I think it would be great to be able to post pictures for critique anonymously. As much as we all try to be objective, knowing the identity of the photographer often colours the way we critique.
Why not take potential 'name bias' and even gear and technique biases out of the equation? Let's judge images purely on merit. Can we set up an anonymous gallery where neither the posters name, camera data, nor technique is revealed? Jim is that a logistical possibility?
Of course all regular galleries would operate as they do and people are free to post anywhere, but if you want an image to be judged soley on its merit then the Anonymous gallery would be the place to post.... I find the idea hugely appealing. Count me in to critique and post there on a regular basis if it happens!
Darwin, I like the idea as well. However, there are those here who have developed a personal style and I may be able to guess who the photographer is. Certainly I would have my suspicions. It would also mean that links to websites and portfolios cannot be seen because they would be "dead giveaways". But I say let's go for it. I would frequent that gallery.
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
Posted by Tom Nevesely on October 28, 2008 at 6:08 PM
I think this would be a great tool and would really help EVERYONE improve their photography.
The person posting would receive comments that they know were genuine and the commenter's would be more inclined to say what they really think instead of only offering praise only because they feel that particular photographer is better than them.
> I think this would be a great tool and would really help EVERYONE improve their photography.
While I agree that this is quite interesting and perhaps people will comment more freely, I don't understand how it will necessarily help "me" improve my photography. Without knowing what I am trying to say/do with my photographs how can someone possibly leave comments that will be helpful to my growth as a photographer. If my direction is not aligned with the mainstream, should I just go join the pack because everyone seems to think that there are other (better) ways to photograph?
One of the major gripes I have with critique forums such as NPN (and the many others that are out there) is that the person(s) posting critiques don't seem to consider the goals/desires of the photographers who made the pictures. Instead, for the most part, folks are always telling about how they would have done things. We end up with a "collective style" (for the lack of a better term) which in my opinion is one sure way of killing individual creativity.
Best regards.
Posted by Kah Kit Yoong on October 28, 2008 at 6:20 PM
In the meantime I am happy to host any requests for anonymous postings. They do not need to be ESS either. Photographers may email me. If there is any text to accompany the photo I will put it up with the image. The photographer has the option of remaining anonymous throughout or may reveal their identity after the critiques have finished.
I don't want to know the name of the shooter, or the gear or even the technique used, but it would be great to hear the motivation behind the shot, or to hear described what the person was trying to do - then we can tell you if you succeed. The names of shooters and gear often get in the way of us judging stuff - but staing purpose is a good thing to judge art by.
Will,
My last few posts (except maybe 'haunted house') were different than my usual style so I doubt you would have recognized me as the photographer. The anonymous gallery would let us put up more personal work, experimental work, or artistic work to see how the crowd responds without bias or 'expectation's' of how someone's work 'should be'. I bet we would see lots of the regulars trying out new styles in the anonymous gallery.
Tom, I agree 100%
I also think an anonymous gallery would let many of the really good but overlooked shooters get solid and fair critiques on their images.
The anonymous galley would be a poor choice for those that want to 'build a name' for themselves among their peers - but the other galleries allow that benefit.
Kah Kit - that is really generous - I would be happy to do the same after Nov 11 if an anonymous gallery is not or can not be set up. I have a couple of workshops coming right away and will be away shootinguntil Nov 11).
Jim, if you can set up an anonymous gallery I would be happy to help moderate or be a regular critiquer or help in any way I can. I find the idea exciting. Darwin
Kah Kit - that is really generous - I would be happy to do the same after Nov 11 if an anonymous gallery is not or can not be set up. I have a couple of workshops coming right away and will be away shootinguntil Nov 11).
Jim, if you can set up an anonymous gallery I would be happy to help moderate or be a regular critiquer or help in any way I can. I find the idea exciting. Darwin
Posted by Toni Lankerd on October 28, 2008 at 7:08 PM
Darwin....We had "anonymous" postings for a short while (not a separate gallery, but in various galleries, posted by other members)...unfortunately, not enough people participated and it fell by the wayside. Members not only critiqued the images, but also tried to guess who the anonymous photographer was.
