How do you judge the success of an Image?
Or what makes for a great shot and not a snapshot?
To quote: "I am afraid that most people subscribing to this forum believe that the more comments an image receives, the more successful or popular an image is"
We all crave recognition and praise there is little doubt else we wouldn't post here at all.
It is interesting to observe commenting behavior with some images garnering 30+ comments and others struggling to get to 5.
What is it that motivates you to comment? Are we sheeple commenting where others have before? Perhaps hoping the the greatness will rub off?
Would the image do so well if the author was not so well know? The popularity of the Anonymous gallery demonstrates that we set store by knowing who the author is.
So is the Image with 30 comments 6x better than the one with 5?
Posted by Dan Borzynski on April 11, 2009 at 6:13 PM
At least for me, the success of an image is one that I want to come back and look at again. Is there an emotional attachment to the subject or, in other words, do I want to be there and see that.
This probably doesn't really answer your question, since it is pretty tough to otherwise quantify. What works for one image may not work for another image. Take composition, for example. A rather high percentage of images don't work quite as well if the primary subject is dead center. But on occasion, an image comes through that would be tough to imagine being composed otherwise. The same applies to pretty much any other specific case you can think of.
So what makes me comment? As a general rule, I try to comment on the images of new people and those images which I opened specifically because of the thumbnail. I'd like to comment on more images, but I could spend all day here and not do anything else of imaprotance (like the job search or even shoot). Also, does the person ask a specific question? Sometimes that helps to direct a comment, especially if it is a technically and artistically well done image.
There are also a few people whose images I generally won't comment on. Guy Tal and Marc Adamus' images come to mind, simply because they very rarely leave anything useful for me to say. Their images speak for themselves. Adding another "wow" or just doesn't seem to do justice.
I think part of the problem with the 30+ comment assessment of an image comes from the crowd here. A rather high percentage of us are very experienced and capable photographers and we have adopted very high standards for both our personal work and for what truly impresses us. When the rare photo comes through that generates 30+ comments, it has gone far beyond what are personal standards are. I think the quote
"I am afraid that most people subscribing to this forum believe that the more comments an image receives, the more successful or popular an image is"
is a muddled interpretation of the response or worth of the photo. An image that is truly successful artistically will generate more comments - which brings me back to my opening: I comment on an image because I formed a connection with the image.
Posted by Jim Bullard on April 11, 2009 at 6:41 PM
Success depends on what you set out to do. Are you primarily creating for yourself and then sharing it or are you trying to impress others? If I get an image that looks like I want it to, it is a success for me. What I find intriguing about the views is which thumbnails inspire visitors to click on them. The one in my portfolio that has (so far) garnered the most views in not one of the ones I would have expected would get the most attention. OTOH some images which have received praise in full sized prints haven't been viewed at all so far. So now I'm trying to figure out what prompts people to click on a thumbnail. Is it an image which is sufficiently complex that the thumbnail is mysterious and people have to see the larger version to figure out what it is? Does the title you give enter into it?
As someone who sells at craft & art fairs I'm always interested in figuring out what grabs folks attention so I can put that up front. While I am my own judge of which images are successful, $$$ from sales are what allow me to keep doing it so in that sense what gets people to look is important.
Posted by Richard Wong on April 11, 2009 at 7:02 PM
If it cost me $1500 of travel expenses and three days of time to get a good photo that gets 25 comments on NPN but never sells is that success? My checking account wouldn't think so and neither would the IRS. Successful by NPN standards sure.
On the other end of the spectrum if a grab shot on the way to dinner brings in $800 in licensing fees, is that a successful image?
Both of those success metrics bring a certain degree of pleasure to me. If I had to pick one, I would opt for the sales though because that would allow me to travel more which is my top priority.
Well, seeing as how I was the one you quoted, I guess I will weigh in on the subject...
Success is an inherently subjective term, open to unlimited interpretations. Ultimately, it is the photographer that chooses his/her own definition of success. If my sole purpose is to sell an image, and it has not sold after 6-months of intensive advertising and marketing, than the photo is unsuccessful (or I am advertising in the wrong market). If my sole purpose is to connect with nature and take pictures as a form of meditation, than any photo I take can be interpreted as a success.
But I do believe that images garnering more comments are the ones that please the crowd. However I think that an interesting dichotomy arises when we accept this logic--because I have seen some images that gain 30+ comments, and I truly believe that not a lot of people would buy it..
