I've always been curious, but never saw anything posted.....
I'd like to ask Nate and Keith: What are the criteria for choosing the Avian WP's? What do you look for?
Thanks - Sandy
Posted by Charlie Baugh on August 17, 2011 at 2:52 PM
Perhaps moderators of other galleries would like to comment on their respective galleries.
Very good question, Sandy.
Charlie
Posted by Keith Bauer on August 17, 2011 at 4:53 PM
Sandy:
I look at 3 major areas: Impact, Composition and Technical. The 3 are always dependent on each other. In other words, an image with a poor composition will have less impact for me than one with a strong composition. An image with weak technical characteristics will hurt the impact. Conversely, images with strong compositions and technical characteristics add to the potential impact of an image.
So what do those three words mean to me?
Impact: When I view an image the first reaction that is formed in my mind is based on the impact of the image. Is it something that really grabs my attention, causes me to want to study the image, and engage with what the photographer was trying to say with their image? Of the three, impact is one that comes more from the gut than the other two. The image usually either has immediate impact with me or not. Some of that is something I’ve learned in my work judging for state level events where the judging panel will see 800-1000 images over the course of 3 evenings of judging. Those images that have impact tend to stay on display for more critical viewing than those images than have little or no impact.
Composition: Does the placement of the important elements in the image provide a pleasing visual flow. While there are plenty of “rules” for composition, I firmly believe that photographers need to work to maximize the visual flow of each image. Sometimes the “rules” work, and sometimes they do not. The photographer needs to understand the “rules” and vary from them when there is a purpose and a reason. The balance of the visual elements in the image, the balance of colors, shapes, negative space and line all have an effect on the composition (and clearly on the impact). The background of an image is just as important as the subject in many cases. If the background competes with the subject the composition and impact both suffer. Good composition takes time. With our Avian photography that is often a challenge since time is often of the essence to capture the image. I understand that. What that means to me is that images with a poor composition may be nice to have since the subject was captured, but they are not “competition” worthy images. I have thousands of those. I have far fewer where all of the elements of a winning competition image came together and included a strong composition.
Technical: I’m looking for things like “proper” exposure. Proper should be determined by the photographer and used as a means to convey the image they had in their head when they captured the image. I’m looking for critical sharpness in the areas that need to be sharp (if there are any). Not every image must have something that is critically sharp, but if the image should have an area of critical sharpness and it does not, then the technical merit of the image suffers. I’m looking for clean images. Noise is an example of what I mean by “clean images”. If the noise in an image is distracting to the overall presentation of the image, then it should be removed (either at capture time or in post processing). I’m not saying that every image has to be noise free, sometimes noise is a good thing and adds to the character of an image. I’m looking for excellent post processing. Every Raw capture requires some post processing. Cropping to help with the composition, selectively brightening or darkening areas of the image, selectively working with the colors or tonal values, etc. Post processing is a vital part of successful digital photography. Post processing can NOT turn a poor image into a good image. It can only make a poor image into a heavily processed image. Getting it right in the camera is still the most important part of “processing”.
In the end, selecting the weekly picks is a subjective process. I hope I’ve provided some insight into how I attempt to take the subjective and make it as objective as possible. There are, of course many, many variables of each of the 3 major topic areas I’ve described.
There are weeks when I select just one image and forward my pick to Jim and Donna. There are other weeks when I select 2 or 3 images and forward those picks to Jim and Donna with my preference.
Very excellent and thorough explanation - thanks, Keith!
Sandy
Posted by Lance Warley on August 18, 2011 at 9:17 AM
Bravo, Keith.
Thanks for the class on judging.
Posted by Nate Chappell on August 20, 2011 at 6:53 PM
Hi Sandy,
I've been out of the country and just returned from Argentina or I would have responded sooner.
My judging style is actually quite similar to Keith's in that I look for impact, composition and technical aspects as well. Also for me impact or the "wow factor" is the most important factor. Although it' subjective the great images really jump off the screen. If an image has impact - really grabs my attention - then I consider the technical aspects and composition of the photo.
