How can we generate more participation in critiques?
Discussion
44 replies
Posted by Bill Chambers on March 9, 2006 at 11:43 AM
This is nothing new. Anyone who's posted an image fights this constantly. Killer images get plenty of attention, all of which is warranted and deserved, but not every image is of Marc Adamus quality. The "less than perfect" images are the ones that need critical commentary, suggestions, and honest review. Sometimes this may be a little painful, but true growth often is. Speaking strictly for myself, if I post something for image critique, I am asking for HONEST, FORTHRIGHT, even BLUNT commentary. I'm not talking about personal attacks, but constructive criticism and helpful guidance. It's incredibly frustrating to post an image, get 140 hits and only 3 or 4 comments. When you get that "hollow echo" with a image it's quite obvious people don't like something about it, but you've learned nothing about how to improve your skills. Again, strictly for myself - I would rather get my feelings stepped on a little or my ego bruised and come away learning something than just post images for mass viewing.
Off my soapbox now and back to my original question - how can get increased critique particpation?
From all out past discussion on this topic the consensus always seems to be that you can't force anyone to provide feedback and that many (most?) seem to fall within the state of mind that "if you don't have something good to say, it's better not to say anything at all". I personally think it's unfortunate.
My personal experience has been that the best way to encourage good critique is via reciprocation - provide to others the kind of critique you're looking for and in turn they will feel comfortable doing the same for you.
Guy
Posted by Mel Ladewig on March 9, 2006 at 12:00 PM
Its just a matter of free time. I'm sure most of the people here really think about the critiques they offer and it takes more than 2 minutes to write such a critique.
In addition, when you read the critiques for an image, you usually see a bit of a herd thing happening. Most people don't need to be told 50 times that the tree lopped of on the upper right is distracting and that the saturation looks overdone or that the composition is great or its the best picture they've ever seen in their life. Once will usually suffice.
Posted by Frank Winters on March 9, 2006 at 12:23 PM
Maybe it would help to have a little more structure -- you could offer a comment only box plus a critique box. Comments might be "great shot!" Critiques would be more thoughtful and detailed. This way people with only a little time could hit and run based on a quick impression while others could think deep thoughts and provide helpful insights....
It is hard to get people who are stealing time from other stuff to leave comments and even harder to get them to actually critique a photo.
That's it for now -- I'll think deeply and if I don't fall asleep I'll report any brillant ideas....
Bill,
You have to differentiate between "critique" and "comment". The ones that get a lot of attention are usually comments not critiques. It takes someone time to form a basis for a critique as opposed to a "WOW" comment. I tend to find the lesser commented images to leave a critique. I feel people appreciate your critique more when it goes beyond "the nice shot syndrome". As suggested many times, by adding a question or asking for some critique aspect, people will tend to give you what you were looking for. But in my experience this doesn't happen. If an image has a large number of comments, I tend to stay away. What is one more attaboy going to do to help someone grow?
I also do not use the number of comments as a sign of a good or bad image, or an image that has something wrong with it. It still comes down to whether "I" like it or not that makes it successful.
Some use popularity as an indication of success. Successful to me is if the image holds my attention and gives me a good feeling down the road.
In the past I have asked for "honest, blunt critiques" and was told that trouble arose at photonet and they didn't want to turn this forum into photonet. Whatever that means.
My personal experience has been that the best way to encourage good critique is via reciprocation - provide to others the kind of critique you're looking for and in turn they will feel comfortable doing the same for you.
Very true. I also agree with Mel that it is a matter of time. I`ve been terribly busy lately and can relate to anyone in a similar situation. It doesn`t feel too time-consuming to click on a couple of images and look at them for a few seconds but writing up an in-depth comment does for some reason (maybe because writing in English is not exactly second nature to me and I often have to stop and think how to convey my thoughts better.)
Also, if the photographer has a very different style than what I try to pursue, I often just feel inadequate to say anything of value.
I think NPN has a number of "lurkers" who have registered but hardly ever post or comment, being here mostly to enjoy the great photography. I wonder how much of the non-commenting views are made by them?
Also, at least sometimes people return to images 3-4 times before they make up their mind (or pop in later to see what others have thought) - so it`s really hard to say how many potential commenters have seen the image when the software says 100 views for example.
It usually helps if the poster asks a specific question, "Does this make my bu** look big?" Well, maybe not THAT question, but something specific about the photograph.
I hear it helps if you post good photographs, but I'm still working on that.
Someone once suggested recognizing good/helpful critiques. Find a Critique of the Week (or Crtique of the Weak?).
I think as the site grows (it is growing isn't it?) the people who take the time to critique get spread pretty thin.
This is a well-beaten horse (not that I find this a sensitive analogy at all), but here's my take:
I have less time these days to give to critiquing, so I tend to seek out the undernoticed/underappreciated images and those who are clearly new to photography/NPN and are really needing advice and direction. From my viewpoint, *most* of the images posted to ESS are technically and compositionally good. Most don't really need 'critique', and attaboys only help develop the ego, not photographic genius. Many ESS images tend to follow well-trodden themes, which I think many have found increasingly less interesting, especially with respect to comments/critiques.
As has been said before in similar threads, if you want comments and critiques, specifically ask for them or take your 'nature' photography in a direction that sets it apart. Photographic homogeneity alone won't do the trick.
Posted by Richard Wong on March 9, 2006 at 1:35 PM
I prefer to critique rather than solely praise though I do that too when I feel I'm truly impressed. If the image is great, then the photographer probably alright knows that and shouldn't feel the need to post them just to show off their portfolio on a critique forum. One reason why I think there's not much constructive crticism is because some people get defensive when they get critiqued. We shouldn't try to refute critiques, rather just respect it and maybe offer an acknowledgement of the crit at most.
For example, I commented on a photo from another photo forum that the image was vastly underexposed and the photographer was like "You should have your monitor checked because the photo is great. and the print looks amazing." My response to him or her was "Since you know the photo is so great already, I apologize for posting then a comment then." My comments were nothig malicious, just critiquing what I saw so it made me mad when he chose to act pretentious. I won't waste time on somebody like that. I will take time for somebody who genuinely is interested in a critique and goes about with proper manners
When i went to art school, it was tough to get a critique but I was always skeptical if the teacher started liking too many things. Waste of our money in that case. Personally I hated receving critiques though because I have a thin skin. I admit that at least.
+ + Last year I posted this same thing over at TPN and for the most part got put down.
In that post I felt that FAR to many people were just patting each other on the backs so that they would get the same in return for their images, so few people got any kind of useful feedback when there were things that could have been said that would improve their images. To me it all looked like one big mutual admiration society, and the people that were on there and new to photography learned next to nothing. As is stated here, it is all just a bunch of, "Oh I like that" type comments. How that is supposed to help anyone I don't know, so I quit that site and came back over here, but although it's not as bad here as it is over yonder, to me there is still way too much of it on NPN also.