Posted by Peter Carroll on October 28, 2008 at 7:25 PM
Oh yeah! I support this idea BIG TIME.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on October 28, 2008 at 7:54 PM
I think a separate gallery could be done - I will look into it!
Posted by Eric Good on October 28, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Darwin,
A very intriguing idea with potentially many merits IMO. I wonder, would it be beneficial to have the comments and critiques anonymous as well? Anyhow, I'll be interested to see how this unfolds.
I like this idea a LOT. We've talked and talked over the years about how people look to see who the photographer is, rather than concentrating on the actual image itself. Just look at the number of views that certain, well-known photographers get. I honestly think that this would give photographers (as opposed to viewers who have no intention of leaving a comment) a chance to really LOOK at images and say what they think, rather than trying to justify what it is they think they OUGHT to say.
Go for it.
Posted by Phillip Noll on October 28, 2008 at 9:15 PM
I think this is an excellent idea. Knowing who the photographer is many times biases the critiques. I think people would be much more honest and forthright in their critiques if the photographer was unknown. I think Eric has a good idea too with the comments and critiques also being anonymous (if the poster chooses).
Perhaps when posting a photo the photographer can check the option of being revealed in 1 week or not being revealed at all. Likewise, the person posting comments could also click a check box indicating if they want their comments to be anonymous or not.
Sounds like an idea that's at least worth a pilot project for a month or so to see how it works (or doesn't).
Posted by Jim DeWitt on October 28, 2008 at 9:18 PM
So far as I know, I have never let the identity of the photographer color my comments. So a new forum wouldn't affect what I say.
I hang out mostly in Avian, and even as a beginner I can identify who the photographer is by the photo in many cases. Skilled photographers develop distinctive styles. In Avian, Lia, Nate, KC, Richard E. and many others have styles that are often recognizable. In addition, the species photographed often help ID the photographer. Not just the guys from Oz; some of my northern birds may make anonymity difficult. So I'm not persuaded it will be completely successful.
The premise is that anonymity might help if others have been coloring their opinions, and anonymity would make it stop. I'm not sure I buy it, but YMMV.
Posted by Darwin Wiggett on October 28, 2008 at 11:13 PM
Eric, I am not sure that comments should be anonymous - that could lead to 'drive-by' commenting. If your name is attached to a critique, you will be more careful to leave something thoughtful and constructive (I use 'you' in the inclusive sense of everybody here). Anonymity sometimes invites callousness. I think it might be dangerous to allow pure anonymous critique.
Jim D, it is awesome that you can keep your objectivity when making critiques. I try to as well to be objective by not reading what others have written about a photo for example. But I know I do critique 'advanced' shooters harder than I critique beginners. I firmly believe all pictures should be judged equally and an anonymous gallery will kill any unconcious biases that creep in - and I know I have some!
Sure we will often be able to guess who's shot is posted based on style but I bet just as often will be surprised by the author.
Darwin
Posted by Benjamin Glatt on October 28, 2008 at 11:26 PM
Why don't we have the photos remain anonymous during the first 'page' of the forum, and then once they enter 'page 2', the photographer's information and www link would appear. That would solve the problem of including websites, but still remain anonymous--I mean, no one really critiques images on the 2nd page anyways, so including the artist info wouldn't really bias too many comments.
I definitely don't like the idea of a separate 'Anonymous' gallery. The participation will never be as high as the ESS/M&N gallery. A separate 'anonymous' gallery would also allow the mixing of all types of images--this is something that I would not be interested in. I like the other galleries, but I primarily enjoy viewing ESS images.
I also think that comments should definitely remain tagged with the name of the who wrote it. Darwin, you touched on the possibility of 'drive-by' comments, but also, I definitely weigh the comments of Marc, or Guy's, for example, over other less well known and more novice amateur photographers.