Keith and I usually alternate with the picks each week unless one of us is out of town. I generally send 2-4 images (usually 3) to Jim and Donna, sometimes giving them a first choice out of the 3 which they can overrule but rarely do and sometimes letting them pick amongst the images that I send to them. Occasionally when one image has really stood out to me I have sent just that one image to Jim and Donna for the weekly pick.
Discussion
5 repliesI'd like to ask Nate and Keith: What are the criteria for choosing the Avian WP's? What do you look for?
Thanks - Sandy
Very good question, Sandy.
Charlie
I look at 3 major areas: Impact, Composition and Technical. The 3 are always dependent on each other. In other words, an image with a poor composition will have less impact for me than one with a strong composition. An image with weak technical characteristics will hurt the impact. Conversely, images with strong compositions and technical characteristics add to the potential impact of an image.
So what do those three words mean to me?
Impact: When I view an image the first reaction that is formed in my mind is based on the impact of the image. Is it something that really grabs my attention, causes me to want to study the image, and engage with what the photographer was trying to say with their image? Of the three, impact is one that comes more from the gut than the other two. The image usually either has immediate impact with me or not. Some of that is something I’ve learned in my work judging for state level events where the judging panel will see 800-1000 images over the course of 3 evenings of judging. Those images that have impact tend to stay on display for more critical viewing than those images than have little or no impact.
Composition: Does the placement of the important elements in the image provide a pleasing visual flow. While there are plenty of “rules” for composition, I firmly believe that photographers need to work to maximize the visual flow of each image. Sometimes the “rules” work, and sometimes they do not. The photographer needs to understand the “rules” and vary from them when there is a purpose and a reason. The balance of the visual elements in the image, the balance of colors, shapes, negative space and line all have an effect on the composition (and clearly on the impact). The background of an image is just as important as the subject in many cases. If the background competes with the subject the composition and impact both suffer. Good composition takes time. With our Avian photography that is often a challenge since time is often of the essence to capture the image. I understand that. What that means to me is that images with a poor composition may be nice to have since the subject was captured, but they are not “competition” worthy images. I have thousands of those. I have far fewer where all of the elements of a winning competition image came together and included a strong composition.
Technical: I’m looking for things like “proper” exposure. Proper should be determined by the photographer and used as a means to convey the image they had in their head when they captured the image. I’m looking for critical sharpness in the areas that need to be sharp (if there are any). Not every image must have something that is critically sharp, but if the image should have an area of critical sharpness and it does not, then the technical merit of the image suffers. I’m looking for clean images. Noise is an example of what I mean by “clean images”. If the noise in an image is distracting to the overall presentation of the image, then it should be removed (either at capture time or in post processing). I’m not saying that every image has to be noise free, sometimes noise is a good thing and adds to the character of an image. I’m looking for excellent post processing. Every Raw capture requires some post processing. Cropping to help with the composition, selectively brightening or darkening areas of the image, selectively working with the colors or tonal values, etc. Post processing is a vital part of successful digital photography. Post processing can NOT turn a poor image into a good image. It can only make a poor image into a heavily processed image. Getting it right in the camera is still the most important part of “processing”.
In the end, selecting the weekly picks is a subjective process. I hope I’ve provided some insight into how I attempt to take the subjective and make it as objective as possible. There are, of course many, many variables of each of the 3 major topic areas I’ve described.
There are weeks when I select just one image and forward my pick to Jim and Donna. There are other weeks when I select 2 or 3 images and forward those picks to Jim and Donna with my preference.
Keith
Sandy
Thanks for the class on judging.
I've been out of the country and just returned from Argentina or I would have responded sooner.
My judging style is actually quite similar to Keith's in that I look for impact, composition and technical aspects as well. Also for me impact or the "wow factor" is the most important factor. Although it' subjective the great images really jump off the screen. If an image has impact - really grabs my attention - then I consider the technical aspects and composition of the photo.
Keith and I usually alternate with the picks each week unless one of us is out of town. I generally send 2-4 images (usually 3) to Jim and Donna, sometimes giving them a first choice out of the 3 which they can overrule but rarely do and sometimes letting them pick amongst the images that I send to them. Occasionally when one image has really stood out to me I have sent just that one image to Jim and Donna for the weekly pick.