+++ Time is a big consideration, but to me that is more of an excuse than a reason.
Personally I hate being bored, and for the most part I work on one thing or another just about ever hour
I am awake, 7 days a week, and if I can find time to do helpful things for others, then
I don't buy anybody else's excuse that they can't. But that's just me, and I don't
expect everyone else to do the same, so to get more help from people here most of the time
you have to make it easier for them, and maybe NPN should be collecting ideas for how to do that.
+++ The only thought I have at this moment is not an easier way, but a "reply reminder" of sorts.
The reminder being that when someone replies to an image and they say nothing but a
5 or 6 word line that they like it, they should be ask, or told if need be, that that is not enough.
A reply should also include WHY do they like or dislike it. What they "like" does not help anyone!
I hear people everyday, everywhere, who have no taste what-so-ever, tell others what they like,
so what does that mean?
+++ Photograpers, or anybody for that matter who wants to learn, learns NOTHING from people
who tell them nothing but, "I like that," if it's not followed by WHY.
Is there a single person on this site who would pay hundreds of dollars to go to a workshop,
just to be told by the instructor that "I like your images, and now you can go home?"
If not, then no one who uses this site should expect others who post images on it to have to settle for the same thing here.
If a person has enough time to log on, sign in, open forums, and write a 6 word reply,
then they have to be pretty dumb if they think that I am going to believe that they don't have time to
write a 6 sentence note about WHY they like it.
+++ I also think that there is the other side to this subject. Many people who post complain about not getting any response, but many of them include next to nothing with their images about the location and shooting conditions. When I see a great image the first thing I like to know is where is it at in case I am around that area. Location info means more to me than the other shooting matters, and if a poster does not care to take the time to include useful info for me then I may not take the time to give much back.
NPN needs to educate its users on giving on both sides.
You could also bribe people like Guy tried for awhile. The best critique gets a print.
That actually worked
I'd do more of it if I had the time.
Guy
Posted by Richard Wong on March 9, 2006 at 2:00 PM
Totally agreed Paul. Sometimes if what one might deem a critqieu or criticism it's deemed "flaming" by another so then everybody walks on egg shells. I say just let it rip man. Say what you really feel. At school or in the professional world if it sucks or is average it'll get torn to shreds, so why not online?
I consider compliemnts to be constructive critqieus too if there's an explanation for why they like the image specifically because that's something we can build on. So it's not so much compliment v.s. nit pick ratio, its more like explaining yourself clearly.
A lot of valid points, and I tend to go back and forth somewhat on responses like "lack of time" or the mutual admiration society. Certainly there are instances when we are all pressed for time, and the mutual admiration factor will always be there regardless of the forum or website chosen. I also have nothing against 'attaboys' - they're important too. But to me, the reason for an image critique forum is CRITIQUE; otherwise it should be an Image Viewing Forum. Don't misunderstand me - I'm not complaining or whining about NPN - I love this place, and have learned SO much from the great folks that share their time and expertise here. My only motivation is that I want to learn more and continue to grow. I just think it's rather sad that you must advertise "Honest Critiques Please" in the title of your post in a critique forum. I wish there was an icon or something that you could choose that would post by your thumbnail that would signal others that you desire very honest, straightforward, guidance oriented feedback. None of us want to stomp on someone's heart so maybe an icon would reduce the worry or guilt associated with giving more truthful appraisals. I dunno, just a thought......
I idea of image critique is the main reason I joined NPN. I think this is a neat community of photographers, and I think there is a lot of opportunity to learn (heck, I'm still reading the backlog of Nature Photography 101 articles that can be found here).
But I've come to realize that critiquing via the forum can be hard, for many of the reasons listed above. There have been a number of times I've started a critique on an image and second guessed myself for the following reasons:
1) I'm fairly new to NPN and don't really want to tick anyone off.
2) I wonder if I'm just nickpicking.
3) I feel I'm not as skilled as the photographer in question, so am I out of place by saying something?
4) If it isn't something technical, if I just think the picture is "ahem" uninspired, what do I say?
Somewhere in the guidelines it says you should comment on ten images for every one you post (or something along those lines). I think this is a great idea.
I've just started trying my hand at landscape photography. I've got a few "just ok" shots and I'd really like to know what I could do to improve, but I'm afriad of either getting no comments, or just the back slapping kind (which I like, but they don't help the technique too much).
Would a sensitivity rating for each member work ? Tear my image to pieces could be a 1 (not sensitive at all) and please be gentle could be a 10 (very sensitive, having a bad week).
Or should I change my byline to "Comments, Critiques, and Criticisms welcome"?
I'd like to see more actual critiquing going on, but I'm at a loss as to how to bring it about.
Alex,
I like your Sensitivity Rating. That was the same concept I was talking about, but was too fumble brained to express very well. I personally think that would be an excellent tool - it would let everybody know how susceptible to are to receiving critical observations, guidance, and suggestions. Make it show by the thumbnail and on the inside as well.
Jim, how about something like that - is it feasible, and would it work?
The problem with online communication and critiquing is that we don't know the person behind the image or the comment. We cannot see the critic's expressions of humor and lightheartedness, and we cannot see or hear their inflection or emphasis. We're never really sure what is 'for real' and what isn't. Because of this, most tend to tread lightly around here. The same -rip-it-to-shreds comment that one begs for might put another into deep counseling. If you want a give-it-to-me critique, ask for it. It can only be assumed that those who do not ask for a straightforward critique are a little more of the delicate variety.
If I've had personal relations, have met, or personally know an NPN member, they'll get my honest critique (no sweet talk or attaboys). I treat others a little more carefully, as I've proven myself capable of pissing people off online
I try to post a picture when I've slotted enough time to be able to respond to other people's posts. I always call'em like I see'um - But I do try to make a point to comment on images that have fewer replies.
I hope I haven't mis-stated my sentiment or desires. When I say I want honest critiques, I'm not talking about personal character assassinations or being mean-spirited. I believe we're all capable of being honest without being ugly. The purpose of honest critiques should be to promote growth, not stunt it by sending someone into shock. I still like the idea of the Sensitivity Rating - nothing too complex, maybe just from 1 to 5, denoting sensitivity to criticism as Alex mentioned.
I don't know if I've been around NPN long enough to be an "old timer", but it's been while. It seems like at one time the image critiques were more constructive. Now it's like, how many comments did you get as a sign of how well received the photo has been. The comments seem to differ only in degrees of superlatives. Not always but a general trend that way. There were some days when I would do a critique and point out three things I liked about a photo and (politely) one that I didn't. I've learned to tread even lighter than that, as often this wan't well received. Just grousing abit I suppose. I've learned a lot about my photo techniques through my posts and will continue to do so. Just seems like it ain't what it used to be, even though it's still good.
Some good (and very valid) observations made so far as to why there are so many views per comment/critique. Here are a few more things to keep in mind;
1. In a typical month, NPN will attract about 80,000 unique viewers (78,806 last month). Anyone have a copy of Outdoor Photographer handy to check their distribution numbers?
