General standards for critique are those used in Salon Photography which governs everything from high level competitions among professionals to the quality judgements related to photos that are accepted to high quality scenic, travel, or other specialty magazines and forums.
The efforts in creating these standards have been to go beyond personal opinion to a set of guidelines, or rules, that can be used in a more objective manner to judge artistic and photographic quality. Whether you like them or not, whether you think they are pompous or not, they are nevertheless fundamental to the nature of quality photography.
These guidelines or rules fall into two separate but integrated areas. Just as paint, brush, palette and canvas are the tools for some artists, the camera, lights, flash, tripod, lenses, are the tools of the photgrapher. The first area is technique and proper use of the tools of photography. The photographer has choices related to the use of certain camera functions and accessories to make a high quality photo and the first major rule is that all those choices MUST contribute to the quality of the photo. If they do not,...as in fuzzy focus, poor lighting, loss of detail, wrong shutterspeed,....in effect mistakes or bad choices, then the photographer has a lot to learn and should get back to studying his camera. In the world of professional competition there is no sympathy. Come back when you have done your homework and paid your "dues" so to speak through hard work, effort and dedication.
The elements of design or composition from the artistic field are used in judging the artistic value of photos. There is some science involved here in the sense of how the eye moves through a photo, what attracts it, the effect of colour, texture, shape, line, contrast etc., and a study of photos that almost everyone would judge as top quality, artistic works.
It is easy to get a list of these judging criteria from major competitions in photography or even find them in some art curricula or books on design, fine art and photography.
The major one is a strong centre of interest that immediately attracts the eye, communicates something to the viewer, and every other aspect of the photo from technical to artistic details contributes to the strength and power of the centre of interest and what it communicates to the viewer. As I remember the sphinx and the jet was extremely effective in that regard and what was interesting was that there was TOTAL agreement from all the postings.
Now, some people like to praise all photos. They are definitely not helping anyone and even more negatively, encouraging mediocre photography. Those perpetual praisers may be nice people but they desperately need to do their research on what constitutes a quality photo. Take a course, buy books, join a photography club, but d**** it, take the time to really learn something about critiquing photos, and what constitutes quality work.
Stop the silly excuses and the "shirtyness" to borrow a term from one of the moderators.
Ronnoco