"But I do believe that images garnering more comments are the ones that please the crowd. However I think that an interesting dichotomy arises when we accept this logic--because I have seen some images that gain 30+ comments, and I truly believe that not a lot of people would buy it.. "
Yet you are confusing markets. I market to fine art crowds/prints sales, so I'm not thinking licensing here. The community here is photographers, who don't buy prints often. They come to your booth and talk shop for hours if you let them. So what works here and garners comments may never sell. Many times it is what matches the drapes. The art buyer doesn't care if the corners could be sharper, if there is a little noise in the shadows. If they feel a connection, that's what motivates the sell(and the colors are right).
I post here for myself. To improve my craft and because I want to "show" what I have been up to. I feel a part of this community and I also love seeing what others are getting into. So yes I am very happy when something garners a lot of comments here, but I may not put that image front and center at the next show. If I was independently rich, I would sell my prints for cheap, just for the satisfaction that someone wanted to hang it on their wall. For me, success is enjoying the experience, a keeper shot is a bonus, and selling it is fantastic. That may change as I lean more and more on my photo income.
Posted by Greg Maklae on April 12, 2009 at 9:47 AM
I judge the success of an image if it stirs my emotions, and draws me back there mentally, when I cannot be there physically. If it portrays what I want, it is a success, regardless of others thoughts. One of my most stirring photos, was the field my wife crossed, escaping from Hungary in 1957. Technically, it was a C grade at best, the lighting was wrong, there was no one subject to draw the eye to, but emotionally it is an A+, hence for me it was a great photo.
A snap shot is were you jump out of you car, or maybe just slow down, click the cell phone, because everyone else is and drive off. A week later you have no clue what is was, or why you shot it, but say since everyone else was doing it, it must be good.
What draws me to open and comment on a photo? If the subject matter is something I can relate to, or if it from a location I am familiar with. I find it strange how some photos can get 300 viewings and a 100 or more comments an hour after posting, and others remain untouched. If there was no name attached to it, would this be the case? Probably not. Is it so much better than Average Joe's. If you think it is always the case, you may be fooling yourself into thinking you are more important than you actually are.
I have only posted a few, so my two cents, might not mean much:
I comment on images that have a title that attracts my attention. I comment on my own likes or dislikes of that persons image. Not how many have gone before me.
I post because "I" think I have a great image. But, I'm blinded by my own bias. The comments are a way of showing if I'm headed in the right direction. To me success is not how many comments, but how honest they are!
A great site with great photographers. That why I joined!!!
Posted by Sally King on April 12, 2009 at 11:13 AM
I have only been a member of this site for about 6 months. I don't know that how many comments a photo gets indicates its success. I think there are a lot of things that determine whether an image gets a lot of looks/comments or not, including when posted, what gallery it is posted in, the title, the thumbnail and whether it pops enough to make people want to take a closer look, and how many comments the image already has. I know I try to comment on images that don't have many comments (it is tough to keep posting if no one ever looks at or comments on your images), images from people that have been kind enough to regularly comment on mine, images that have great titles, images that intrigue me in the thumbnail, etc. If I have time, I will go through and comment on as many images as I can.
In return, the comments I appreciate the most on my images contain constructive critisism or praise. Even if I really like how my image looks as posted, I will attempt the changes that have been suggested to see if I think the result is better. That is the great thing about digital. I can make all those changes and if in the end I like my original better then I can still use that one. In the end, I want my photos to be better, but since I don't sell them, I am still the one that has to be pleased with the end result.
Posted by Colin Smale on April 12, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Getting the right image on would be a good start. Have you noticed, if you have been out all day, week, month trying to get a decent shot of some critter and you finish up with what you feel are, let's say 6 'keepers' the very one out of the six that you think is the best, rarely is.
It is uncanny how many times I have shown several shots to photo friends and they always pick the same one which is never the one I like best, that happened to you ?
When I look on here I usually get hooked by an interesting looking thumbnail, I never look to see how many comments it has made, too hungry to find the next intersting shot. I am finding I don't comment so much nowadays and if I am developing a downer on some pix it is those who look after the whites so much, the rest of the pic looks way too dark.
Interesting question. I try to comment on images where I have some reaction to the image and/or the subject. Also I try to offer some constructive criticism and suggestions for how to improve if I can, realizing of course that this is mostly subjective. I'm also happy to add a Wow or a when I have that reaction to an image: don't know many people who don't enjoy getting some praise when they've done something well.
Often in the Avian gallery where I 'hang out' the sheer volume of images posted is so high that I simply can't keep up and I often don't have time or stamina to even look at every posting, so the thumbnail becomes a determinant of whether or not I open the image to peruse further. Popularity of a sort also comes into it I guess. When certain people with whom I've been trading comments for years post I make an effort to look and comment. And I also note that there are some folks who post their images and never or very rarely comment on anyone else's. IMO it seems those folks are not to making an effort to contribute to this online community so they go to the bottom of the list for me to expend effort on.