2. Unlike most other nature photography forums, the NPN IC galleries can be viewed without the need to register.
3. Google the following phrases; "nature photography", "wildlife photography", "nature photographers" or even just "nature"
Take the above three points into mind and it becomes a bit easier to understand the number of views that are generated.
Last month, the portfolio of Marc Adamus garnered 21,685 views (and obviously no comments). So far this month, Lori's has already garnered 4,678.
Bottom line is many people come to NPN and PhotoPortfolios to view the incredible work on display. Like those who buy books and magazines to do the same, most will not be interested in any other interaction.
As already pointed out, the best way to generate comments/critiques is to be an active participant - and asking for specific feedback on the photos you post is always a good idea. And remember, the ratio of "lurkers" to "participants" is very high, making NPN a true international showcase of our members' work.
Giving a critique can be difficult. It takes some thought to give it without sounding pretentious. And what if noone agrees with the critique? And often there are conflicting reactions to the posted image. One commenter says that the light does not work for him in the shot (for example) to be immediately followed by another commenter who says "absolutely stunning". How would you take this if you were the person who posted the photo? Sometimes you know that there is something not quite right with your image and you ask for help to find it. What if noone finds fault? Does your opinion that something is not quite right change? It could be the flaw is subtle and elusive. Sometimes it takes a keen eye to find a critique even on a shot that is stunning. Read Joe Kayne's comment on Marc Adamus' Crater Lake which is deservedly in the Editors Pick.
Posters often ask others for critiques to improve their work. Posters have to ask the same of themselves.
+++ There will always be differing opinions about what makes a good image.
LIke, people say, I don't know if it's art but I know what I like.
That doesn't quit fit with images in a photo forum.
+++To me, one major problem with critiquing is the fact that on forums like this you do not know what the original intend of an image is. 20+ years ago I did a lot of photo contest judging. With those types of submissions you know what the intent is, and you can judge accordingly, but how many people who reply on here know what the poeple who post on here are shooting for? I shoot for my article illustrations, and stock sales, but images used for those needs can be VERY different from what you will need for something like print sales. -(I said CAN BE )- But critiques on here only look at things the way the people are conditioned to, and people who know stock will see them one way, and people who know only things like photo contests will see them another way.
Hense,
the idea of the icon is ok, but it still wouldn't work for long as it does not take into consideration the "REASON" the image was taken in the first place. And then there are the "guidelines" which I doubt many people read much, if at all, other than to find out the file size needed for posting.
+++To me I'd say that people who post should just come out and say what they are looking for with the critique, PLUS, add what the intent of the image was they are showing. Was it taken to sell framed prints of, for stock, for publishing illustrations, or what? A critique that does not fit the need is almost a useless as no critique at all. A critique that fits those needs is really the only useful one. - - - To me at least.
I look at it that way because in 40 years of taking pics, and 25+ years of working with editors and publishers, I have been exposed to most of the areas of photography and have seen the different ways images are not only needed, but the different looks an image has to have to meet those needs. In a critique forum you either have to accomidate all forms or target the kind of critique you need by stating what the original intended use of the post was when the image was taken.
+ YES, before there are tons of "BUTS" posted, I know there are exceptions where one good critique will cover several uses, but there is also just as many times it doesn't work that way,
hense my thought here.
I think you have to lead by example. "You" being NPN . That is why I brought to the group's attention this week's challenge. It's all about the "crtitique" not the image. It's been a long time coming, and I can honestly say this is one of the few times I've seen this type of forward step.
So, all those who lament about egos getting in the way, personalities etc. jump in! I'm not saying you have to post an image but share something!
I think you do a great job Bill , posting many thoughtful comments and I see you have posted an image in WC#219 , so you know I'm not talking about you personally. But what about the rest of you people?
If you want more images that aren't perfect, that aren't looking for pats on the back, here's your chance, post one. If you want to see more thoughtful, helpfull critiques, then step up and write one.
It's like the old saying; if you want a friend, be a friend. Tim
Posted by Kent Staubus on March 9, 2006 at 10:39 PM
This is an excellent discussion. I agree with much of what was said, but will get what I disagree with out of the way first. I don't see a "sensitivity" rating working as intended. The problem is that those who really are sensitive just aren't going to advertise it. No one is going to check the box saying "Very Sensitive" because that makes them look like a crybaby. Everyone will check the box "Not sensitive" even though that won't be the case. Nice idea, but I question the practicality.
I find my time is constrained, just like everyone else's is. I have two kids, drive 300-400 miles a day on my job, and actually have stayed married. I don't get around to very many forums very often, but have chipped in to help on the Man & Nature forum. There, I make an EXTRA effort to be sure all photos on my forum get at least two comments (I think David is doing the same.) It is surely discouraging to someone, especially new, who took the time to scan and post an image they obviously like only to get no comments at all. The second category I try to leave comments are for those folks who really seem to be asking for some help and I am able to do it. I actually do mention the weaker points of the image, and also the stronger points. The third category I will comment on are the really exceptional images. Sure, maybe a dozen others made a glowing comment, but I think another one was earned. I try to draw attention to what it was that worked in the image to help the others. I don't try to comment on EVERY photo in M&N, I think people would quickly get tired of reading my posts. There are some photos that I really just can't get a handle on, and others seem to already have enough comments saying what I would have.
It is uncomfortable to tell a stranger that their prized shot just doesn't work for us, but there are ways to do this diplomatically. It shouldn't be hard for anyone to simply make a comment saying what DID work for them.
I make the effort to comment on new people's photos, especially. This is what helps NPN grow, and it is vital. More than that though, I was once just starting out and was very happy when someone more experienced took time to help me. I am just passing that help along since it was simply given to me. One last thing I'll mention is that hopefully everyone is leaving a lot more comments than they are images. When you do post images, why not tell a little about it? Every picture has a story! I've found over the years that being able to articulate that story in the field has always led to a better photo.
--->Please be sure to comment on new members' photos, especially if they have less than 3 comments after a couple of days.
You can tell the person what all is right with it.
You can tell them what all is wrong.
You can combine the two,
or
instead of the first 3 you can just tell them what they might try the next time to see if that works better.
If you want to add why, that's up to the person replying to the image.
Posted by Bill Chambers on March 9, 2006 at 11:05 PM
Perhaps the way to get more critique participation is to remind us that these are crtique forums. (I'm just showing that I read the original question, by the way.)
Before one ever gets to the free-form "Reply to this Topic" box (I also read the bold text above this box.) maybe you need to answer three questions about the photograph. Someone else has to come up with the questions.
This subject is something as a newish member I have noticed.There appears to be a mutual admiration society that forms around certain members and even certain locales - Sure the images are very good - But are they that much better than all of the rest?
And even if they are how does that help those members improve.
Like others I feel that participation is the best way to get repsonses.
I see little point in commenting on an image that has already had 10 or more responses - What more could I add except inflate someone's ego an extra PSI or 2?