Posted by Peter Carroll on October 28, 2008 at 11:30 PM
I totally agree that critiques and comments should NOT be anonymous. If you express an opinion you need to stand behind it.
Posted by Benjamin Glatt on October 28, 2008 at 11:33 PM
Well said, Peter. I concur!
Posted by Jesse Speer on October 29, 2008 at 2:53 AM
I absolutely love the premise, Darwin. In fact, you're saying what I've so often thought in the past - considering my experience here and with other online communities. Although I must say that I completely echo Anil's sentiments. In fact, those sentiments are what make me weary of most critique forums. So, I would selfishly love to see this type of new forum. Yet, I can see the proposed forum serving a variety of interests ... from possibly encouraging those who are timidly teetering on the edge of personal expression ... to engaging those who are simply looking for something different - where the art of photography can simply be shared, enjoyed and discussed in a stripped-down format. (Diversifying the appeal of NPN would obviously be a plus too.) Regardless, it would be refreshing to see something focused more on the essence of photography - rather than the technicals, the processing, the status, the expectations, the habits, etc.
I think it could work if the focus is clearly directed towards the more "experimental" and "alternative" and "not my typical style" type of imagery ... leaving the "mass appeal" images to the other successful critique forums. Not sure how you find a distinction there that doesn't kill the whole premise of a quasi "anti-establishment" forum. But I think the forum intent really has to be made clear, so people don't use this type of forum just for the sake of purely anonymous/timid posting ... or so that the forum doesn't duplicate Photo Art ... and so on. And I don't see a big problem arising with the muddying of subject matter. If someone wants to show an "experimental" avian photograph (a subject that usually doesn't interest me) - bring it on!
I agree with the consensus on the "anonymous" factor - and in a separate forum. It's what makes this whole idea worthwhile.
Anyway, there's my 33 cents. If you build it, I will certainly come.
Posted by Eric Good on October 29, 2008 at 3:01 AM
While I do think one might get a few more honest critiques with the ability to remain anonymous as a commenter, I can see the greater danger presented by potential "drive by" commenting as Darwin states. Then again, I'm not sure how much that changes the landscape from the current setup. If only everyone could be like Stan, man I enjoy his brutal honesty.
Cheers!
~Eric
Posted by Pedro Bento on October 29, 2008 at 6:37 AM
WOW Darwin, you read my mind ...I was thinking to propose the same today
IMO NPN is the most wonderful space on the web for a photographer show his work and receive feedback from other photographer. No doubt it's a great community, however everybody knows that some photographers receive much more comments and feedback that any others for their popularity. I saw same situations on ESS that a "popular author" receive much more comments in a poor photo that a great photo in the same page taken by a "less popular author". So this idea will improve situations like this one. This is a method used in other photo communities, members judge in a much more pure way the true potential of an image instead of the shadow of the name's author.
Posted by David Chauvin on October 29, 2008 at 7:04 AM
Great idea, Darwin! It seems that critique forums often lose sight of the fact that this is supposed to be about the images as presented and not about the photographer, the gear or degree of difficulty. I also believe that this will encourage some people to stretch beyond their comfort zone.
Having the poster remain anomynous is fine, but the commenters should be identified for the reason you stated.
Posted by Jay Patel on October 29, 2008 at 7:52 AM
I also support this idea. I have seen it many time on other site that there is way too much "hero worship" in landscape photography. Not only do well know photographer get more critiques, but the critiques also show bias toward "Great work" rather then getting an honest critique.
On the down side, I am not sure how successful the gallery will be. As someone already pointed out the participation may be limited. The best way to implement an anonymous gallery is to make is part of regular galleries.
<b>Here is a proposal</b>: When a photo is posted on the first page of the gallery it remains anonymous with just the title of the photograph appearing. All other links are stripped out. When a photograph drops down to the second page, replace it with regular links as we have always done.
Thoughts? Comments?
Posted by Wayne Rhodus on October 29, 2008 at 9:45 AM
Darwin, this is an idea I have hoped would be put in place for some time now. I've often wondered if I took a shot and had another more prominent photographer post it under their name would the comment and view ratios go up significantly. It would almost certainly eliminate the "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" mentality.
