this and other forums who's opinion I do respect deeply.
My photography philosophy is not for everyone, I get that, but that is why I have been a photography nut for most of my life. I am pushing my own boundaries not other peoples.
I am due to retire in the next few years and I have a hankering to enter a few photography competitions just to see if I can conform to the normal rules sufficiently to be recognised for it. In the same plan I want to specialise in Super Macro of a specific fungus.


----------



## Overread (Apr 5, 2020)

One thing I've often done to find if a person really wants critique is not to comment, but instead to ask questions. Even something as basic as "What camera/lens did you use" and "what mode" etc... can not only sift those who want to learn from those who are just posting to share their enjoyment of photography; but it also allows you to start getting information about the creation of the photo. This can directly impact what critique you give in reply.

Learning that someone used a bridge camera might well change how you reply compared to if they used the latest SLR with a laser spotter and motorised rail. Some improvements are impractical/difficult/impossible on some camera systems. Meanwhile engaging a person in dialogue starts to get them to open up to their method. This isn't just what they used, but also starts to tell you what thought process they were going though. Get enough from them and you can start to work out their internal thought process. This might highlight that they actually do know the theory of what they are doing, but they are perhaps giving more weight/importance to the wrong area or doing things in an order that can result in a lowered performance. It can also show where there might be some subtle gaps in their understanding which might compound or even confuse them if you start to explain latter stages in a process.


Because so many of us learn photography in an ad-hock manner, with fits of intense study and then periods of just casual shooting. It's possible to end up with a lot of gaps in understanding and theories that are only understood at a functional level. Often enough this is all we need and even some theory teaching aids only teach things in a more practical application rather than scientific study approach. (eg arguments over what  counts as contributing to exposure and exposure triangles can go in circles for pages and pages).




So my first part of evaluation is to learn about the creation and the creator. If the prime intent of a critique is to help a person to improve then the first step has to be to learn more than just the photo before your eyes. Opening up that dialogue is important. You can be the best of the best of the best, but if you've no ability to communicate and engage with others then sometimes it can be like trying to push a square into the circle. You might get it to fit, but its never going to be an ideal result.



I also remain open to the fact that people will disagree with what I say, or they will question it, or even counter it. This is good, yet so often its taken as a negative by many giving critique*. Not only are there variations in theory in the technical and artistic areas, but there's also the fact that when giving critique there's a learning process going on. You aren't just feeding information into a computer, you're teaching someone a new way of understanding. For some this might just be confirming what they've already read and reinforcing it; for others its totally new and for some it goes counter to some critiques and feedback they've had before. So a pushback or counter is great since what it is in effect saying from a person is that they don't fully understand and/or agree with you. At that point you can start to provide more detail and depth to the discussion to elaborate the point. In theory it should result in shifting the discussion to a higher level of depth which might result in taking a very basic point to a higher level.
Sometimes a person just won't agree with you and that's good too. In the end we all want a different thing from our hobbies and whilst many of us want to continually improve, some are happy where they are and don't want to change. Or don't feel a need or whatever. There's nothing wrong in that. It's our hobby our rules. I think its important to respect that aspect in the end. Forums are full of people from all walks - from pros with National Geographic awards to people who just snap away blindly. Each is engaging in their own way with their own gear, skills etc.... Those who wish to help others (which is in its own way how many engage with their hobby) should always be open to the fact that some want the help and some don't. It's better to identify who wants help and who doesn't and to focus our energy on those  who do - rather than focusing our ire and anger and frustrations on those who don't.


*as a mod I've made the observation many times that some giving critique complain that "newbies can't  take criticism of their creations". Yet I've also witnessed many of those same people then get into fights and arguments when their advice is questioned/critiqued in turn.


----------



## SquarePeg (Apr 5, 2020)

I tend to use my initial reaction and then think deeper on what it is about the photo that made me feel that way.  I’ll sometimes look at technical points like dof, composition, light, focus, pov etc to see if they added to or detracted from the photo.  That’s about it.  I’m not super technical when I shoot or process so I don’t really look at other people’s photos with that perspective.  If I really love it, I’ll examine it much more throughly as to why so I can use the info to improve my own photos.  

As for cc and feedback- 
If I like something and I comment, I try to add a note about what I like about the photo or set.  If I’m in a rush and catching up on a few day’s posts, I may just hit like or winner and move on.  