I certainly appreciate those who take the time to comment on my fumbling efforts particularly those members like Guy and Michael whose work I admire.
I don't suppose this will ever be any different because thats the way folks are
Posted by Bill Chambers on March 10, 2006 at 7:19 AM
Rodney - The only bone of contention I have with your statements is your not commenting because of some member having already received a larger amount of comments. If the image is outstanding, what difference does it make how many comments they have. If Marc or Guy, etc. already have 40 comments that's great - why penalize them because they're good. The way I see it, they've earned the litttle extra praise and deserve the extra comments. I agree that in some cases it's just people wanting to crowd around Ceasar hoping something will rub off, but I have a feeling they probably know the difference. One of the delightful things I've noticed about NPN is the lack of swelled egos, and the willingness of the more advanced photogs to share and guide those of us who are less advanced. I think in most cases the extra comments are given as an acknowledgement of that and as a well deserved thank you. Just my view......
Posted by Jim Erhardt on March 10, 2006 at 9:28 AM
One of the delightful things I've noticed about NPN is the lack of swelled egos, and the willingness of the more advanced photogs to share and guide those of us who are less advanced.
Posted by Richard Wong on March 10, 2006 at 11:29 AM
"One of the delightful things I've noticed about NPN is the lack of swelled egos, and the willingness of the more advanced photogs to share and guide those of us who are less advanced."
Don't sell yourself short Bill, you're just as talented as anyone else here.
Posted by Bill Chambers on March 10, 2006 at 1:11 PM
Gee, I feel my ego beginning to swell.
Thanks for the compliment Richard (the check's in the mail!) , but I'm afraid I have a LONGGGGGG way to go in this journey, but it sure is fun! I will gladly admit however that my photography has improved greatly since joining NPN, and will just as gladly credit that improvement to the help and suggestions garnered here, as well as just having the opportunity to study others' work to see what works and doesn't, what I like and don't like, etc. BY FAR , NPN is the greatest resource I've come across to date. I've probably asked more dumb questions than anyone here, but have never been treated like a dummy - I've received nothing but serious responses and patient understanding, regardless of the sometimes pitifully basic or naive questions I have posed. I have looked at other forums and none compare to NPN. (OK, Jim, now put my check in the mail)
+++ BILL +++ I just re-read your first post to check on something, and just to make sure I wasn't missing something here, and it is as follows.
This is nothing new. Anyone who's posted an image fights this constantly. Killer images get plenty of attention, all of which is warranted and deserved, but not every image is of Marc Adamus quality. The "less than perfect" images are the ones that need critical commentary, suggestions, and honest review.
+++ Wasn't this whole thing started about giving replies to those who need it most, and not adding to the count of those who don't? I haven't seen any experienced photographers who need critiques, so IMO it seems that one way to benefit the most people would be to reply in one of two ways.
1st - those not looking for a critique (experianced photographers) could just state something like,
"Any questions about this image are welcome.)
and
2nd - those wanting feedback can state as mentioned before,
"Please give any and all honest feedback about this image."
For #1, instead of giving feedback, people can learn by asking "questions" about how something was done,
and #2 speaks for itself.
Seems to me that should take care of a lot of problems with this.
Now you just have to get people to do it...........
Posted by Bill Chambers on March 10, 2006 at 4:54 PM
Paul - Yes, this was started to hopefully spur an increase in the critiques for those of us needing and desiring it, but I've never begrudged those who get many either. This is not about a re-distribution of comments (ie, take from the rich to give to the poor), rather just a desire to have people participate fully so that growth is stimulated. There seems to be an overall feeling at times that writing critiques is some kind of torture, but I relish them because I will generally learn as much (perhaps more) from writing them as receiving them, and that's why I joined NPN - to learn.
Your ideas about asking questions is great, but I'm not sure many would willingly advertise that for fear of (1) it making them look pompous and self-important, and (2) being inundated. Still a great idea if it would work.
+++ Only trying to suggest things that MIGHT work.
I don't really think that many people would fell like they looked pompous as most experianced photographers I know are usually more than willing to answer questions and give help.
Maybe instead of how I wrote it before they could say,
"Will answer image questions as time permits", or something like that.
After all I think most peope will have about the same questions about an image anyway,
so one reply can cover many viewers thoughts, and this is really just to seperate the
posts that are looking for feedback from the others that aren't.
By turning one set of posts into a question group, that could also generate
other posts about those questions in the discussion forums.
I think one possible answer to your question, is pretty simple, state in you post why you took the image, what idea came to your mind. That's it, everything else is just a means to an end, yet look through the forums, very few talk about or simply state what that desired end result was. Most of the comments, most of the questions , could be equated to people describing a trip without ever mentioning the destination, why they went or what they hoped to see. Tim
Coming at this from a career in writing, where critiques are also common...I may have a different view from some of you.
1) Positive reinforcement works better than negative reinforcement for many if not most people--the "wow" is not just ego-boo, but an indication that you hit the target with that audience. Since in any art, hitting the target audience right smack in the emotional center is what you want, the knowledge that 10/15 people were correctly smacked (as opposed to 8/15 the time before) is very useful information. Positive reinforcement is usually more precise (and always at least as accurate) as negative.
2) Even the most detailed negative comments can be wrong. Famous case in writing: BNA (big name author) was told by first editor that a story was too long. Actually, it was too short, and it made a best-selling book when he lengthened it. Less detailed negative comments that give an emotional reaction, combined with some knowledge of the critic's personal biases, is useful. (Personal biases are needed because there is no absolute right or wrong: if you hate stories about dragons, the best story about dragons ever written will leave you cold, and your comments on that story will all be colored by your bias. On this site, I've already noticed that some people express a bias against, say, "bird portraits" or "postcard scenes.")
3) Time constraints are not excuses. They are choices, but we all have a right to our choices. Those of us who have a living to make (whether at a salaried job or self-employed) do have limited time to critique others' works. I have to refuse dozens of requests a year to read newbies' manuscripts (takes a lot longer than looking at picture!) or I wouldn't get my own work done. Moreover, at a certain point expert critiquing impinges on any creative person's workspace, time, and budget. People who are expert enough to give workshops get *paid* to critique. They can't be expected to give it away all the time as well...yes, "paying forward" is good, but so is paying the bills on time.
4) Choosing to comment rather than critique is also a choice, and a reasonable one. I may have something to say about how a picture affected me (excitement, boredom, simple wow) but no expertise on exposure problems (should you have used a different lens or filter? I dunno) and nothing constructive or otherwise to say about composition. Also, for those who believe that positive comments are useful for more than egoboo, making those sorts of comments will be a reasonable choice.