As to why I post the reasons vary. Sometimes I have an image that appeals to me for some reason that I want to share. Other times I have a specific question about the subject, the photography or the post processing and I find other members offer useful information here that helps me to improve. Being able to repost in the same thread with the suggestions incorporated has proven to be a very helpful feature on NPN. Those online conversations can be really worthwhile.
The actual measure of the success of an image is pretty intangible to me. If success is measured in numbers of comments, a question posed with the posting will often start a conversation and increase the number of comments: is that success? Or maybe being the Weekly Pick, or selling an image or having favorable comments from photographers whose work you admire or just feeling satisfied that you've done the best you could do at this point? It all depends how you define success. For me the definition changes from image to image so ultimately success of my images is defined by me.
Posted by Gary Crabbe on April 12, 2009 at 1:50 PM
I judge the success of an image based on an emotional connection drawn between the viewer and the photo, and the clarity by which the story of the image is being communicated. Although I haven't posted much here in awhile, I like to use NPN on some of my on-the-fence images, to see if they resonate with impartial viewers. That could be images I really like, but not sure if other will, or images I'm a little "iffy" about, but that I think might have potential to resonate with a viewer. If the viewers here or anywhere respond positively, or are able to connect to the image, then that to me is success. If the clarity of the message is at all "off", or the viewers fail to make a strong connection to the image, then I feel that image is not as successful as it could be.
As for stock sales as Richard mentions, that's a totally different beast. In that case, a successful image is one that fits what the editor needs to go with a story, or a message in an ad, and doesn't need to be a perfect image. However, it does still need to clearly communicate a message or feeling.
In specific to the OP about success relative to comments, I think that in some cases popularity counts as an issue, but overall, I think that most people comment on the image they feel is the most successful at clearly conveying a scene or subject. Unfortunately, the photos that need the most constructive help or suggestions receive the fewest comments because they lack the clarity of subject to draw the viewer in from the thumbnail.
My 2 cents, rebates available in leftover Easter jellybeans.
Posted by Bill Brennan on April 12, 2009 at 8:58 PM
There are a number of factors that determine whether I will make a comment. Available time and emotional reaction to the image are the main factors. The maker is not a factor.
Bill Brennan
Posted by Lon Overacker on April 12, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Rodney,
I think for your question, "success" is probably best defined within the constraints of NPN. Outside of NPN, "success" takes on a different measure in terms of marketability, sales, etc.
Within NPN, I think success in large part is measured by the number of comments, but that's not the whole story. We must remember that we are a community of photographers; not photo buyers, art collectors or even the general public. We tend to be more critical of our own work - and others. And at the same time, we also can "connect" with so many images posted here, because we love nature and appreciate it when someone else can capture a beautiful moment.
I don't think I'm going out on a limb when I say that if you look at those images with "30" comments, they are almost always above, if not way above "average." They invoke an emotional response to the viewer. People's responses and comments usually reflect that.
But there are other factors. I've heard the terms a number of times here, "popularity contest," or the "good ole' boys club," etc. etc. I think we can be honest and say that this does exist to some extent here. It's human nature and will happen in any group setting over time and it's no different here than any other online photography forum. To be blunt, there are two choices. You can be part of the community by pariticipating, communicating with your fellow photographers, learning from your peers and helping them improve their photography. Or, you can sit on the sidelines, not participate and be disappointed you only get 5 comments. I won't name names, but I could point out numerous members who have jumped right in, participated and taken critiques to a point where their photography (and PS skills for that matter) have shown great improvement. They participate and embrace the community. And for those that have grown and learned, I would call that success.
If I look at my own "success" here on NPN, I consider 3 things. 1. I'm a moderator, 2. I comment on a lot of images (47:1) and 3. I think I post solid images. Honestly, I think #1 and #2 garner the bulk of the comments I get. I'm under no illusion that my images are better than anyone elses, but I'm happy and proud of them. I've made a number of friends here on NPN, both online and offline and yes, friends will make an effort to comment on each others work. If that's the "good ole boys club," then that's fine, I won't apologize for it. But I also take the time to comment on every single new member and seek out those posts that have very few comments. In turn, those folks may also comment on my images and thus, I get a higher number of comments. In the end, it all boils down to, what you put in, is what you get back. Maybe for some, that sounds arrogant. But I'm just trying to be honest.
For me, success should be measured on what you get out of NPN and how you feel about your own work. Most of us want to improve our photography and more than any number of comments one gets, the more you emerse yourself in to the process, the more you will improve and in the end, be more "successful."
I am primarily looking for images that have something to say. The more personal and unique, the higher I value them. Technical ability is far secondary to me although technical merit helps to get the point across.