If I don’t like it or find it to be not very good, I won’t usually critique unless it’s been specially asked for even though any photo in the gallery forums other than Just For Fun is technically open to critique.  I prefer, if someone wants critique, that they elaborate on what they are struggling with on the photo or state what they like about it to start the conversation.  There are plenty of other forums/Facebook groups/camera clubs where people give rude, blunt, harsh critique whether you want it or not.  I don’t come to this site for that and I don’t think most other members do either.  But critique is the best way to improve so offering it in a friendly and helpful way should be what we all strive for.  

If critique isn’t asked for but the OP really needs improvement and obviously doesn’t know it, I’ll sometimes comment with a note about something I would change if it were my photo or with a question about why the OP chose one thing over another.


----------



## jcdeboever (Apr 5, 2020)

I'm not qualified to critique. I often comment on images that I enjoy looking at. Life is too short. I really don't take my failures to seriously.


----------



## waday (Apr 6, 2020)

Space Face said:


> waday said:
> 
> 
> > Space Face said:
> ...


I recognize your statement as a valid opinion.


----------



## RVT1K (Apr 6, 2020)

It's like food...if I like it...it's good.


----------



## Designer (Apr 6, 2020)

weepete said:


> That's roughly my process. What's yours?


I will often look at a photograph more than once, and if there is enough going on in it, then I will take extra time to analyze why it has captured my attention.  I am willing to put in some effort at a critique if it looks as if the photographer has put in some planning, time, and effort to create the photograph.  A casual snapshot and the short-hand request "thoughts?" shows me that the photographer has invested very little time in making it, therefore I will allow only a very short critique of it.

If there is something there to consider, then I take my time and start digging into it more.  Probably the biggest contributor to success is the composition.  I look for good balance, such as; mass/void, light/dark, symmetry/asymmetrical balance, as well as line, form, texture, etc.  I can appreciate a photograph that has good composition even if the technical aspects are not so great.

Occasionally the best feature of a photograph is capturing the moment.  A moment that is spontaneous and not likely to be discovered again is worth quite a bit because it might not be the same if staged.  The more famous "street" photographers of years ago would sometimes capture a shot that would make people stare at the photograph in wonder.  Notably, some of those shots are technically not good, but they have withstood the test of time in capturing people's attention.

Lastly, I look at the technical aspects.  Is the subject in good focus?  Does the exposure look correct?  Is the depth of field adequate?  Is the photo level?  (unless it's not intended to be level)  Does the crop compliment the subject? (i.e.: vertical for vertical subjects, and vice-versa) and is there adequate space around the subject to allow for framing?  This is not a comprehensive list, but just what was on my mind at the time.


----------



## jkeller (Apr 7, 2020)

The three basic components of nearly all photographs have been alluded to in this discussion, but I don't recall them being spelled out. They are; subject, form, and content. In some ways these are tiered, but the order of importance depends on the larger context for any given photograph. Subject is, simply, the "what" of the photograph. Form, is the "how", and Content it the "why. As a visual artist/photographer, I'm typically more focused on the Form, dealing with the design elements (line, shape, value, texture, color, space) and the design principles (composition, harmony, balance, symmetry, asymmetry, repetition, simplification, focal point, etc.).  These are the things that my critiques with students typically focus on. (pun intended)  However, subject matter is important and some would argue the most important of the three. To the layman, that is probably the case. I make the case to my students that great photographs are strong in subject, form, and content. The later, content, is arguably the most important of the triad. The really sad thing about where Art and Photography have drifted in the last century has been that the ultimate content, "Beauty", has so often been denigrated as trite. Cliché in photography does tend to make a photograph a bit boring, but Beautiful, in it's whole sense, is the apex of great photography. Photographers with a critical eye will expand their understanding of all three components when critiquing: subject, form, content.


----------



## Soocom1 (Apr 7, 2020)

So I am going to approach this from a completely diff. standpoint and some will think (perhaps most) that I am in woo woo land. 

I am not one to say with certainty that I am or am not empathic to a certain degree. I simply "see things" in ways others don't. 
When I look at a photograph, its intent is to relay a story, a message, or an impression of what the photographer saw at that moment in time. Simply put, what you see you want to tell. 

OK. So for me when shooting in the wilds of various nature and landscape, even architectural or eng. shots, what I look for is the "feeling" of the shot and try to capture it. There is a kind of (here is where I am going to get weird of people) an "energy" of the environment. Meaning that sometimes the picture simply makes itself. 
Other times it comes out in PP, but in whatever sense, the "catch" of the image is what I am intending to get to "pop" out. 
It could be color, lines, other shapes, a mood, whatever that lets its own story to be told, and I try to simply catch what I can. 

Sometimes I fail spectacularly, (more accurately MOST of the time) but regardless, the crux of my intent of seeing is what I try to push. 