5) I personally like to know not only where a shot was taken, and with what equipment, but why that shot was taken--what was the intent. Whether it is good or bad depends in part on what it was intended to accomplish. Recording species for a site is a different task from attempting to show a specific behavior, or capturing a detailed shot of a specific individual. For example, I'm trying to get identifying shots of cardinals on our place, so that I can identify each individual bird and track its reproductive success. If I capture the identifying characteristics of the head (bill shape, wear on the bill, variations in feather pattern around the eyes, etc.) I don't care if the background is "messy", or the rest of the bird obscured by leaves, or even out of focus. Last year I took a number of images of a "mystery plant"--fairly boring series of stem, leaves, buds, flowers, seeds, not at all art-shots--but when sent to a botanist, they enabled him to identify the plant. At other times, I may be taking a picture because I liked the colors, or the pose of the critter, or some unusual light effect. So it helps if someone states what it was they were trying to accomplish--then comments can be directed to that issue. It's not useful to critique for a quality that wasn't even being attempted.
6) From those who comment, it would be helpful to know what their POV is...are they coming to this image from the POV of someone who likes/doesn't like the *kind* of picture it is? Do they have a "perfect image" in mind, to which this is being compared, or do they look at each image and allow themselves to experience it freshly, without preconceptions? What are their criteria for perfect exposure/sharpness/composition? (I freely admit a bias towards sharpness and clear, even contrasty lighting, probably the result of growing up in the southwest, where such light is natural.) Do they prefer a subject "floating" by itself in a cloud of OOF background, or do they prefer wildlife in settings that clearly show the habitat details? Sometimes this is clear from the comments, but sometimes it's not.
7) The only thing I've found mildly annoying are comments which suggest that something be changed which--in the nature of shooting wildlife in natural settings--can't be. The bird lands on the limb it lands on...that's the picture you get, or don't get. I've seen a lot of comments (not so much of my images, but of many others) suggesting that the photographer should just change the critter's position, or what it's on, or near...again, my personal bias, but I like images that show things in their natural setting--sure, with an OOF background in some cases, but not cropping or cloning out every little thing, and certainly not "change the perch" or "it's too bad it was next to that whatsis..." You can pose livestock and pets and people to improve the background...even get them to stay there while you walk around them. But not wildlife (or, not much wildlife.) Every time I've asked our wintering kestrel to perch *there* and let me get *here*, it's flown away.
But this is my personal opinion, and certainly not binding on anyone else. I have as many biases as anyone else, and expect to find some comments useful and some not when people comment on my images...just as I expect those whose images I comment on will find some of mine useful and some not. To the extent that photography is an art, that it goes beyond craft, beyond technique, perfection is in the eye of the beholder.
Elizabeth Moon
Texas
Posted by Jim Erhardt on March 11, 2006 at 12:25 PM
Elizabeth, I would say that you are right in most areas, but I would also have to say just about all of that would be under perfect conditions, and since nothing in this world is perfect, many exceptions would have to be considered.
Your #6 would be great to get, but you never will.
This post started trying to find ways to get more people to add anything at all to more replies,
so I doubt that even those who give the most on them are going to take ten times longer to add
all of what you listed in there, even though it would be nice.
I've alrady said that I thought that "Image intent" should be included with each post, and in fact I think it should be REQUIRED. You said that, "there is no absolute right or wrong" but with photography that is not really correct. When you shoot for certain photo markets there are rights and wrongs, and when people start out trying to sell their images they learn that real fast. Each photo market has its own standards and requirements, and the same with photo contests, but other "general" areas of photography may have none at all, and you can not critiqure them the same. What one photo may need can be totally different than the next one. + + + THIS IS THE REASON TO FEEL THAT "INTENT" SHOULD BE A REQUIRED ITEM IN ALL POSTS. + + + There are people who post images with barely a half a dozen words about it. They seem to expect everyone else to read their minds and already know what it is all about. I generally skip right over those. If they can't spend two minutes of their time to help me out with what it is about, then I don't waste my time on it.
+++ All of the things in #6 would be great, but I already take time away from other things to try to help out who I can, and I am sure that there are more than a few others on here who do the same, but I don't think no one on here has the time to do all of what you listed.
#1 + Positive reinforcement works better than negative reinforcement.
Agreeded. I have always liked to give ideas for change, edits, or other version ideas for what I see posted in the form, and what they might want to try the next time, along with saying what does work in it now. BUT AGAIN,,,
Feedback should be "TRAGETED" at what the photographer wanted the image to show in the first place, and I think only when the replier (is that a word?) knows what the intent was can they do that.
If NPN wants the images to get more replies, and better ones, then NPN needs to educate the people posting them to give FULL deatils about the images. And if need be, require it. As I said before, a critique that does not fit the photographers needs is pretty much a useless one, and we are not mind readers..........
+++ John+++You check on two (2) image posts and that gives you the stats on the whole site?
I am dam glad that you do not do my checking book!
After reading your whole thing I happen to think that if I hadn't of spent all this time on these forums the last week I could have replied to probalby a hundred image posts.
ByeBye
Posted by Bill Chambers on March 11, 2006 at 10:01 PM
John - You may have a valid point, but I'm somewhat doubtful. I'm not sure you're being quite fair in your assessment. I wish you had tried the experiment with something other than an abstract. I also wish you had tried a post in ESS vs. M&N. I don't know if that would have made a difference or not, but I think you would have received more hits, which would have made whatever conclusion that would be drawn more valid. Maybe you can slip another one in in a week or so .
Discussion
44 repliesOff my soapbox now and back to my original question - how can get increased critique particpation?
From all out past discussion on this topic the consensus always seems to be that you can't force anyone to provide feedback and that many (most?) seem to fall within the state of mind that "if you don't have something good to say, it's better not to say anything at all". I personally think it's unfortunate.
My personal experience has been that the best way to encourage good critique is via reciprocation - provide to others the kind of critique you're looking for and in turn they will feel comfortable doing the same for you.
Guy
In addition, when you read the critiques for an image, you usually see a bit of a herd thing happening. Most people don't need to be told 50 times that the tree lopped of on the upper right is distracting and that the saturation looks overdone or that the composition is great or its the best picture they've ever seen in their life. Once will usually suffice.
It is hard to get people who are stealing time from other stuff to leave comments and even harder to get them to actually critique a photo.
That's it for now -- I'll think deeply and if I don't fall asleep I'll report any brillant ideas....
You have to differentiate between "critique" and "comment". The ones that get a lot of attention are usually comments not critiques. It takes someone time to form a basis for a critique as opposed to a "WOW" comment. I tend to find the lesser commented images to leave a critique. I feel people appreciate your critique more when it goes beyond "the nice shot syndrome". As suggested many times, by adding a question or asking for some critique aspect, people will tend to give you what you were looking for. But in my experience this doesn't happen. If an image has a large number of comments, I tend to stay away. What is one more attaboy going to do to help someone grow?
I also do not use the number of comments as a sign of a good or bad image, or an image that has something wrong with it. It still comes down to whether "I" like it or not that makes it successful.
Some use popularity as an indication of success. Successful to me is if the image holds my attention and gives me a good feeling down the road.
