Evaluation

Learning goal

You will be able to read your capstone project yourself with the assessment criteria the jury will use, and use the feedback coming from the jury to move your project forward. You will see what each of the five criteria, stretching from idea to presentation, asks and how much space it takes in the total score. Before the jury you will give yourself a score for each criterion and justify this score in one sentence, finding your weakest side yourself. You will note the jury's comments as they are, separate those tied to a criterion from those tied to taste, and draw a short revision plan from them. In technical quality you will ask, as a measurable question, whether the face of every skin tone in the series keeps its detail on screen and in print, and not read an aesthetic preference like a rule.

The question

The book is printed, the web page is open and the jury day is approaching. Your friend carries in their pocket the sheet the older member gave them; on it are five lines and a number beside each line. At night before going to bed they open the sheet and look, and each time find a different fear: what if the idea isn't original enough, what if one of the bakery frames is too dark, what if someone on the jury doesn't like their colors at all? Four weeks of labor will fit into a few minutes' look from a few people. What does the jury expect?

Context

You practiced earlier reading your own frames free of the memory's load, with a reading checklist (Lesson 23.7). At club meetings you also saw receiving and giving critique, comments that start with two pieces of praise and end with a single actionable suggestion (Lesson 23.6). In the competitions lesson, too, you discussed that a jury's choice reflects not a photo's value, but that jury's view that year (Lesson 28.11).

The evaluation of the capstone project brings these three experiences together. In this last lesson of the program the project is evaluated by an instructor and the community with five criteria, and projects found successful receive the program certificate. But this lesson's real subject isn't winning a score, but learning how to read a score and a comment.

Simple explanation

What do the criteria ask?

An assessment criterion is an item that sets in advance from which angles and with which questions a project will be read. In the capstone project there are five criteria. Concept and originality asks whether the project carries a question and whether the photographer approaches that question with their own way of looking. Technical quality asks whether exposure, sharpness and color are at the service of the project. Composition and light looks at how the frames direct the gaze and how the light carries the meaning. Consistency and sequencing asks whether the twelve frames speak like a series. Presentation looks at how the statement, the title and the format carry the project.

Criterion weight is how much space a criterion takes in the total score. In this project concept and originality and technical quality each carry twenty-five of a hundred points, composition and light and consistency and sequencing twenty each, and presentation ten. This distribution says something: a very bright presentation doesn't rescue a project without a question; but a good project also loses points with a careless presentation. The criteria don't impose an aesthetic. When a jury member says "the colors should have been more vivid," this is a preference; when they say "the master's face has lost its detail in print," this is a measurable technical problem. One of the questions to ask in technical quality is exactly this: does every skin tone in the series keep its own detail on screen and in print?

How do you measure yourself before the jury?

Self-scoring is the photographer giving their own project a score for each criterion before the jury and justifying this score with a single sentence. The justification sentence is more important than the score: the sentence "I give technical quality eighteen, because in one of the bakery frames the master's face went dark in the test print" tells the photographer directly what they need to fix. Self-scoring is a way of rearranging the reading checklist according to these five criteria.

The most valuable result of self-scoring is finding the weakest criterion before the jury. Doing this alone is hard; the memory's load is still there. That is why someone who knows the project but didn't take part in the shoots, for example a club member, can be asked to fill in the same sheet. The line where the two sheets differ most is where the photographer stands closest to their own work, that is, where they see least clearly.

When giving scores it is easy to go to one of two extremes. Some photographers, thinking of the labor, give every line a high score; others, to protect themselves before the jury, keep every line low. Neither works, because they erase the difference between the lines. What makes a score honest is tying it to a frame: if the justification sentence can't point to a frame, that score is a feeling. In such a line, opening the frames again and asking that criterion's question one by one puts the number in its place.

How is feedback used?

A feedback log is putting the jury's and viewers' comments into writing as they are, without mixing them with the photographer's own interpretation. During evaluation it is natural to answer comments immediately, to start defending or explaining a frame; but this makes it harder to listen to the comment itself. Taking notes and asking clarifying questions such as "what did you see, in which frame?" continues the way of listening you practiced in the critique lesson.

