I review literally thousands of images each year. Some are from classes where students learn about visual design and composition, some are from camera club competitions, and some are from workshops where area professionals and serious amateurs submit images for critique. My remarks here refer to my evaluation of images for camera clubs and workshops.

All image evaluators are not created equal. Not only are their skills different, but their criteria for evaluating are as well. I prefer the word "evaluator" rather than "judge" and admit to being a maverick in that I tend not to be bound by conventional criteria when evaluating/critiquing an image.

Is there, however, a common denominator for evaluation? Yes! For me it is good craftsmanship. Simply stated, there is no excuse for poor craftsmanship, and the higher the level of expertise, the less tolerant I am. By "craftsmanship" I mean edges that are straight, horizons that are level, pictures that are sharp (if meant to be sharp), correct exposure, etc. Does this mean that poor technical competence cannot win an award? No, not always, but other elements in the picture space must be powerful enough to compensate for the defects of poor craftsmanship.

Regardless of what was in front of the camera lens, the photographer is responsible for everything contained within the picture space. If there are unappealing elements that could not be eliminated, then the picture should not have been taken at all, or else should have remained a record shot and not entered in competition.

In my opinion, more images in competition are found wanting due to visual design weaknesses than for any other factor. I look for images that offer unique but careful visual design. The operative phrase here is "careful visual design." To me that means the photographer gave thought to the arrangement and values of all elements in the picture space. Good visual design is learned only when it is felt. I like images where the arrangement of elements in the picture space seems free and uninhibited. Certainly there are guidelines, but one should avoid adhering to rigid "rules." Freeman Patterson says: "The only rule to follow in photography is never process color film in chicken noodle soup."

I try to see photographs as geometric shapes. Henri Cartier-Bresson said: "Photography requires concentration, a discipline of mind, sensitivity, and a sense of geometry."  Good photographers must learn to see geometric shapes and appreciate how they interrelate with each other. Many images fail because photographers see objects as familiar things -- trees, houses, windows, etc., and do not see them as geometric shapes having to coexist with other shapes within the picture space.

I want the photographer to present more than the obvious, no matter how pretty the image may be. Technical advances in equipment make it easy for virtually all photographers to take a pretty picture of a pretty scene, but that is not enough. Does the photographer put a personal stamp on that pretty scene through unique composition or camera position? Does the photographer convey an individual or distinctive style that makes the image better than others?

Most evaluators insist on having a center of interest in an image. I do not. Indeed, some pictures (particularly abstracts) are destroyed when a center of interest is introduced because then a different story is told. In those cases where there is no center of interest to "carry" the picture, it is even more critical that all the design elements work together. I sometimes see images where the photographer clearly concentrated on the center of interest and gave little or no attention to the other elements in the picture space.

I find corners and edges to be critical in the composition of an image. Corners serve as points and edges as barriers which contain the image. The eye sweeps these areas in reviewing the picture. Most images benefit from "breathing room" around the edges. The principle of the fulcrum applies within the picture space: those elements at a farther distance from the center point carry the greater "weight." A thoughtful photographer will use that knowledge to his/her advantage. One other difficult lesson to learn in composition is the importance of negative space. Within the picture area, good negative space is not wasted space.

My personal preference is for simple designs. Frequently I see images which include too much information for my eye to interpret, making me wonder what message the photographer wanted to covey. In my view, "Simple is Super!" I know there are outstanding photographers who produce complicated, complex designs which work beautifully, but nonetheless, I think it important to learn how to produce simple designs. Contrary to what one might think, it is more difficult to produce a good simple design than a complicated one because the arrangement of elements in a simple design must be so precise.

I try not to be influenced by the initial impact of an image. A good image, like good wine, should age well, but unfortunately, evaluators do not have the opportunity to consider images over an extended period of time. Nonetheless, good evaluators must develop the skill to recognize those images having immediate impact that likely would not endure the scrutiny of continuing review. No doubt Oscar Wilde had the evaluation of images in mind when he said ".....not love at first sight, but love at the end of the season which is so much more satisfactory."