In the past I have asked for "honest, blunt critiques" and was told that trouble arose at photonet and they didn't want to turn this forum into photonet. Whatever that means.
Very true. I also agree with Mel that it is a matter of time. I`ve been terribly busy lately and can relate to anyone in a similar situation. It doesn`t feel too time-consuming to click on a couple of images and look at them for a few seconds but writing up an in-depth comment does for some reason (maybe because writing in English is not exactly second nature to me and I often have to stop and think how to convey my thoughts better.)
Also, if the photographer has a very different style than what I try to pursue, I often just feel inadequate to say anything of value.
I think NPN has a number of "lurkers" who have registered but hardly ever post or comment, being here mostly to enjoy the great photography. I wonder how much of the non-commenting views are made by them?
Also, at least sometimes people return to images 3-4 times before they make up their mind (or pop in later to see what others have thought) - so it`s really hard to say how many potential commenters have seen the image when the software says 100 views for example.
I hear it helps if you post good photographs, but I'm still working on that.
Someone once suggested recognizing good/helpful critiques. Find a Critique of the Week (or Crtique of the Weak?).
I think as the site grows (it is growing isn't it?) the people who take the time to critique get spread pretty thin.
Pete D.
I have less time these days to give to critiquing, so I tend to seek out the undernoticed/underappreciated images and those who are clearly new to photography/NPN and are really needing advice and direction. From my viewpoint, *most* of the images posted to ESS are technically and compositionally good. Most don't really need 'critique', and attaboys only help develop the ego, not photographic genius. Many ESS images tend to follow well-trodden themes, which I think many have found increasingly less interesting, especially with respect to comments/critiques.
As has been said before in similar threads, if you want comments and critiques, specifically ask for them or take your 'nature' photography in a direction that sets it apart. Photographic homogeneity alone won't do the trick.
For example, I commented on a photo from another photo forum that the image was vastly underexposed and the photographer was like "You should have your monitor checked because the photo is great. and the print looks amazing." My response to him or her was "Since you know the photo is so great already, I apologize for posting then a comment then." My comments were nothig malicious, just critiquing what I saw so it made me mad when he chose to act pretentious. I won't waste time on somebody like that. I will take time for somebody who genuinely is interested in a critique and goes about with proper manners
When i went to art school, it was tough to get a critique but I was always skeptical if the teacher started liking too many things. Waste of our money in that case. Personally I hated receving critiques though because I have a thin skin. I admit that at least.
In that post I felt that FAR to many people were just patting each other on the backs so that they would get the same in return for their images, so few people got any kind of useful feedback when there were things that could have been said that would improve their images. To me it all looked like one big mutual admiration society, and the people that were on there and new to photography learned next to nothing. As is stated here, it is all just a bunch of, "Oh I like that" type comments. How that is supposed to help anyone I don't know, so I quit that site and came back over here, but although it's not as bad here as it is over yonder, to me there is still way too much of it on NPN also.
+++ Time is a big consideration, but to me that is more of an excuse than a reason.
Personally I hate being bored, and for the most part I work on one thing or another just about ever hour
I am awake, 7 days a week, and if I can find time to do helpful things for others, then
I don't buy anybody else's excuse that they can't. But that's just me, and I don't
expect everyone else to do the same, so to get more help from people here most of the time
you have to make it easier for them, and maybe NPN should be collecting ideas for how to do that.
+++ The only thought I have at this moment is not an easier way, but a "reply reminder" of sorts.
The reminder being that when someone replies to an image and they say nothing but a
5 or 6 word line that they like it, they should be ask, or told if need be, that that is not enough.
A reply should also include WHY do they like or dislike it. What they "like" does not help anyone!
I hear people everyday, everywhere, who have no taste what-so-ever, tell others what they like,
so what does that mean?
+++ Photograpers, or anybody for that matter who wants to learn, learns NOTHING from people
who tell them nothing but, "I like that," if it's not followed by WHY.
Is there a single person on this site who would pay hundreds of dollars to go to a workshop,
just to be told by the instructor that "I like your images, and now you can go home?"
If not, then no one who uses this site should expect others who post images on it to have to settle for the same thing here.
If a person has enough time to log on, sign in, open forums, and write a 6 word reply,
then they have to be pretty dumb if they think that I am going to believe that they don't have time to
write a 6 sentence note about WHY they like it.
+++ I also think that there is the other side to this subject. Many people who post complain about not getting any response, but many of them include next to nothing with their images about the location and shooting conditions. When I see a great image the first thing I like to know is where is it at in case I am around that area. Location info means more to me than the other shooting matters, and if a poster does not care to take the time to include useful info for me then I may not take the time to give much back.
NPN needs to educate its users on giving on both sides.
That actually worked
I'd do more of it if I had the time.
Guy
I consider compliemnts to be constructive critqieus too if there's an explanation for why they like the image specifically because that's something we can build on. So it's not so much compliment v.s. nit pick ratio, its more like explaining yourself clearly.
I idea of image critique is the main reason I joined NPN. I think this is a neat community of photographers, and I think there is a lot of opportunity to learn (heck, I'm still reading the backlog of Nature Photography 101 articles that can be found here).
But I've come to realize that critiquing via the forum can be hard, for many of the reasons listed above. There have been a number of times I've started a critique on an image and second guessed myself for the following reasons:
1) I'm fairly new to NPN and don't really want to tick anyone off.
2) I wonder if I'm just nickpicking.
3) I feel I'm not as skilled as the photographer in question, so am I out of place by saying something?
4) If it isn't something technical, if I just think the picture is "ahem" uninspired, what do I say?
Somewhere in the guidelines it says you should comment on ten images for every one you post (or something along those lines). I think this is a great idea.
I've just started trying my hand at landscape photography. I've got a few "just ok" shots and I'd really like to know what I could do to improve, but I'm afriad of either getting no comments, or just the back slapping kind (which I like, but they don't help the technique too much).
Would a sensitivity rating for each member work
Or should I change my byline to "Comments, Critiques, and Criticisms welcome"?
I'd like to see more actual critiquing going on, but I'm at a loss as to how to bring it about.
Cheers (and good topic Bill),
Alex
I like your Sensitivity Rating. That was the same concept I was talking about, but was too fumble brained to express very well. I personally think that would be an excellent tool - it would let everybody know how susceptible to are to receiving critical observations, guidance, and suggestions. Make it show by the thumbnail and on the inside as well.
Jim, how about something like that - is it feasible, and would it work?
If I've had personal relations, have met, or personally know an NPN member, they'll get my honest critique (no sweet talk or attaboys). I treat others a little more carefully, as I've proven myself capable of pissing people off online
1. In a typical month, NPN will attract about 80,000 unique viewers (78,806 last month). Anyone have a copy of Outdoor Photographer handy to check their distribution numbers?
2. Unlike most other nature photography forums, the NPN IC galleries can be viewed without the need to register.
3. Google the following phrases; "nature photography", "wildlife photography", "nature photographers" or even just "nature"
Take the above three points into mind and it becomes a bit easier to understand the number of views that are generated.
