Evaluating photographs
Back
[11Aug20] The quest for a methodology is continued in I&P.
[4Jun20] This is what I included in Asg.4,
There are numerous published approaches to analysing photographs. Combining Barrett (2000), Shore (2007) and Szarkowski (1978 and 2007) with Barthes and Derrida from the course, any analytical method should consider up to five main aspects of a photograph's trajectory from camera to publication and consumption: the subject; the photographer's physical and technical choices; their personal attitudes; the display environment; and the viewer's circumstances Asg.4
This was truncated to meet the word limit, but it says what I want it to say. I think I'll draw a line over what has gone before (or below) and see where the sources fit into my new formulation.
text
[2May20] Now working on C&N Asg.4, an essay prefixed 'a picture is worth a thousand words' with an instruction to apply the course's analytical methods which are Barthes', as below.
I had and organising thought today. A photographic event (from planning to viewing) involves:
(i) a subject;
(ii) the setting (both the; subject location and the camera settings)
[perhaps change that to (i) subject and setting; (ii) technical choices;]
(iii) the intention and approach of photographer;
(iv) the display choices;
(v) the attitudes of viewer.
and predispositions
There is some overlap
I will apply these to my synthesis.
[1Apr20] C&N has a lot on Barthes, which boils down to a distinction between the objective contents of the image and the subjective interpretations of the viewers, but it lacks some of Barrett's context. I will try to integrate and arrive at a synthesis.
[14Jan20] The purpose of this page is to gather approaches to evaluating or describing or distinguishing between photographs (and sometimes between photographers). At the time of writing, I noted five sources to get us started - Barthes, Barrett, Szarkowski, Shore and the OCA's own. I think I will show them in descending order of (my subjective) merit with OCA last, not necessarily because it is the least useful, but because it is the standard for work produced for this site.
Synthesis - Barrett - Barthes - Szarkowski - Shore - OCA
Synthesis
[2Apr20] The most comprehensive and systematic method encountered so far is Barrett's three contexts so I will try that as a basis and bolt on considerations from the others. To Barrett’s must be added the viewers' subjective interpretations of the image.
Note that the EyV final assessment feedback advised,
Your learning log section on your blog shows an interesting range of sources. Do continue to collect these pieces of information. For this course you have made use of the Barrett text [Criticising Photographs]. Do continue to read around the subject of photography and explore other opinions on photographic aesthetic theory. EyV final assessment feedback
Evaluation II
Method | Subject | Setting | Intention | Display | Viewer Attitudes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Barrett | picture, date | the location, circumstances | maker | title, presentational environment | |
Szarkowski M&W | mirror or window i | ||||
Szarkowski TPE | |||||
Shore | interpretation | ||||
Barthes | signifier, denoted, studium | signified, connoted, punctum |
Evaluation I
Method | Internal | External | Original | Viewer |
---|---|---|---|---|
Barrett | picture, title, date and maker | the presentational environment | the causal environment: the location, circumstances and intention of the maker | |
Szarkowski M&W | mirror or window i | |||
Szarkowski TPE | ||||
Shore | ||||
Barthes | signifier, denoted, studium | signified, connoted, punctum |
- i It can be argued that each viewer, once aware of the distinction, can interpret whether a photograph is (and the tendency of the photographer towards) more mirror or window. That said, Szarkowski's book classifies the images as on one side or the other of the continuum. When I eventually get round to writing up the book, I will list them.
- ii text
- iii text
Classification
Barrett's classification of images is also useful. I summarised this in my (as yet unfinished) writeup of Criticising photographs and there is a précis below, repeated here. I will embellish this over time.
Descriptive - diagnostic, factual e.g. ID, speed cameras, medical photography, the Hubble Space Telescope
Explanatory - similar, but with some artistic flair, includes most press photography e.g. Muybridge
Interpretive - staged by the photographer, can be ambiguous e.g. Jeff Wall
Ethically evaluative † - factual but also socially judgemental e.g. Walker Evans, Dorothea Lange
Aesthetically evaluative - often beautiful things photographed artistically e.g. Ansel Adams', Edward Weston, Cartier-Bresson
Theoretical — photographs about photography e.g. Cindy Sherman
† Salkeld [11, p.37] refers to the 'concerned photojournalism' of Jacob Riis, a good term with large overlaps into the ethically evaluative category
Usage
In C&N Part 4, I tried to come up with a checklist for evaluation - here's the starting point to build on. I'll try to list links here to any subsequent evaluations on the site.
look at the objective aspects; find quotes from the artist on the particular work or their general approach;examine aspects amenable to subjective interpretation and speculate on why the artist chose to include them; look at the piece in the wider context of the artists work, how it might relate to other artists and other art forms. Deploy the appropriate technical terms. C&N Part 4 to build

Box A
Mirrors and Windows, 1978
John Szarkowski
John Szarkowski
Szarkowski has two entries. The first, in Mirrors and Windows (1978) [1] is the simplest of all and yet one of the most telling and useful. I summarise it in C&N 1-4 as, photographs are on a continuum between windows, which tell the viewer more about the world, and mirrors, which tell more about the artist. Here's a fuller review. Note that the windows in question are both portable and dynamic, which weakens the analogy, nevertheless, it is a useful distinction.
In The photographer's eye (2007) [2] summarised here, Szarkowski identifies five key aspects of the photograph, The Thing Itself, The Detail, The Frame, Time and Vantage Point.