I find that the thumbnail rarely indicates the value of an image and I look at every image on ESS. I find that I like images that don't get over 10 comments as much as those that get 30 comments. Images with a lot of comments seem to be established photographers that are targeted by the viewing public. Most are 'atta boy comments' and as such don't make interesting reading. There also appears to be a level of idolatry going on here. Images of marginal quality are sometimes praised which would not be the case with lesser known contributors.
Up until now I have not received any valuable feedback from viewers and am not looking for ways to make my images look better yet. My goal is to get a message across and hope that it clicks with the viewer: "aha, I know exactly what you mean and yes that is very special ". Similarly, my comments reflect how their image affects me primarily - a verbal conversation continuing what the image started. I realize that not everyone has this interest in mind and will give suggestions (crop here, darken there, etc. etc.).
I often comment on images that are least successful. It could be argued that most unsuccesful images should get the most comments as they are in the greatest need of suggestions. Yet these people are largely ignored. I am told that many of such images are from posters who really have little interest in becoming good photographers and therefore the effort is wasted. That could be true. I just don't know how you know.
It's a big subject. These are thoughts that have come to mind.
I wont be happy until i get at least 100 comments per image.
Seriously, it is a big subject, and ill just give you a few thoughts off the top of my head:
I comment on 1) Every WC post 2) the previous 5 images regardless whenever i post 3) people who i know personally or who ive developed an 'online' friendship with 4) any thumb that jumps out at me 5) posts with an unusually low number of comments (theyre more challenging to critique) 6) A few big names here. All this contributes to a very large number of comments (wish i had more time)
I make no apologies about #6. It's entirely selfish on my part. I feel id be a complete idiot if i didnt avail myself of the opportunity to comment/critique someone who either is or is on their way to being in a very elite group of the best photogs around. That gives me a better chance of learning from them. How many other hobbies/sports do you know where you have the opportunity to mingle with the very best on a daily basis? It's not "hoping" the greatness rubs off, it is knowing it rubs off! I wouldnt bother if i didnt see results!
As for success, i just got a nice payment from a zine for a photo i wouldnt have bothered posting on NPN, wasnt a fav of mine. So i wouldnt begin to start pronouncing what makes an image successful, i just know what i like and what i dont.
Just my few thoughts on the commenting ratio:
Lon said something about "rules" (he did not term it like that): Every community has its rules. If you follow the rules you also get something. Since the forums here are a means of communication, "putting in" communication will "get" you communication. That's very simple. And that's why some less good work will get a lot of comments. I can only speak for my self, but if I get more that 30 comments, I know it's not just because I comment often on other's work, but if I at least get 10 comments I know five of them I get cause I post often...and I fact I also then know the image is not going well. The same image by a person who does not comment often would have received just the 5 or even less.
Some images that should get more comments to help the photographer are also often the hardest to comment on because there's nothing that I can related to. It is usally easier for me to comment on a weaker shot when the photographer specifically asks for feedback.
My approach is: I post at least on the first two to five images when I post my own. I try to comment on my "buddies" images. I try to comment on the images I find noticable.I try to comment on images that receive very few comments. (in that order)
Posted by Larry Fischer on April 14, 2009 at 9:34 AM
Taking the time to comment is one issue. The content of the comment is another.
Plato in presenting the death of Socrates in "Phaedo" asked the question: "What makes the beautiful, beautiful?" The same could be asked in the judging of a photo.
The concept in Phado was there is an implanted concept of beauty, as well as other qualities, in humans. These include the concepts of "equal", "justice", and others. Plato stated that Socrates believed these were not learned but imprinted in the "spirit". They were also always compared to a nebulous "absolute" of which we have concept that such does exist but is unknowable for now, for always we say this is more or less beautiful than that. And always there is someone who disagrees.
Using that as an example, it does not make any difference who comments because there will always be lesser and greater in beauty.
Perhaps it is the attempt at beauty that is the race. Why? There is no finish line.
I'm kind of late to the boat here.. but this is an interesting topic, great reading people's responses.
Like everyone else, I comment on images that connect with me. They don't have to be perfect, in fact, if I can connect with a shot that needs a good critique that's the best, I learn a lot giving such a critique myself as well. Occasionally I won't be able to think of anything thoughtful to say, but really want to share my enthusiasm for an image, but generally I try to give solid critiques, either for what I like or would change (and generally a mix of both). And I will make a concerted effort to critique folks photos who give me a good critique, though it may take a few times before I recognize the name (striking avatars really help, as silly as that sounds). I think it is in no small part because of that effort that I find I receive a lot of thoughtful critiques. Sometimes I might post an image that was really special to me, and it might not be special to others, and it can hurt a little sometimes.. but in the end I really appreciate the honesty folks here put in their comments, it's why I keep coming back.