Last month, the portfolio of Marc Adamus garnered 21,685 views (and obviously no comments). So far this month, Lori's has already garnered 4,678.
Bottom line is many people come to NPN and PhotoPortfolios to view the incredible work on display. Like those who buy books and magazines to do the same, most will not be interested in any other interaction.
As already pointed out, the best way to generate comments/critiques is to be an active participant - and asking for specific feedback on the photos you post is always a good idea. And remember, the ratio of "lurkers" to "participants" is very high, making NPN a true international showcase of our members' work.
Posters often ask others for critiques to improve their work. Posters have to ask the same of themselves.
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
LIke, people say, I don't know if it's art but I know what I like.
That doesn't quit fit with images in a photo forum.
+++To me, one major problem with critiquing is the fact that on forums like this you do not know what the original intend of an image is. 20+ years ago I did a lot of photo contest judging. With those types of submissions you know what the intent is, and you can judge accordingly, but how many people who reply on here know what the poeple who post on here are shooting for? I shoot for my article illustrations, and stock sales, but images used for those needs can be VERY different from what you will need for something like print sales. -(I said CAN BE )- But critiques on here only look at things the way the people are conditioned to, and people who know stock will see them one way, and people who know only things like photo contests will see them another way.
Hense,
the idea of the icon is ok, but it still wouldn't work for long as it does not take into consideration the "REASON" the image was taken in the first place. And then there are the "guidelines" which I doubt many people read much, if at all, other than to find out the file size needed for posting.
+++To me I'd say that people who post should just come out and say what they are looking for with the critique, PLUS, add what the intent of the image was they are showing. Was it taken to sell framed prints of, for stock, for publishing illustrations, or what? A critique that does not fit the need is almost a useless as no critique at all. A critique that fits those needs is really the only useful one. - - - To me at least.
I look at it that way because in 40 years of taking pics, and 25+ years of working with editors and publishers, I have been exposed to most of the areas of photography and have seen the different ways images are not only needed, but the different looks an image has to have to meet those needs. In a critique forum you either have to accomidate all forms or target the kind of critique you need by stating what the original intended use of the post was when the image was taken.
+ YES, before there are tons of "BUTS" posted, I know there are exceptions where one good critique will cover several uses, but there is also just as many times it doesn't work that way,
hense my thought here.
So, all those who lament about egos getting in the way, personalities etc. jump in! I'm not saying you have to post an image but share something!
I think you do a great job Bill , posting many thoughtful comments and I see you have posted an image in WC#219 , so you know I'm not talking about you personally. But what about the rest of you people?
If you want more images that aren't perfect, that aren't looking for pats on the back, here's your chance, post one. If you want to see more thoughtful, helpfull critiques, then step up and write one.
It's like the old saying; if you want a friend, be a friend.
I find my time is constrained, just like everyone else's is. I have two kids, drive 300-400 miles a day on my job, and actually have stayed married. I don't get around to very many forums very often, but have chipped in to help on the Man & Nature forum. There, I make an EXTRA effort to be sure all photos on my forum get at least two comments (I think David is doing the same.) It is surely discouraging to someone, especially new, who took the time to scan and post an image they obviously like only to get no comments at all. The second category I try to leave comments are for those folks who really seem to be asking for some help and I am able to do it. I actually do mention the weaker points of the image, and also the stronger points. The third category I will comment on are the really exceptional images. Sure, maybe a dozen others made a glowing comment, but I think another one was earned. I try to draw attention to what it was that worked in the image to help the others. I don't try to comment on EVERY photo in M&N, I think people would quickly get tired of reading my posts.
It is uncomfortable to tell a stranger that their prized shot just doesn't work for us, but there are ways to do this diplomatically. It shouldn't be hard for anyone to simply make a comment saying what DID work for them.
I make the effort to comment on new people's photos, especially. This is what helps NPN grow, and it is vital. More than that though, I was once just starting out and was very happy when someone more experienced took time to help me. I am just passing that help along since it was simply given to me. One last thing I'll mention is that hopefully everyone is leaving a lot more comments than they are images. When you do post images, why not tell a little about it? Every picture has a story! I've found over the years that being able to articulate that story in the field has always led to a better photo.
--->Please be sure to comment on new members' photos, especially if they have less than 3 comments after a couple of days.
Kent in SD
You can tell the person what all is right with it.
You can tell them what all is wrong.
You can combine the two,
or
instead of the first 3 you can just tell them what they might try the next time to see if that works better.
If you want to add why, that's up to the person replying to the image.
Before one ever gets to the free-form "Reply to this Topic" box (I also read the bold text above this box.) maybe you need to answer three questions about the photograph. Someone else has to come up with the questions.
Pete D. deep in ... thought
And even if they are how does that help those members improve.
Like others I feel that participation is the best way to get repsonses.
I see little point in commenting on an image that has already had 10 or more responses - What more could I add except inflate someone's ego an extra PSI or 2?
I certainly appreciate those who take the time to comment on my fumbling efforts particularly those members like Guy and Michael whose work I admire.
I don't suppose this will ever be any different because thats the way folks are
Don't sell yourself short Bill, you're just as talented as anyone else here.
Thanks for the compliment Richard (the check's in the mail!)
Bill: Photography is all about the journey! Enjoy your travels!
This is nothing new. Anyone who's posted an image fights this constantly. Killer images get plenty of attention, all of which is warranted and deserved, but not every image is of Marc Adamus quality. The "less than perfect" images are the ones that need critical commentary, suggestions, and honest review.
+++ Wasn't this whole thing started about giving replies to those who need it most, and not adding to the count of those who don't? I haven't seen any experienced photographers who need critiques, so IMO it seems that one way to benefit the most people would be to reply in one of two ways.
1st - those not looking for a critique (experianced photographers) could just state something like,
"Any questions about this image are welcome.)
and
2nd - those wanting feedback can state as mentioned before,
"Please give any and all honest feedback about this image."
For #1, instead of giving feedback, people can learn by asking "questions" about how something was done,
and #2 speaks for itself.
Seems to me that should take care of a lot of problems with this.
Now you just have to get people to do it...........
Your ideas about asking questions is great, but I'm not sure many would willingly advertise that for fear of (1) it making them look pompous and self-important, and (2) being inundated. Still a great idea if it would work.
I don't really think that many people would fell like they looked pompous as most experianced photographers I know are usually more than willing to answer questions and give help.
Maybe instead of how I wrote it before they could say,
"Will answer image questions as time permits", or something like that.
After all I think most peope will have about the same questions about an image anyway,
so one reply can cover many viewers thoughts, and this is really just to seperate the
posts that are looking for feedback from the others that aren't.
By turning one set of posts into a question group, that could also generate
other posts about those questions in the discussion forums.