Posted by Jim Jirka on October 29, 2008 at 10:52 AM
There was anonymous postings awhile back. It worked for a while then went by the wayside. It seems the different, non mainstream images just receive a handful of comments, which really would not provide the honest feedback you desire.
Posted by Varina Patel on October 29, 2008 at 11:03 AM
I think this is a fantastic idea. I'd be happy to help out too. I can offer my services as moderator if it's helpful. I will certainly post my images in the gallery - and offer critiques as well.
Posted by William Vrolyk on October 29, 2008 at 11:12 AM
Darwin, what would the theme of this Anonymous Gallery be? We have avian, nature with and nature without hand of man, close ups, floral, fauna, and photo art. Could the Anomymous Gallery accommodate all these interests? Of course there is only one way to find out.
It is going to take some adjustment not to put your name behind the photo. We would still be recognized for outstanding work; only noone will know who that person is.
And I sure hope I do not forget and accidentally type in...
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
Posted by Stan Rose on October 29, 2008 at 2:26 PM
If only everyone could be like Stan, man I enjoy his brutal honesty.
funny, i never thought Stan Burman was that brutal
Anyhow, i like the idea in general, though i have some reservations. My biggest goal as a photographer is to develop a recognizable style, so an anonymous post might be at cross-purposes there. I think Benjamin's (echoed by Jay) idea is a bit more appealing. However it's done, it's worth a test i think.
I approve the idea. It's definitely worth a try. I can help out as a moderator or any other way that I can. I will love to post in such a gallery too - I don't think that I have any style and anyone can recognize me by my photo - I am just a random shooter, so will be great for me
Posted by Frank Winters on October 29, 2008 at 6:15 PM
Excellent idea, Darwin.
When we post technical data along with our names people sometimes make conclusions -- such as handheld = soft, big expensive camera = good, point and shoot = can't be that great, photographer X = brilliant, Y = ordinary.
But in fact these assumptions and others are often incorrect -- so I hope we see this feature here soon.
In a perfect world all the galleries should be entered anonymously and critiques should be made without knowing who took the image. What about making all images in the critique galleries anonymous and the author of the critiques known.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on October 29, 2008 at 8:00 PM
I can approach this from one of two ways:
1. A separate gallery for all types of nature photography (Avian, ESS, etc.). The original poster would have their name, avatar, signature field and icons left out of the post to conceal their identity.
2. A check-box option to post anonymously in any gallery. This would not require a separate gallery.
In both cases, I feel it's important that those leaving comments have thier identities known.
Posted by David Bostedo on October 29, 2008 at 8:00 PM
The only argument against that Patricia, is that not using names makes the site a little less community oriented and a little more formal I think. People like (ok, maybe it's just me, but I doubt it) to visit posts from their favorites on here, and have a chance to comment on things personally, particularly if they actually know the person. While I like the idea of some anonymous posting (as we've tried before), doing all posts like that doesn't sound so great to me. Remember, getting honest critiques isn't the sole goal of this site.
Hi Jim, I prefer option 1 - a separate gallery covering all topics for several reasons:
1. It will be a single gallery with a mixed variety of images which is great. I know some people just visit ESS or just Avian etc. I think it helps us all grow to see different types of photography than we normally view and to critique such work.
2. Chances are better that the gallery will fly if it has its own status - this makes a level playing field for everyone in that gallery - this is the most fair approach. Posting anonymously in a single gallery like ESS with 'profile' photographers also posting likely means the anonymous picture will get little attention - so we gain little.
3. It seems anonymous posting was tried in the past in individual galleries without much success. I think people really like the 'community' of their favorite galleries and so I say don't mess with that model. I often like looking at my favorite photographers' work and will visit individual galleries to comment. But the anonymous gallery would be a place I visit for very different reasons.
Excellent proposal and one that's been sitting in the back of my head.
Option 2, Jim.