What I find most interesting, is seeing which of my images work for people, and why. Occasionally I'll get a shot I had no emotional connection with creating, don't really care about, but for some reason post anyways.. and then, suddenly that one becomes hugely popular. Why?! Sometimes I'm just confused as to what people like. I've had images I post here that no one really likes, but other people do. The question for me becomes, from a sales perspective, what images do you put on your website? I have a ton of photos on mine... I like all of them (though I could weed out a few older ones).. simply because I want to give people a choice. Now that's actually backfired, and people won't put in their order cus they can't choose! So am I better off just having a few images per category and hoping that I cover the interest base? Interesting to think about the psychology..
Interesting topic and replies. My random thoughts to add to the soup:
*Some of the best photos don't translate into great thumbs; this has to mean fewer viewers and thus fewer comments.
*I find that I'm more likely to comment on a photo if the photographer has started the conversation by explaining a bit about the shot's background. I wonder if images with a story get more comments in general on this site? I'm a psychologist by training, so I'm thinking along these lines here - the photographer engages the audience... or not.
*As a beginner photographer with comparatively VERY little technical knowledge, I find my comments are usually limited to the type of emotion a shot evokes in me, or a simple congratulatory note. It's all I can do, but it IS a sincere expression of my admiration.
I like the "Jim Bullard" comment best. And my own $0.02 is that I judge the success not by what other photographers think of my work. I already know the standards there are much higher than those I market my work to. I take the critiques I get from our fellow photographer friends here and I apply them to the next image I make, but I do not let the comments determine if I succeeded or not or if the image has market value or not.
I go to a local gallery and show newer images now and then to my friend who owns the gallery and he usually let's me know if his clients would buy it or not.
Also I have had images I thought were total failures sell like hotcakes at a truckstop. So keep in mind what Margaret Hungerford first penned, "Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder". you just gotta get the right beholder in front of your work.
Once again to clarify, I value the opinions of our friends here at NPN and take every consideration in what I need to work on to be more consistent with the results I want to have and I also seek a broader perspective outside of the photography world.
Ultimately I judge success of an image based on what I expected to get from the image I made. If I get the emotional response I want from it and myself that i wanted, and if others see that too.
Discussion
22 repliesHow do you judge the success of an Image?
Or what makes for a great shot and not a snapshot?
To quote: "I am afraid that most people subscribing to this forum believe that the more comments an image receives, the more successful or popular an image is"
We all crave recognition and praise there is little doubt else we wouldn't post here at all.
It is interesting to observe commenting behavior with some images garnering 30+ comments and others struggling to get to 5.
What is it that motivates you to comment? Are we sheeple commenting where others have before? Perhaps hoping the the greatness will rub off?
Would the image do so well if the author was not so well know? The popularity of the Anonymous gallery demonstrates that we set store by knowing who the author is.
So is the Image with 30 comments 6x better than the one with 5?
This probably doesn't really answer your question, since it is pretty tough to otherwise quantify. What works for one image may not work for another image. Take composition, for example. A rather high percentage of images don't work quite as well if the primary subject is dead center. But on occasion, an image comes through that would be tough to imagine being composed otherwise. The same applies to pretty much any other specific case you can think of.
So what makes me comment? As a general rule, I try to comment on the images of new people and those images which I opened specifically because of the thumbnail. I'd like to comment on more images, but I could spend all day here and not do anything else of imaprotance (like the job search or even shoot). Also, does the person ask a specific question? Sometimes that helps to direct a comment, especially if it is a technically and artistically well done image.
There are also a few people whose images I generally won't comment on. Guy Tal and Marc Adamus' images come to mind, simply because they very rarely leave anything useful for me to say. Their images speak for themselves. Adding another "wow" or
I think part of the problem with the 30+ comment assessment of an image comes from the crowd here. A rather high percentage of us are very experienced and capable photographers and we have adopted very high standards for both our personal work and for what truly impresses us. When the rare photo comes through that generates 30+ comments, it has gone far beyond what are personal standards are. I think the quote
"I am afraid that most people subscribing to this forum believe that the more comments an image receives, the more successful or popular an image is"
is a muddled interpretation of the response or worth of the photo. An image that is truly successful artistically will generate more comments - which brings me back to my opening: I comment on an image because I formed a connection with the image.
As someone who sells at craft & art fairs I'm always interested in figuring out what grabs folks attention so I can put that up front. While I am my own judge of which images are successful, $$$ from sales are what allow me to keep doing it so in that sense what gets people to look is important.
On the other end of the spectrum if a grab shot on the way to dinner brings in $800 in licensing fees, is that a successful image?