Criticizing Photographs
3rd ed. Terry Barrett
Terry Barrett
Barrett also has two bites, perhaps with more to come.
In a 1997 essay, summarised here [3], defines three aspects of evaluation:
internal context — picture, title, date and maker
external context — the presentational environment
original context — the causal environment: the location, circumstances and intention of the maker.
In his book Criticising photographs (2000) [4], partially summarised here (it's WIP) Barrett defines six types of photograph - I used these definitions in EyV Asg. 5,
Descriptive - diagnostic, factual e.g. clinical photography, the Hubble Space Telescope
Explanatory - similar, but with some artistic flair, includes most press photography e.g. Muybridge
Interpretive - staged by the photographer, can be ambiguous e.g. Jeff Wall
Ethically evaluative - factual but also socially judgemental e.g. Walker Evans, Dorothea Lange
Aesthetically evaluative - often beautiful things photographed artistically e.g. Ansel Adams', Edward Weston, Cartier-Bresson
Theoretical — photographs about photography e.g. Cindy Sherman

The Nature of Photographs
Stephen Shore
I describe the first half of Shore's The nature of photographs (2007) [5] as, 'a useful approach to analysing photographs. It builds on Szarkowski's methodology [but] the second half is, by contrast, rather mystical and of less practical use'. link
In the first half, then, 'A photograph is a flat, 2-dimension representation of reality. In creating one, the photographer can choose the image's boundaries, composition, the time and duration of exposure and the subject and depth of focus. In interpreting it, the viewer is influenced both by the photographer's choices and their mental processes.
Shore does not mention choices of lighting or emotional reactions to the subjects'.
Roland Barthes
He will have, I expect, numerous contributions to the page, but the first two are, copied from here,
According to Dillon [6], the studium, "is the manifest subject, meaning and context of the photograph" and the punctum is, " that aspect (often a detail) of a photograph that holds our gaze".
In the Telegraph's Photography theory: a beginner's guide ([7] Bush et al., 2014), Tim Clark covers Barthes and offers similar definitions, elaborating on punctum as, "something intensely private, unexpected and thus indelible".
This writer offers:
studium - those objective aspects of a photograph
about which most might agree (the "W"s);
punctum - the individual's personal, subjective, reactive triggers.
Then, I have used Barthes in Part 1 of C&N.
Barthes (in The Photographic Message (1961), included in Sontag's reader
[8] and neatly summarised in Modrak's Reframing Photography [9, p.351]) refers to a news photograph as a message comprising three parts, "a source of emission, a channel of transmission and a point of reception" [8, p.194]:
the source is the photographer and the photo editor who selects the image and perhaps gives it a title;
the channel (in this example) is the newspaper itself, including any text associated accompanying the photograph, but also the nature of the newspaper (Barthes gives examples of "the very conservative L'Aurore [and] the Communist L'Humanité");
the point of reception is the public that read the paper.
And, as Modrak puts it, 'the "meaning" of the same photograph can vary widely depending on how and where it is seen and by whom' [9, p.355].

EyV p.34 [10]
OCA
Technical Skills - Quality - Creativity - Context

Box A
1. title,
date
Name
text
text

©
References
1. Szarkowski, J. (1978) Mirrors and Windows. New York: MoMA.
2. Szarkowski, J. (2007) The photographer's eye. Revised 3rd ed. New York: MoMA.
3. Barrett, T. (1997) 'Photographs and Contexts', in Goldblatt, A. & Brown, L. (eds.) A reader in philosophy of the arts. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. pp. 110-116.
4. Barrett, T. (2000) Criticising photographs, an introduction to understanding images. 3rd ed. Mountain View, California: Mayfield Publishing.
5. Shore, S. (2007) The nature of photographs. 2nd ed. London: Phaidon Press.
6. Dillon, B. (2011) Rereading: Camera Lucida by Roland Barthes. The Guardian. 26 March. [online] Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/mar/26/roland-barthes-camera-lucida-rereading. [accessed 17 December 2018]
7. Bush, L., Clark, T., Hamilton, S., Smyth, D. (2014) Photography theory: a beginner's guide. The Telegraph 9 June. [online] Available from: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/photography/10753112/Photography-theory-a-beginners-guide.html. [accessed 17 December 2018]
8. Sontag, S. (1983) Barthes: Selected Writings. London: Fontana.
9. Modrak, R. & Anthes, B (2011) Reframing photography: theory and practice. Oxford: Routledge.
10. Bloomfield, R (2017) Expressing your vision. Barnsley: Open College of the Arts.
11. Salkeld, R. (2018) Reading Photographs. London: Bloomsbury.