I don't see a separate gallery drawing as much traffic or as many critiques, and it eliminates the sorting of subject matter. We already see those issues with the Weekly Challenge gallery. Integrating anonymous images into the existing structure just seems better all around for encouraging participation.
Posted by Steve Foss on October 29, 2008 at 9:10 PM
Darwin, full marks!
Jim, I'm for option 1.
Everyone else: Geez, quit quibbling!
Posted by David Bostedo on October 29, 2008 at 9:22 PM
I'm all option 1. Perhaps we could resurrect something that was done in the past, which I think was only one image post per week (for everyone, not for each person). Maybe limiting it somehow (1 or 2 per week per gallery category?) will create more interest - like wanting to see what this week's anonymous posts are.
Posted by Toni Lankerd on October 29, 2008 at 9:48 PM
My vote goes for option 1 for the reasons Darwin stated. It's already been tried the other way and that didn't seem to work out very well.
Posted by Bill Fach on October 29, 2008 at 10:40 PM
Option 1 for exactly the reasons Darwin proposed. I think a gallery with disparate images will have significant appeal. I don't shoot birds much and rarely post or comment in Avian but when I do go snooping there I find it stimulating. Having the entire spectrum of images in one anonymous place sounds terrific to me. When we tried a variant of this in the past it was kind of a gimmick and did peter out. I think a dedicated gallery will be surprisingly well covered. >=))>
Posted by Nate Chappell on October 30, 2008 at 1:43 AM
I vote for option 1 also and I think its a neat idea.
I vote for #2 too.
the principal idea is fine, but all categories in one gallery will lead to 10000000000 posts a day with an average of 3,6 comments and it will be hard to catch up on images before they will be on page 3...
the overload on images is a problem for me right now but is unavoidable, of course.
to look after all of 'em (meaning just pop them up) and even leave more or less useful comments, will be too time consuming.
just my 2 (euro-) cents...
georg
Posted by Pedro Bento on October 30, 2008 at 6:14 AM
I think JAY PATEL idea it's the better. I think all photos must be anonymous in all galleries on the 1st page, when the photo drops to the 2nd page every info will be displayed. If you will create another anonymous galery I think the submissions and participation will be to limited. And this method could be in experimentation for a period of 2 months, for example. If it doesn't work, just go back to the present method!
Posted by Jay Patel on October 30, 2008 at 8:10 AM
The problem with a separate gallery is that a photographer has to make a choice: Weather to put the photo in anonymous gallery or to put it in general gallery. If there is a single gallery, this will not be an issue.
Just my 2c...Thanks.
-Jay
Posted by Jim Erhardt on October 30, 2008 at 8:27 AM
It appears the majority are in favor of being able post anonymously but there does not appear to be a consensus on how to do so. From a technical implementation standpoint I believe option 1 works better - I will discuss with David today to get his input.
BTW, a little know fact - you can sort a mixed gallery quite easily. Go to the All Photos gallery from the header menu and "copy and paste" any gallery name in the search box (Avian, Weekly Challenge, etc.) - it will sort the photos by the gallery they were placed in.
I also like the idea of 1 post a week per member - this will help prevent the overload Georg points out.
Let's give it a try and see how it goes. The nice thing about the custom scripting we use is that we can make any changes we want, so future changes are not difficult to make.
Thanks Jim for giving it a try. I wonder if the gallery will be as popular as Georg thinks or if it will be less overwhelmed with pictures. I might be tempted to allow 2 postings per week at the beginning to see how things progress. If it gets to big and popular cut it back to one posting. If it is slow to catch on we can allow regular 48 hour postings. I am pretty sure the majority of posting will still be through the regular gallery route. Darwin
Posted by Tom Nevesely on October 30, 2008 at 10:06 AM
Thanks Jim! I'm really excited about this.
Posted by David Bostedo on October 30, 2008 at 1:31 PM
I think having a time limit for the post to be anonymous would be better than the "second page" thing, since that's dependent on the amount of posting. One week or two weeks would make sense to me, after which time it would no longer be anonymous.