Both of those success metrics bring a certain degree of pleasure to me. If I had to pick one, I would opt for the sales though because that would allow me to travel more which is my top priority.
Success is an inherently subjective term, open to unlimited interpretations. Ultimately, it is the photographer that chooses his/her own definition of success. If my sole purpose is to sell an image, and it has not sold after 6-months of intensive advertising and marketing, than the photo is unsuccessful (or I am advertising in the wrong market). If my sole purpose is to connect with nature and take pictures as a form of meditation, than any photo I take can be interpreted as a success.
But I do believe that images garnering more comments are the ones that please the crowd. However I think that an interesting dichotomy arises when we accept this logic--because I have seen some images that gain 30+ comments, and I truly believe that not a lot of people would buy it..
Yet you are confusing markets. I market to fine art crowds/prints sales, so I'm not thinking licensing here. The community here is photographers, who don't buy prints often. They come to your booth and talk shop for hours if you let them. So what works here and garners comments may never sell. Many times it is what matches the drapes. The art buyer doesn't care if the corners could be sharper, if there is a little noise in the shadows. If they feel a connection, that's what motivates the sell(and the colors are right).
I post here for myself. To improve my craft and because I want to "show" what I have been up to. I feel a part of this community and I also love seeing what others are getting into. So yes I am very happy when something garners a lot of comments here, but I may not put that image front and center at the next show. If I was independently rich, I would sell my prints for cheap, just for the satisfaction that someone wanted to hang it on their wall. For me, success is enjoying the experience, a keeper shot is a bonus, and selling it is fantastic. That may change as I lean more and more on my photo income.
A snap shot is were you jump out of you car, or maybe just slow down, click the cell phone, because everyone else is and drive off. A week later you have no clue what is was, or why you shot it, but say since everyone else was doing it, it must be good.
What draws me to open and comment on a photo? If the subject matter is something I can relate to, or if it from a location I am familiar with. I find it strange how some photos can get 300 viewings and a 100 or more comments an hour after posting, and others remain untouched. If there was no name attached to it, would this be the case? Probably not. Is it so much better than Average Joe's. If you think it is always the case, you may be fooling yourself into thinking you are more important than you actually are.
I comment on images that have a title that attracts my attention. I comment on my own likes or dislikes of that persons image. Not how many have gone before me.
I post because "I" think I have a great image. But, I'm blinded by my own bias. The comments are a way of showing if I'm headed in the right direction. To me success is not how many comments, but how honest they are!
A great site with great photographers. That why I joined!!!
In return, the comments I appreciate the most on my images contain constructive critisism or praise. Even if I really like how my image looks as posted, I will attempt the changes that have been suggested to see if I think the result is better. That is the great thing about digital. I can make all those changes and if in the end I like my original better then I can still use that one. In the end, I want my photos to be better, but since I don't sell them, I am still the one that has to be pleased with the end result.
It is uncanny how many times I have shown several shots to photo friends and they always pick the same one which is never the one I like best, that happened to you ?
When I look on here I usually get hooked by an interesting looking thumbnail, I never look to see how many comments it has made, too hungry to find the next intersting shot. I am finding I don't comment so much nowadays and if I am developing a downer on some pix it is those who look after the whites so much, the rest of the pic looks way too dark.
Often in the Avian gallery where I 'hang out' the sheer volume of images posted is so high that I simply can't keep up and I often don't have time or stamina to even look at every posting, so the thumbnail becomes a determinant of whether or not I open the image to peruse further. Popularity of a sort also comes into it I guess. When certain people with whom I've been trading comments for years post I make an effort to look and comment. And I also note that there are some folks who post their images and never or very rarely comment on anyone else's. IMO it seems those folks are not to making an effort to contribute to this online community so they go to the bottom of the list for me to expend effort on.
As to why I post the reasons vary. Sometimes I have an image that appeals to me for some reason that I want to share. Other times I have a specific question about the subject, the photography or the post processing and I find other members offer useful information here that helps me to improve. Being able to repost in the same thread with the suggestions incorporated has proven to be a very helpful feature on NPN. Those online conversations can be really worthwhile.
The actual measure of the success of an image is pretty intangible to me. If success is measured in numbers of comments, a question posed with the posting will often start a conversation and increase the number of comments: is that success? Or maybe being the Weekly Pick, or selling an image or having favorable comments from photographers whose work you admire or just feeling satisfied that you've done the best you could do at this point? It all depends how you define success. For me the definition changes from image to image so ultimately success of my images is defined by me.
As for stock sales as Richard mentions, that's a totally different beast. In that case, a successful image is one that fits what the editor needs to go with a story, or a message in an ad, and doesn't need to be a perfect image. However, it does still need to clearly communicate a message or feeling.