A revision plan is a short list of a few changes chosen from the feedback received, in which frame and how they will be made. Not every comment is applied. First the comments are split in two: measurable comments tied to a criterion and a frame, and comments that express a taste. Those in the first group are mostly fixed. Comments tied to taste, on the other hand, are listened to carefully, weighed for whether they serve the project's question, and the photographer makes the decision. If the same comment comes from several people, it needs rethinking even if it looks like taste. A score isn't the end of the project; the revision plan turns the project into a work that lives on after the certificate too.

Visual evidence

Before the jury your friend fills in the sheet: twenty-two for concept, eighteen for technical quality, seventeen for composition and light, sixteen for consistency and sequencing, eight for presentation. Beside each number they write a sentence. When a club member fills in the same sheet, the biggest difference comes out in the consistency line: the member has written that two frames at the tea stall say almost the same thing.

On jury day the instructor and three people from the community look at the series. Your friend puts every comment into the notebook as it is. A jury member points out that in the bakery frame the master's face has lost its detail in print; the one beside them notices the repetition at the tea stall; the member at the end of the table says they would like the colors to be more vivid.

In the evening your friend splits the comments into two columns. The master's face and the repeating frame are tied to a criterion and a frame; they go into the revision plan: a local correction on the face, a test print, and a frame from the pool in place of one of the tea stall frames. The color comment, on the other hand, is a preference; your friend decides that the morning's pale light serves the project's question and doesn't change the colors.

Common mistakes

Summary

The capstone project is evaluated with five criteria that ask separately about the idea, the technique, the frames, the series and the presentation, and with different weights; justified self-scoring done before the jury and comparison with someone else's scores reveal the weakest side. Jury comments are noted as they are, those tied to a criterion are separated from those tied to taste, and while measurable problems such as each skin tone's detail turn into a revision plan, the decision on preferences is left to the photographer, looking at the project's question.

Mini assignment

In this assignment you will prepare your capstone project for the jury and work on it after the jury.

1. Give your project a score for each of the five criteria and write a one-sentence justification beside each score.
2. Ask someone who didn't take part in the shoots to fill in the same sheet, and mark the line where the two sheets differ most.
3. Compare each face in the series on screen and in a test print; if a skin tone loses its detail, write this in the technical quality line.
4. Note the jury comments as they are, split them into two columns, "tied to a criterion" and "tied to taste," and write a revision plan of at most three items.

Check yourself

• Is there a sentence explaining each score beside it?
• While taking notes on the comments, were you able to listen without moving into defense?
• Is every item in the revision plan tied to a frame and a criterion?

Glossary

Mini quiz

1. What do the criterion weights in this project show?

• A) That presentation is the most important criterion
• B) That a bright presentation won't rescue a project without a question
• C) That all criteria are equal
• D) That technical quality doesn't matter

2. In self-scoring, what is more valuable than the score?

• A) The total coming out high
• B) The scores being the same as the jury's
• C) Not giving any criterion a low score
• D) The justification sentence beside each score

3. What kind of comment is "the master's face has lost its detail in print"?

• A) A measurable comment tied to a criterion and a frame
• B) A comment that only expresses a taste
• C) A comment belonging to the presentation criterion
• D) A comment that should be ignored

4. If a jury member wants the colors to be more vivid, what does the photographer do?

• A) Immediately makes the whole series more vivid
• B) Doesn't note the comment
• C) Listens to the comment, weighs whether it serves the project's question and makes the decision themselves
• D) Argues with the jury member and tries to convince them

Answers

1. B — The weights show the project values its question and its frames more than its presentation.
2. D — The justification sentence tells the photographer directly what to fix in which frame.
3. A — It is tied to a frame and to the technical quality criterion and can be tested with a test print.
4. C — A comment tied to taste is listened to carefully but isn't applied like a rule.

Summary card

• Five criteria, different weights: concept and technique 25, composition and series 20, presentation 10.
• Justified self-scoring before the jury; compare with someone else's sheet.
• Note comments as they are, don't move into defense.
• Fix the comment tied to a criterion, weigh the comment tied to taste.
• Each skin tone's detail is a measurable technical question.

Bridge to the next lesson

The certificate is earned, the revision plan sits in the notebook. Your friend looks again at the series' most talked-about frame: the close-up in which the master looks toward them in the light coming from the oven's mouth. Someone on the jury had said of this frame, "I don't know this person, but it feels as if I do." Where does the difference between photographing a face and photographing a person begin? The core program ends here; the next lesson opens, for those who want to go deeper in a single genre, the Portraits and People track among the specialization tracks, with the question of what a portrait captures beyond the record of a face.