When I look at others work, as previously mentioned, there is an "impact" of sorts. Wheat their intention was or is may be diff. from what they intended. However, I don't judge on those terms either specifically or deliberately. I am looking to see how the image affects my view of it. Is it "ok", mediocre, impactful, WOW or "HOLY ANSEL ADAMS BATMAN" .

There are many times I see an image that looks from the "rules standpoint" (Darrel this goes back to the rules of thirds we had last year) as complete garbage, but IMPACTS me so much that fudge the rules, just enjoy the shot.   Its really the final product that makes that impact, and it does or does not have to follow "rules" or be "prefect". It just needs to hold my attention.


----------



## Overread (Apr 7, 2020)

Soocom1 said:


> There are many times I see an image that looks from the "rules standpoint" (Darrel this goes back to the rules of thirds we had last year) as complete garbage, but IMPACTS me so much that fudge the rules, just enjoy the shot.   Its really the final product that makes that impact, and it does or does not have to follow "rules" or be "prefect". It just needs to hold my attention.



The important thing to remember about the "rules of art" is that they are not rules but theories, ideas and guidelines. There's also a LOT of them and they can all cross cross and interact with each other. In addition there's no singular "weight" to them. Ergo there's no linear scale of X is better than Y, their variation in importance within a photo varies from shot to shot based on the situation. 




What you see as the energy of the photo is starting to see some of this, however likely lacking an indepth understanding of the many theories in order to "see" them. WoW factors in most photos have things we can start to identify as contributing to that factor (which can also vary person to person too). By identification of those elements you can start to spot the myriad of theories. Even though many of them will be more subconscious or even luck based for the photographer when they took the shot. 

So I'd say you're not in "woo woo land" you're just in "art" land.


----------



## johngpt (Apr 7, 2020)

I'll judge a photo in ways similar to what weepeete, Space Face and Leonore have written.
Rarely will I criticize (negatively) a photo. I might make a comment about some facet of a photo which I like, so as to say something more than 'nice photo.' 
I always look at others' photos and think about what I would have done differently, in terms of technical issues.
Would I have attempted to avoid blowing highlights by using a faster shutter speed?
Would I have attempted a different angle?
Would I have dodged and burned to draw the eye in certain directions?
I don't consider myself a good enough photographer to do other than use others' photos to try to improve mine.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 7, 2020)

I look mostly for photographic skill and good technique as well as composition skill. A photo does not have to be perfectly Sharp or perfectly 100% in focus if artistic or visual components outweigh technical shortcomings. Many times a slight technical shortcoming can be overridden by a picture that has a high degree of impact in other ways.

Some types of photos however demand technical Perfection or nearly so, and it is difficult to describe how one evaluates a photo without 10,000 words to describe the process. Some photos are "vernacular" images, snapshots, if you will, and those are evaluated differently than serious Artistic Endeavors.


----------



## zulu42 (Apr 7, 2020)

The square root of length times width divided by emotion


----------



## DanOstergren (Apr 7, 2020)

The initial impact and artistic vision are most important to me, followed by how the photographer used their light, color, composition, and if the subject is interesting or was captured in a way that makes them interesting. Honestly I would have a much easier time actually critiquing a photo than I seem to be having with explaining how I might critique a hypothetical photo though.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 19, 2020)

What is the sound of wind?

You have 1,000 words...And....Go!


----------



## Jeff G (Apr 19, 2020)

The sound of wind is a gentle whisper on a warm summer's eve, or the roar of a freight train on a stormy afternoon, the sound of the wind is.....uh heck I don't  know.....the whistling between my ears!


----------



## BananaRepublic (Apr 20, 2020)

Designer said:


> weepete said:
> 
> 
> > PS @Designer I'd be particularly interested in hearing yours as you brought this idea to my attention!
> ...



Diesel doesn't ignite like gasoline but it still burns.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Apr 20, 2020)

jcdeboever said:


> I'm not qualified to critique.



It is my observation that many of those "qualified people" often dont know or have much understanding of things out side of their own bailiwick. 



DanOstergren said:


> artistic vision





DanOstergren said:


> subject is interesting



Those are completely subjective.


----------



## Designer (Apr 20, 2020)

BananaRepublic said:


> Diesel doesn't ignite like gasoline but it still burns.


Please tell me how that remark adds anything to the conversation, or even remotely connects with the topic.


----------



## DanOstergren (Apr 20, 2020)

BananaRepublic said:


> DanOstergren said:
> 
> 
> > artistic vision
> ...


That doesn't invalidate subjective criticism. What is your point?