In specific to the OP about success relative to comments, I think that in some cases popularity counts as an issue, but overall, I think that most people comment on the image they feel is the most successful at clearly conveying a scene or subject. Unfortunately, the photos that need the most constructive help or suggestions receive the fewest comments because they lack the clarity of subject to draw the viewer in from the thumbnail.
My 2 cents, rebates available in leftover Easter jellybeans.
Bill Brennan
I think for your question, "success" is probably best defined within the constraints of NPN. Outside of NPN, "success" takes on a different measure in terms of marketability, sales, etc.
Within NPN, I think success in large part is measured by the number of comments, but that's not the whole story. We must remember that we are a community of photographers; not photo buyers, art collectors or even the general public. We tend to be more critical of our own work - and others. And at the same time, we also can "connect" with so many images posted here, because we love nature and appreciate it when someone else can capture a beautiful moment.
I don't think I'm going out on a limb when I say that if you look at those images with "30" comments, they are almost always above, if not way above "average." They invoke an emotional response to the viewer. People's responses and comments usually reflect that.
But there are other factors. I've heard the terms a number of times here, "popularity contest," or the "good ole' boys club," etc. etc. I think we can be honest and say that this does exist to some extent here. It's human nature and will happen in any group setting over time and it's no different here than any other online photography forum. To be blunt, there are two choices. You can be part of the community by pariticipating, communicating with your fellow photographers, learning from your peers and helping them improve their photography. Or, you can sit on the sidelines, not participate and be disappointed you only get 5 comments. I won't name names, but I could point out numerous members who have jumped right in, participated and taken critiques to a point where their photography (and PS skills for that matter) have shown great improvement. They participate and embrace the community. And for those that have grown and learned, I would call that success.
If I look at my own "success" here on NPN, I consider 3 things. 1. I'm a moderator, 2. I comment on a lot of images (47:1) and 3. I think I post solid images. Honestly, I think #1 and #2 garner the bulk of the comments I get. I'm under no illusion that my images are better than anyone elses, but I'm happy and proud of them. I've made a number of friends here on NPN, both online and offline and yes, friends will make an effort to comment on each others work. If that's the "good ole boys club," then that's fine, I won't apologize for it. But I also take the time to comment on every single new member and seek out those posts that have very few comments. In turn, those folks may also comment on my images and thus, I get a higher number of comments. In the end, it all boils down to, what you put in, is what you get back. Maybe for some, that sounds arrogant. But I'm just trying to be honest.
For me, success should be measured on what you get out of NPN and how you feel about your own work. Most of us want to improve our photography and more than any number of comments one gets, the more you emerse yourself in to the process, the more you will improve and in the end, be more "successful."
Just my .02.
Lon
I find that the thumbnail rarely indicates the value of an image and I look at every image on ESS. I find that I like images that don't get over 10 comments as much as those that get 30 comments. Images with a lot of comments seem to be established photographers that are targeted by the viewing public. Most are 'atta boy comments' and as such don't make interesting reading. There also appears to be a level of idolatry going on here. Images of marginal quality are sometimes praised which would not be the case with lesser known contributors.
Up until now I have not received any valuable feedback from viewers and am not looking for ways to make my images look better yet. My goal is to get a message across and hope that it clicks with the viewer: "aha, I know exactly what you mean and yes that is very special ". Similarly, my comments reflect how their image affects me primarily - a verbal conversation continuing what the image started. I realize that not everyone has this interest in mind and will give suggestions (crop here, darken there, etc. etc.).
I often comment on images that are least successful. It could be argued that most unsuccesful images should get the most comments as they are in the greatest need of suggestions. Yet these people are largely ignored. I am told that many of such images are from posters who really have little interest in becoming good photographers and therefore the effort is wasted. That could be true. I just don't know how you know.
It's a big subject. These are thoughts that have come to mind.
Seriously, it is a big subject, and ill just give you a few thoughts off the top of my head:
I comment on 1) Every WC post 2) the previous 5 images regardless whenever i post 3) people who i know personally or who ive developed an 'online' friendship with 4) any thumb that jumps out at me 5) posts with an unusually low number of comments (theyre more challenging to critique) 6) A few big names here. All this contributes to a very large number of comments (wish i had more time)
I make no apologies about #6. It's entirely selfish on my part. I feel id be a complete idiot if i didnt avail myself of the opportunity to comment/critique someone who either is or is on their way to being in a very elite group of the best photogs around. That gives me a better chance of learning from them. How many other hobbies/sports do you know where you have the opportunity to mingle with the very best on a daily basis? It's not "hoping" the greatness rubs off, it is knowing it rubs off! I wouldnt bother if i didnt see results!
