Quite often I ask my wife for opinions, especially when I was putting CiM out. She has an eye for the visual. And even though she does not like Black and White she does have a good way of seeing it. I even ask her for ideas for contrast control in printing. There have been a few I tried where I had burning block and doggonit if she wasn't right.
Isn't this something of a trick question? I mean, either you have an editor or you don't. An editor decides, they don't exactly help decide. If you have veto power over your editor, then you don't have an editor! Okay, maybe J. K. Rowling and Stephen King have editors who make "suggestions" that are either followed or not.
Example: I basically shoot and print whatever I want, but when it comes to display in public my wife makes the call. This is because she owns the walls they are displayed on. Fortunately we usually agree. When we disagree, I can't help but take it personally and can only thank my luck that photography is not my bread and butter. Or an editor would drive me nuts.
Learn to edit your own work. (Unless you are working for someone else. Then they are going to take what they want.) Taking pictures is easy. Editing is the skill that gets your work in front of others. Bad editing gives bad results. Other people will simply edit for themselves and so you simply see their vision. Editing in turn makes you a better photographer as you can start weeding out ineffective ideas/methods/subjects/compositions.
BTW, I have work(ed) professionally in art direction/editing. There is nothing worse than getting work from photographers that can't edit.
Originally Posted by stradibarrius
When I've done some digital creation work in Photoshop, I also run into this problem. Rather than turn to others (though I do appreciate peer review, I don't always heed the advice given), I step away from it. I don't look at it. I close the file and don't even think about it for a full week.
Then I come back with fresh eyes and spot new things in the photoshop file. I say "oh, that effect is gaudy," or "did I really miss this detail?" and keep working until I think I'm done or nearly so. Then repeat the 1-week-cooldown.
I would imagine the same works for photography, as long as you're not on a deadline.
I disagree. The most important question is and remains: is it what i (!) wanted it to be. Something only you can answer and decide.
Originally Posted by ann
(Unless you communicate in a non-photographic way what it is you are aiming to communicate through your photos. Do you want to write and present essays, or produce images?)
The thing with this question is that you really should not need an editor. If you know what you are doing, what it is what you are hoping to achieve, and work towards that, the editing is in the creative act/process itself.
But yes, if you just point your camera at things in a random fashion, editing afterwards (i.e. trying to detect a possible link between, a consistency in, the things you have brought home) could be a good idea.
A better idea, however, would be to avoid that completely, and work deliberately.