----------



## johngpt (Apr 20, 2020)

Time to unwatch the thread.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Apr 21, 2020)

Designer said:


> BananaRepublic said:
> 
> 
> > Diesel doesn't ignite like gasoline but it still burns.
> ...



It doesn't really add to to the topic of conversation but you did say that you have gotten some blow back over comments made or points raised and you were reluctant to make comment/critique in future because as you outlined the may cause offence.  My understanding of the idiom to pour gas on the fire  is to not want to have things blowup. When I said diesel fuel doesn't ignite  in the same manner as gasoline it was primarily an off the cuff remark that does has a factual bases and secondly, although its only now fully coming to mind, that one could reword any future comments in a different manner which would equate to a slow burning diesel fire instead of the apparently outrageous comments, critique and advise that were made previously.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Apr 21, 2020)

DanOstergren said:


> BananaRepublic said:
> 
> 
> > DanOstergren said:
> ...



No it doesn't but my remarks were made in the context of what I had read previously in the thread. I quoted the above to try and make my comments as concise as possible to avoid going into a half cocked rant.

With regards to yours specifically; it is my experience that majority can see artistic merit only in things that they are aware of or have personally encountered, now perhaps you yourself are an artist and are open to things but the majority are not.

As for a particular subject being interesting or not is entirely personal taste now that doesn't invalidate the criteria but when people have been inculcated over decades to have regard for certain subjects it diminishes things. I recently entered two prints into a regional photographic federations POTY comp, it was my first time going to one of these things just representing myself. The "qualified judges" on the day where professional and regarded nature/wildlife, portrait/baby portraiture and landscape photographers, needless to say people doffed their caps to them as if they were Plantagenet kings.
What I observed is that they were far from objective, images of animals, babies and beachscapes did well but anything different, ergo that they didn't know or care about didn't, regardless of quality. Even though everyone in the room knew that the animals were baited, the babies doped, and the beaches seen and done before.

FYI I did moderately well in the sense that I qualified for the national POTY comp, so this is not a "because I didnt do well" thing, but the judging was much the same there and in other competitions of high regard.


----------



## Designer (Apr 21, 2020)

BananaRepublic said:


> .. a slow burning diesel fire ...


Now I wish I had some visual evidence to show that diesel can burn rather furiously when sprayed directly onto hot coals.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Apr 21, 2020)

Designer said:


> BananaRepublic said:
> 
> 
> > .. a slow burning diesel fire ...
> ...



here is a video that isn't relavant to anything only this exact micro discussion


----------



## limr (Apr 21, 2020)

Just let it go, hmmm?


----------



## DanOstergren (Apr 21, 2020)

BananaRepublic said:


> DanOstergren said:
> 
> 
> > BananaRepublic said:
> ...


It's just a little comical that you are criticizing others in this thread on how they might critique hypothetical photos.  I couldn't care less what you think about my personal criteria for evaluating a photograph to be honest though, or whether you think I or anyone else here is qualified to do so.


----------



## zulu42 (Apr 21, 2020)

Diesel and other kerosene products have a higher flash point than gasoline products. The Flash Point is the temperature at which the vapors can be ignited. Above their flash point (126 F for diesel) the rate of flame spread is similar to gasoline. If the guy in the video had tested in ambient or fuel temperatures above 100 F, the jet fuel would have lit just like the gas.
Gasoline has a flash point of -45 F, so it is virtually always above the flash point.

Jet Fuel Fire 'a monster'


----------



## limr (Apr 21, 2020)

@zulu42 



limr said:


> Just let it go, hmmm?


----------



## marmle (Apr 22, 2020)

I am my own worst critic which is why I rarely post any of my photos here.  I am no expert in judging photos,  but I like to believe I can tell a good shot from a bad one.  Composition is the first thing I look at,  distractions from the main subject, then focus...all the obvious things.  I don't know if I could tell if a photo had been over processed or badly lit or not, though I know sometimes less is more. I know I have seen some which _I_ thought were,  but I don't know whether I was right in my assumption or not.


----------



## Designer (Apr 22, 2020)

marmle said:


> ..I don't know whether I was right in my assumption or not.


You could spend some spare time independently studying art, particularly if your study materials lean towards contemporary examples of photography.  It's not terribly difficult to pick up.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Apr 24, 2020)

DanOstergren said:


> BananaRepublic said:
> 
> 
> > DanOstergren said:
> ...



Why did quote me in the first place so.


----------



## mariah1902 (Nov 26, 2020)

A photograph has to be meaningful and full of life. Not every picture is considered as photograph. The photograph has to focus an object and has to tell about that object.


----------