In my experience, photographers frequently ignore the character of light when taking pictures. Light is neither good nor bad, but must be appropriate to the subject matter. It is very important for photographers to learn to "read" light and select subjects which can be presented best in that light. As we all know, harsh, midday light generally should be avoided because it has wide tonal ranges, and the shadows it creates are not usually pleasing. In spite of that, good pictures can be taken in harsh light if the photographer carefully selects and arranges shapes and tones which work together under such lighting conditions.

Many images also fail when taken in flat light because the images often appear dull and uninteresting, even though the limited tonal ranges are easily recorded by film. Morning photographers have a decided advantage over late-risers in that early light produces some of photography's best images.

All too often photographers do not understand the importance of the background as a major partner in the overall image. Frequently I find backgrounds that are competitive and distracting, while others seem to intrude into rather than support the story which the photographer wants to tell. More often than not, it is good advice to "compose for the background." This is particularly important where wide tonal ranges in the background can be distracting. It is essential that the photographer learn to assign to the background its proper role in the image.

I am always impressed whenever a photographer conveys "feeling" in an image. Think of the images by Dorothea Lange during the Great Depression, or by Ansel Adams depicting the majesty of the Southwest. The sense of emotion in an image sometimes can be powerful enough to overcome technical flaws. Exposure of an image will influence mood and feeling. Is the exposure appropriate to convey the sentiments which the photographer wants to express? Almost always I will rate an image that has feeling higher than one that does not.

I see many images which at best are only snapshots. It is sad when such images are enlarged and entered in one of the print categories. A mediocre image is not made better by making it larger; it is a waste of money and time. Even with a good image, larger is not necessarily better. A smaller print is almost always preferable when the image has a sense of intimacy.

With the rapidly growing use of home printers, color management has become a problem. Some images may not need precise color accuracy, abstracts for example, but most images do. I see some nature pictures where the colors are totally inaccurate and are very disturbing. Portraits almost always need accurate color. Sometimes when home printers produce black and white pictures, a hint of purple or green occurs which reduces the effect of a black and white image.

I consider the mat (and also the frame) to be an important but silent partner in the presentation of an image. Some exhibition venues are very strict about how an image is to be shown. For exhibitions and camera club competitions simple white mats are preferred, with an adequate border to serve as an appropriate retaining wall for the image. Colored mats, double and triple matting and other such matting techniques are best left for craft shows, home decorating, and framing shops. It is wise advice to use any color mat you want as long as it is white. The mat is merely the neighborhood where the print lives, and it should never compete with the image. Many photographers try to fit the print to a mat of a predetermined size. It should be the other way around; the mat should be fitted to the print. A wonderful print not matted properly is like wearing a tuxedo with tennis shoes.

Finally, the question I ask myself when evaluating is: would I want this image hanging in my house? To me, that is the ultimate test. Thus, I look for images that transform photography into art. This preference is no worse (and no better) than a photojournalist who needs an image with immediate impact to keep the reader from turning the page. Charles Montgomery of Winterthur Museum wrote a paper entitled: "Some Remarks on the Science and Principles of Connoisseurship." Mr. Montgomery listed a number of points to follow when examining works of art (which would include our photographs, of course) and he asked himself: "Do I enjoy it?" "Does it sing to me?" If you enjoy the image, and if it sings to you, what other criteria need be met?

Joe Miller

For further reading:

Bayer, Jonathan. Reading Photographs. New York: Pantheon Books. l977.

Carter, David. Some Important Principles of Composition. Washington, DC. Northern Virginia Alliance of Camera Clubs. 1998.

Finn, David. How to Look at Photographs. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc. l994.

Miller, Joseph, and Carter, David. Composition and Visual Design. Northern Virginia Alliance of Camera Clubs. l998.

Patterson, Freeman. The Art of Seeing. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Key Porter Books, Ltd. l985.