Posted by Larry Puckett on October 30, 2008 at 7:35 PM
I like option 1 also.
I haven't read all of the posts here (too many) but I think that some folks who might be reluctant to post their work now might be less reluctant if they can do it anonymously. The idea of anonymous reviews is important in the scientific community and many journals have a double blind review system where both the authors and reviewers names are not provided. However in this case it is good to know who is making the review comments since I'm sure that a comment by Richard B. or Darwin would carry a lot more weight than that of a total unknown photographer--Larry
Hi,
I think it's great that you have a good idea and the support to go with it. I had suggested a very similar idea years ago but it didn't get much support. So, I thought I'd try a work - around. The problem withthe first time was that people had to agree to give up a posting of their own in order to host another. Once someone balked at their responsibility the whole process stopped for awhile. So, I think you have a good idea and it needs a home gallery, in my opinion. Nice to see times change . Tim
Posted by Jim Erhardt on November 5, 2008 at 6:10 AM
The new Anonymous Gallery will be online today!
The way it works - when you post a photo in any gallery, there will be a check box option to post the photo anonymously. When the box is selected, the photo will only appear in the Anonymous Gallery with the name, avatar, signature fields and icons removed.
You will also have the option to use the edit link (next to the thumbnail) and uncheck the box. When you do so, the photo will be removed from the Anonymous Gallery and appear in the gallery you originally posted it in, complete with your avatar, sig field, etc.
We should have this up and running this evening.
Posted by Tom Nevesely on November 5, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Discussion
54 repliesWhy not take potential 'name bias' and even gear and technique biases out of the equation? Let's judge images purely on merit. Can we set up an anonymous gallery where neither the posters name, camera data, nor technique is revealed? Jim is that a logistical possibility?
Of course all regular galleries would operate as they do and people are free to post anywhere, but if you want an image to be judged soley on its merit then the Anonymous gallery would be the place to post.... I find the idea hugely appealing. Count me in to critique and post there on a regular basis if it happens!
Thoughts? Pros? Cons?
Darwin
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
The person posting would receive comments that they know were genuine and the commenter's would be more inclined to say what they really think instead of only offering praise only because they feel that particular photographer is better than them.
While I agree that this is quite interesting and perhaps people will comment more freely, I don't understand how it will necessarily help "me" improve my photography. Without knowing what I am trying to say/do with my photographs how can someone possibly leave comments that will be helpful to my growth as a photographer. If my direction is not aligned with the mainstream, should I just go join the pack because everyone seems to think that there are other (better) ways to photograph?
One of the major gripes I have with critique forums such as NPN (and the many others that are out there) is that the person(s) posting critiques don't seem to consider the goals/desires of the photographers who made the pictures. Instead, for the most part, folks are always telling about how they would have done things. We end up with a "collective style" (for the lack of a better term) which in my opinion is one sure way of killing individual creativity.
Best regards.
I don't want to know the name of the shooter, or the gear or even the technique used, but it would be great to hear the motivation behind the shot, or to hear described what the person was trying to do - then we can tell you if you succeed. The names of shooters and gear often get in the way of us judging stuff - but staing purpose is a good thing to judge art by.
Will,
My last few posts (except maybe 'haunted house') were different than my usual style so I doubt you would have recognized me as the photographer. The anonymous gallery would let us put up more personal work, experimental work, or artistic work to see how the crowd responds without bias or 'expectation's' of how someone's work 'should be'. I bet we would see lots of the regulars trying out new styles in the anonymous gallery.
Tom, I agree 100%
I also think an anonymous gallery would let many of the really good but overlooked shooters get solid and fair critiques on their images.
The anonymous galley would be a poor choice for those that want to 'build a name' for themselves among their peers - but the other galleries allow that benefit.
Darwin
Jim, if you can set up an anonymous gallery I would be happy to help moderate or be a regular critiquer or help in any way I can. I find the idea exciting. Darwin
Jim, if you can set up an anonymous gallery I would be happy to help moderate or be a regular critiquer or help in any way I can. I find the idea exciting. Darwin
A very intriguing idea with potentially many merits IMO. I wonder, would it be beneficial to have the comments and critiques anonymous as well? Anyhow, I'll be interested to see how this unfolds.