As for success, i just got a nice payment from a zine for a photo i wouldnt have bothered posting on NPN, wasnt a fav of mine. So i wouldnt begin to start pronouncing what makes an image successful, i just know what i like and what i dont.
All seem valid too.
Lon I appreciate your honesty it gels with my observations.
My way forward is clear no further post until I have made 1714 extra comments
No more lousy Images(Which will fit in with the above requirement well)
Post at the right time of the day (This is more important than you think)
Lon said something about "rules" (he did not term it like that): Every community has its rules. If you follow the rules you also get something. Since the forums here are a means of communication, "putting in" communication will "get" you communication. That's very simple. And that's why some less good work will get a lot of comments. I can only speak for my self, but if I get more that 30 comments, I know it's not just because I comment often on other's work, but if I at least get 10 comments I know five of them I get cause I post often...and I fact I also then know the image is not going well. The same image by a person who does not comment often would have received just the 5 or even less.
Some images that should get more comments to help the photographer are also often the hardest to comment on because there's nothing that I can related to. It is usally easier for me to comment on a weaker shot when the photographer specifically asks for feedback.
My approach is: I post at least on the first two to five images when I post my own. I try to comment on my "buddies" images. I try to comment on the images I find noticable.I try to comment on images that receive very few comments. (in that order)
Plato in presenting the death of Socrates in "Phaedo" asked the question: "What makes the beautiful, beautiful?" The same could be asked in the judging of a photo.
The concept in Phado was there is an implanted concept of beauty, as well as other qualities, in humans. These include the concepts of "equal", "justice", and others. Plato stated that Socrates believed these were not learned but imprinted in the "spirit". They were also always compared to a nebulous "absolute" of which we have concept that such does exist but is unknowable for now, for always we say this is more or less beautiful than that. And always there is someone who disagrees.
Using that as an example, it does not make any difference who comments because there will always be lesser and greater in beauty.
Perhaps it is the attempt at beauty that is the race. Why? There is no finish line.
the fisch
Like everyone else, I comment on images that connect with me. They don't have to be perfect, in fact, if I can connect with a shot that needs a good critique that's the best, I learn a lot giving such a critique myself as well. Occasionally I won't be able to think of anything thoughtful to say, but really want to share my enthusiasm for an image, but generally I try to give solid critiques, either for what I like or would change (and generally a mix of both). And I will make a concerted effort to critique folks photos who give me a good critique, though it may take a few times before I recognize the name (striking avatars really help, as silly as that sounds). I think it is in no small part because of that effort that I find I receive a lot of thoughtful critiques. Sometimes I might post an image that was really special to me, and it might not be special to others, and it can hurt a little sometimes.. but in the end I really appreciate the honesty folks here put in their comments, it's why I keep coming back.
What I find most interesting, is seeing which of my images work for people, and why. Occasionally I'll get a shot I had no emotional connection with creating, don't really care about, but for some reason post anyways.. and then, suddenly that one becomes hugely popular. Why?! Sometimes I'm just confused as to what people like. I've had images I post here that no one really likes, but other people do. The question for me becomes, from a sales perspective, what images do you put on your website? I have a ton of photos on mine... I like all of them (though I could weed out a few older ones).. simply because I want to give people a choice. Now that's actually backfired, and people won't put in their order cus they can't choose! So am I better off just having a few images per category and hoping that I cover the interest base? Interesting to think about the psychology..
*Some of the best photos don't translate into great thumbs; this has to mean fewer viewers and thus fewer comments.
*I find that I'm more likely to comment on a photo if the photographer has started the conversation by explaining a bit about the shot's background. I wonder if images with a story get more comments in general on this site? I'm a psychologist by training, so I'm thinking along these lines here - the photographer engages the audience... or not.
*As a beginner photographer with comparatively VERY little technical knowledge, I find my comments are usually limited to the type of emotion a shot evokes in me, or a simple congratulatory note. It's all I can do, but it IS a sincere expression of my admiration.
I go to a local gallery and show newer images now and then to my friend who owns the gallery and he usually let's me know if his clients would buy it or not.
Also I have had images I thought were total failures sell like hotcakes at a truckstop. So keep in mind what Margaret Hungerford first penned, "Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder". you just gotta get the right beholder in front of your work.
Once again to clarify, I value the opinions of our friends here at NPN and take every consideration in what I need to work on to be more consistent with the results I want to have and I also seek a broader perspective outside of the photography world.
Ultimately I judge success of an image based on what I expected to get from the image I made. If I get the emotional response I want from it and myself that i wanted, and if others see that too.
The other successes are bonuses to me!
I believe at the end of that day success is very personal and indeed contextual.