# Photo Analysis

Participants review the same detailed photograph under two slightly different prompts, one asking for all items and the other for interesting items. Comparing list lengths demonstrates how early evaluation restricts baseline observation.

**Time:** 10 minutes. Based on the 10-minute workshop exercise described in Thiagi GameLetter (December 2008).
**People:** 6 to 24. Individual observation followed by plenary tally and debrief.

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Demonstrate through list comparison how evaluative criteria narrow sensory observation and data collection.
**Use it when:** Use when kicking off units on critical thinking, field inspection, problem investigation, or root cause analysis where jumping to judgment hinders thorough fact gathering.
**Skip it when:** Skip when the session goal is rapid filtering, curation, or subjective taste evaluation rather than objective observation.

## Materials and tools

- One complex photograph handout per participant, half printed with Instruction A and half with Instruction B
- One blank sheet of scratch paper per participant
- One pen or pencil per participant

## Before participants arrive

1. Select a detailed, busy scene (such as a crowded open-air market or street scene).
2. Print copies of the scene on two distinct sheets: Version A heading says 'List things that you see', Version B heading says 'List interesting things that you see'.
3. Collate the handouts alternating A and B so distribution naturally splits the room.

## Say this to open

I am distributing a photograph face down along with scratch paper. Please do not turn the sheet over until I say start. Once we begin, read your written prompt carefully and follow it silently on your scratch paper.

## How to run it

### 1. Distribute handouts and clarify rules (2 minutes)

Hand out the collated sheets face down. Ask everyone to have scratch paper and a pen ready. Instruct participants to read the prompt on top of their photo silently without conferring.

### 2. Observe and record (3 minutes)

Start a 2-minute silent writing period. Tell participants to examine the image and write down items according to their assigned prompt. Stop the writing promptly at the 2-minute mark.

### 3. Count items and compare lists (2 minutes)

Ask everyone to count the total distinct items on their list. Call out list counts to identify the roughly five highest totals and five lowest totals in the room. Reveal that two different instructions were handed out. Ask the high-count group which prompt they had, then ask the low-count group.

### 4. Debrief the impact of judgment (3 minutes)

Facilitate a short discussion connecting the difference in item counts to how subjective judgment filters attention. Highlight that deciding what is 'interesting' slows recording and filters out baseline facts.


## Debrief questions

- How did the word 'interesting' change the mental filter you applied before writing an item down?
- In what workplace situations does premature evaluation cause teams to miss vital facts?
- What simple practice can keep initial data collection separate from interpretation?

**Finished output:** A shared count comparison demonstrating the filtering effect of judgment, with private individual lists retained by participants.

## Remote

Send individual private direct messages or split breakout links with the specific prompt (Version A: 'List things you see'; Version B: 'List interesting things you see') along with an identical digital image file. Run the 2-minute timer with cameras on and mics muted. Have everyone type their final numerical count into the chat box simultaneously before revealing the two conditions.

## Hybrid

Distribute physical sheets to in-person participants and private digital links to remote participants ensuring balanced prompt assignment across both cohorts. Collect item count numbers in a shared digital chat or whiteboard so in-person and remote participants compare results together.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may type, write, or mentally tally items.
- Providing an image with strong contrast and clear focus supports visual review.
- Anyone may choose not to read their list aloud and simply report their count, or pass entirely.

## If the session gets stuck

**A participant with the 'interesting' prompt generates a very long list because they find everything interesting.**

Acknowledge the outlier as natural variation, then focus on the group median and the five lowest totals, where the filter effect consistently appears.

**Participants compare sheets during the exercise and notice the instruction difference too early.**

Emphasize absolute silence and solitary work during the 2-minute observation period to prevent early comparison.


## Terms used here

- Graphics Game: An interactive training exercise built around creating, analyzing, or interpreting visual media.

## Participant material: Photo Analysis Handout Instructions

Version A Prompt:
'Carefully study the photograph below. On a separate sheet of paper, write down a list of things that you see in the photograph.'

Version B Prompt:
'Carefully study the photograph below. On a separate sheet of paper, write down a list of interesting things that you see in the photograph.'

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in Thiagi GameLetter (December 2008), which presents 'Photo Analysis' as a graphics training game facilitated by Sue Malone.

Retained the exact core mechanic, prompt wording, split-run conditions, and debrief principle from the 'Photo Analysis' game in Thiagi GameLetter (December 2008). Added explicit timekeeping, hybrid/remote adaptations, and standard facilitator management scripts.

[The Thiagi Group](https://thiagi.net/archive/www/pfp/IE4H/december2008.html)

[The Thiagi Group](http://thiagi.net/archive/www/pfp/IE4H/december2008.html)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/tgl-december-2008/