~Eric
Go for it.
Perhaps when posting a photo the photographer can check the option of being revealed in 1 week or not being revealed at all. Likewise, the person posting comments could also click a check box indicating if they want their comments to be anonymous or not.
Sounds like an idea that's at least worth a pilot project for a month or so to see how it works (or doesn't).
I hang out mostly in Avian, and even as a beginner I can identify who the photographer is by the photo in many cases. Skilled photographers develop distinctive styles. In Avian, Lia, Nate, KC, Richard E. and many others have styles that are often recognizable. In addition, the species photographed often help ID the photographer. Not just the guys from Oz; some of my northern birds may make anonymity difficult. So I'm not persuaded it will be completely successful.
The premise is that anonymity might help if others have been coloring their opinions, and anonymity would make it stop. I'm not sure I buy it, but YMMV.
Jim D, it is awesome that you can keep your objectivity when making critiques. I try to as well to be objective by not reading what others have written about a photo for example. But I know I do critique 'advanced' shooters harder than I critique beginners. I firmly believe all pictures should be judged equally and an anonymous gallery will kill any unconcious biases that creep in - and I know I have some!
Sure we will often be able to guess who's shot is posted based on style but I bet just as often will be surprised by the author.
Darwin
I definitely don't like the idea of a separate 'Anonymous' gallery. The participation will never be as high as the ESS/M&N gallery. A separate 'anonymous' gallery would also allow the mixing of all types of images--this is something that I would not be interested in. I like the other galleries, but I primarily enjoy viewing ESS images.
I also think that comments should definitely remain tagged with the name of the who wrote it. Darwin, you touched on the possibility of 'drive-by' comments, but also, I definitely weigh the comments of Marc, or Guy's, for example, over other less well known and more novice amateur photographers.
I think it could work if the focus is clearly directed towards the more "experimental" and "alternative" and "not my typical style" type of imagery ... leaving the "mass appeal" images to the other successful critique forums. Not sure how you find a distinction there that doesn't kill the whole premise of a quasi "anti-establishment" forum. But I think the forum intent really has to be made clear, so people don't use this type of forum just for the sake of purely anonymous/timid posting ... or so that the forum doesn't duplicate Photo Art ... and so on. And I don't see a big problem arising with the muddying of subject matter. If someone wants to show an "experimental" avian photograph (a subject that usually doesn't interest me) - bring it on!
I agree with the consensus on the "anonymous" factor - and in a separate forum. It's what makes this whole idea worthwhile.
Anyway, there's my 33 cents. If you build it, I will certainly come.
Cheers!
~Eric
IMO NPN is the most wonderful space on the web for a photographer show his work and receive feedback from other photographer. No doubt it's a great community, however everybody knows that some photographers receive much more comments and feedback that any others for their popularity. I saw same situations on ESS that a "popular author" receive much more comments in a poor photo that a great photo in the same page taken by a "less popular author". So this idea will improve situations like this one. This is a method used in other photo communities, members judge in a much more pure way the true potential of an image instead of the shadow of the name's author.
Having the poster remain anomynous is fine, but the commenters should be identified for the reason you stated.
On the down side, I am not sure how successful the gallery will be. As someone already pointed out the participation may be limited. The best way to implement an anonymous gallery is to make is part of regular galleries.
<b>Here is a proposal</b>: When a photo is posted on the first page of the gallery it remains anonymous with just the title of the photograph appearing. All other links are stripped out. When a photograph drops down to the second page, replace it with regular links as we have always done.
Thoughts? Comments?
Varina Patel
www.photographybyvarina.com
My Blog
It is going to take some adjustment not to put your name behind the photo. We would still be recognized for outstanding work; only noone will know who that person is.
And I sure hope I do not forget and accidentally type in...