I think one possible answer to your question, is pretty simple, state in you post why you took the image, what idea came to your mind. That's it, everything else is just a means to an end, yet look through the forums, very few talk about or simply state what that desired end result was. Most of the comments, most of the questions , could be equated to people describing a trip without ever mentioning the destination, why they went or what they hoped to see. Tim
1) Positive reinforcement works better than negative reinforcement for many if not most people--the "wow" is not just ego-boo, but an indication that you hit the target with that audience. Since in any art, hitting the target audience right smack in the emotional center is what you want, the knowledge that 10/15 people were correctly smacked (as opposed to 8/15 the time before) is very useful information. Positive reinforcement is usually more precise (and always at least as accurate) as negative.
2) Even the most detailed negative comments can be wrong. Famous case in writing: BNA (big name author) was told by first editor that a story was too long. Actually, it was too short, and it made a best-selling book when he lengthened it. Less detailed negative comments that give an emotional reaction, combined with some knowledge of the critic's personal biases, is useful. (Personal biases are needed because there is no absolute right or wrong: if you hate stories about dragons, the best story about dragons ever written will leave you cold, and your comments on that story will all be colored by your bias. On this site, I've already noticed that some people express a bias against, say, "bird portraits" or "postcard scenes.")
3) Time constraints are not excuses. They are choices, but we all have a right to our choices. Those of us who have a living to make (whether at a salaried job or self-employed) do have limited time to critique others' works. I have to refuse dozens of requests a year to read newbies' manuscripts (takes a lot longer than looking at picture!) or I wouldn't get my own work done. Moreover, at a certain point expert critiquing impinges on any creative person's workspace, time, and budget. People who are expert enough to give workshops get *paid* to critique. They can't be expected to give it away all the time as well...yes, "paying forward" is good, but so is paying the bills on time.
4) Choosing to comment rather than critique is also a choice, and a reasonable one. I may have something to say about how a picture affected me (excitement, boredom, simple wow) but no expertise on exposure problems (should you have used a different lens or filter? I dunno) and nothing constructive or otherwise to say about composition. Also, for those who believe that positive comments are useful for more than egoboo, making those sorts of comments will be a reasonable choice.
5) I personally like to know not only where a shot was taken, and with what equipment, but why that shot was taken--what was the intent. Whether it is good or bad depends in part on what it was intended to accomplish. Recording species for a site is a different task from attempting to show a specific behavior, or capturing a detailed shot of a specific individual. For example, I'm trying to get identifying shots of cardinals on our place, so that I can identify each individual bird and track its reproductive success. If I capture the identifying characteristics of the head (bill shape, wear on the bill, variations in feather pattern around the eyes, etc.) I don't care if the background is "messy", or the rest of the bird obscured by leaves, or even out of focus. Last year I took a number of images of a "mystery plant"--fairly boring series of stem, leaves, buds, flowers, seeds, not at all art-shots--but when sent to a botanist, they enabled him to identify the plant. At other times, I may be taking a picture because I liked the colors, or the pose of the critter, or some unusual light effect. So it helps if someone states what it was they were trying to accomplish--then comments can be directed to that issue. It's not useful to critique for a quality that wasn't even being attempted.
6) From those who comment, it would be helpful to know what their POV is...are they coming to this image from the POV of someone who likes/doesn't like the *kind* of picture it is? Do they have a "perfect image" in mind, to which this is being compared, or do they look at each image and allow themselves to experience it freshly, without preconceptions? What are their criteria for perfect exposure/sharpness/composition? (I freely admit a bias towards sharpness and clear, even contrasty lighting, probably the result of growing up in the southwest, where such light is natural.) Do they prefer a subject "floating" by itself in a cloud of OOF background, or do they prefer wildlife in settings that clearly show the habitat details? Sometimes this is clear from the comments, but sometimes it's not.
7) The only thing I've found mildly annoying are comments which suggest that something be changed which--in the nature of shooting wildlife in natural settings--can't be. The bird lands on the limb it lands on...that's the picture you get, or don't get. I've seen a lot of comments (not so much of my images, but of many others) suggesting that the photographer should just change the critter's position, or what it's on, or near...again, my personal bias, but I like images that show things in their natural setting--sure, with an OOF background in some cases, but not cropping or cloning out every little thing, and certainly not "change the perch" or "it's too bad it was next to that whatsis..." You can pose livestock and pets and people to improve the background...even get them to stay there while you walk around them. But not wildlife (or, not much wildlife.) Every time I've asked our wintering kestrel to perch *there* and let me get *here*, it's flown away.
But this is my personal opinion, and certainly not binding on anyone else. I have as many biases as anyone else, and expect to find some comments useful and some not when people comment on my images...just as I expect those whose images I comment on will find some of mine useful and some not. To the extent that photography is an art, that it goes beyond craft, beyond technique, perfection is in the eye of the beholder.
Elizabeth Moon
Texas
Elizabeth, I would say that you are right in most areas, but I would also have to say just about all of that would be under perfect conditions, and since nothing in this world is perfect, many exceptions would have to be considered.
Your #6 would be great to get, but you never will.
This post started trying to find ways to get more people to add anything at all to more replies,
so I doubt that even those who give the most on them are going to take ten times longer to add
all of what you listed in there, even though it would be nice.
I've alrady said that I thought that "Image intent" should be included with each post, and in fact I think it should be REQUIRED. You said that, "there is no absolute right or wrong" but with photography that is not really correct. When you shoot for certain photo markets there are rights and wrongs, and when people start out trying to sell their images they learn that real fast. Each photo market has its own standards and requirements, and the same with photo contests, but other "general" areas of photography may have none at all, and you can not critiqure them the same. What one photo may need can be totally different than the next one. + + + THIS IS THE REASON TO FEEL THAT "INTENT" SHOULD BE A REQUIRED ITEM IN ALL POSTS. + + + There are people who post images with barely a half a dozen words about it. They seem to expect everyone else to read their minds and already know what it is all about. I generally skip right over those. If they can't spend two minutes of their time to help me out with what it is about, then I don't waste my time on it.
+++ All of the things in #6 would be great, but I already take time away from other things to try to help out who I can, and I am sure that there are more than a few others on here who do the same, but I don't think no one on here has the time to do all of what you listed.
#1 + Positive reinforcement works better than negative reinforcement.
Agreeded. I have always liked to give ideas for change, edits, or other version ideas for what I see posted in the form, and what they might want to try the next time, along with saying what does work in it now. BUT AGAIN,,,
Feedback should be "TRAGETED" at what the photographer wanted the image to show in the first place, and I think only when the replier (is that a word?) knows what the intent was can they do that.
If NPN wants the images to get more replies, and better ones, then NPN needs to educate the people posting them to give FULL deatils about the images. And if need be, require it. As I said before, a critique that does not fit the photographers needs is pretty much a useless one, and we are not mind readers..........
I am dam glad that you do not do my checking book!
After reading your whole thing I happen to think that if I hadn't of spent all this time on these forums the last week I could have replied to probalby a hundred image posts.
ByeBye