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
funny, i never thought Stan Burman was that brutal
Anyhow, i like the idea in general, though i have some reservations. My biggest goal as a photographer is to develop a recognizable style, so an anonymous post might be at cross-purposes there. I think Benjamin's (echoed by Jay) idea is a bit more appealing. However it's done, it's worth a test i think.
When we post technical data along with our names people sometimes make conclusions -- such as handheld = soft, big expensive camera = good, point and shoot = can't be that great, photographer X = brilliant, Y = ordinary.
But in fact these assumptions and others are often incorrect -- so I hope we see this feature here soon.
1. A separate gallery for all types of nature photography (Avian, ESS, etc.). The original poster would have their name, avatar, signature field and icons left out of the post to conceal their identity.
2. A check-box option to post anonymously in any gallery. This would not require a separate gallery.
In both cases, I feel it's important that those leaving comments have thier identities known.
1. It will be a single gallery with a mixed variety of images which is great. I know some people just visit ESS or just Avian etc. I think it helps us all grow to see different types of photography than we normally view and to critique such work.
2. Chances are better that the gallery will fly if it has its own status - this makes a level playing field for everyone in that gallery - this is the most fair approach. Posting anonymously in a single gallery like ESS with 'profile' photographers also posting likely means the anonymous picture will get little attention - so we gain little.
3. It seems anonymous posting was tried in the past in individual galleries without much success. I think people really like the 'community' of their favorite galleries and so I say don't mess with that model. I often like looking at my favorite photographers' work and will visit individual galleries to comment. But the anonymous gallery would be a place I visit for very different reasons.
Darwin
Option 2, Jim.
I don't see a separate gallery drawing as much traffic or as many critiques, and it eliminates the sorting of subject matter. We already see those issues with the Weekly Challenge gallery. Integrating anonymous images into the existing structure just seems better all around for encouraging participation.
Jim, I'm for option 1.
Everyone else: Geez, quit quibbling!
the principal idea is fine, but all categories in one gallery will lead to 10000000000 posts a day with an average of 3,6 comments and it will be hard to catch up on images before they will be on page 3...
the overload on images is a problem for me right now but is unavoidable, of course.
to look after all of 'em (meaning just pop them up) and even leave more or less useful comments, will be too time consuming.
just my 2 (euro-) cents...
georg
Just my 2c...Thanks.
-Jay
BTW, a little know fact - you can sort a mixed gallery quite easily. Go to the All Photos gallery from the header menu and "copy and paste" any gallery name in the search box (Avian, Weekly Challenge, etc.) - it will sort the photos by the gallery they were placed in.
I also like the idea of 1 post a week per member - this will help prevent the overload Georg points out.
Let's give it a try and see how it goes. The nice thing about the custom scripting we use is that we can make any changes we want, so future changes are not difficult to make.
I haven't read all of the posts here (too many) but I think that some folks who might be reluctant to post their work now might be less reluctant if they can do it anonymously. The idea of anonymous reviews is important in the scientific community and many journals have a double blind review system where both the authors and reviewers names are not provided. However in this case it is good to know who is making the review comments since I'm sure that a comment by Richard B. or Darwin would carry a lot more weight than that of a total unknown photographer--Larry
I think it's great that you have a good idea and the support to go with it. I had suggested a very similar idea years ago but it didn't get much support. So, I thought I'd try a work - around. The problem withthe first time was that people had to agree to give up a posting of their own in order to host another. Once someone balked at their responsibility the whole process stopped for awhile. So, I think you have a good idea and it needs a home gallery, in my opinion. Nice to see times change .
Nice initiative
The way it works - when you post a photo in any gallery, there will be a check box option to post the photo anonymously. When the box is selected, the photo will only appear in the Anonymous Gallery with the name, avatar, signature fields and icons removed.
You will also have the option to use the edit link (next to the thumbnail) and uncheck the box. When you do so, the photo will be removed from the Anonymous Gallery and appear in the gallery you originally posted it in, complete with your avatar, sig field, etc.
We should have this up and running this evening.