Do you pay attention to number of comments?

I am curious if members pay any attention to an image-poster's number of comments when looking at and commenting on an image.

Unless someone is new to the forum, I typically will not post a comment if it is evident the poster is not commenting on the images of other. Participation makes this website a success. It tends to irk me when I see someone with 50 posts and 15 comments asking for feedback for their image. Quid pro quo and all that.

I was wondering what others thought about it.

Yes. I do pay attention. Close attention - but it's more to the post/comment ratio rather than just the number of comments. I generally do not comment on the images of "takers" and there are some (thankfully very few) who are notorious for just that. I make exception if they're relatively new to NPN and have made few posts.

It seems like this issue comes up from time to time by folks that, like yourself, are a bit frustrated with the phenomenon that you describe. I do pay attention to the post/comment ratio and (with the exception of very new members) often do not comment on an image posted by someone with a ratio that is less than at least 3-4 comments for every post. Occasionally I break from that approach when I see a truly fine image, but like you I believe that "quid pro quo" is an important element of the success of the galleries. I also don't think it takes much time or trouble to post a comment and, more importantly, I think you can learn a bit from the process of developing and expressing critiques.

I think those who post here just to get praise or publicity or to try to sell images as well as those who post here just to get feedback without commenting on other posts themselves are misusing NPN.

Here's a further controversial statement: I know that I am not involved in the "who's who" of photography, and I don't have the inclination to change my thinking because of somebody's being well known, so I may be different from most people here in that way. I think some members truly believe that big names posting here is a good thing for NPN, and they may be right, I don't know. I don't own NPN. But since I'm not selling images through NPN I prefer regular participants, big names or not, over big names who don't participate.

I also look at a poster's comment to post ratio. It is not an absolute determining factor in whether I make a comment or not, but it is a big factor. I think the recommended 5 comments to each post ratio is totally reasonable and I cannot understand why some people can find so much time to post and not much time to comment. I am a firm believer, both on NPN as well as in life, that you must give in order to receive.

I also pay attention and generally won't comment on an image from someone not willing to critique on other people's images. Why waste my time and effort on someone who doesn't want to give back?

I pay attention and I think it's important for all the reasons already stated. I also think the 5:1 target is reasonable but I don't breakout the calculator. If the numbers are in the ballpark, no problem.

The simple answer is yes, I do watch the pattern of takers. C-P ratio should be at least the 5 mentioned as a ball park number.
This issue is nothing new and is certainly not unique to NPN. Other commenting sites have similar issues. Not sure human nature can correct the process, maybe go mechanical with it. I hate to place numbers on things. But, it is just an idea. Basically stated, in order for the image to appear after mounting it in a gallery the person posting must comment 5 times in that given day for their image to surface in the gallery. However, that too could also lead to second hand comments, like; Great shot! or WOW, what a piece of work? Sadly, that could all reciprocate back with like comments also.........

Harley,

Always a pertinent topic and good to bring up now and then. I expect that there a lot of member who feel like you and won't comment on images where the poster chooses not to participate by offering comments on other images. I understand that. That also influences whether or not I may comment on an image; it's certainly a factor. Wearing my member-only hat, I feel the same way as many of you and will pass on offering a comment or critique.

Wearing my NPN/moderator hat I've tempered my thoughts a little over time. Some may recall I used to make comments "encouraging" folks to participate by posting more comments. But after some feedback and thinking on it, I rarely, if ever, make those direct comments any more. I know there are those who support and wish I would make more of an issue of it, but I've chosen civility over scorn. Paying members aren't required to post any comments although it's "recommended" to do so. And as some have mentioned it's a bit easier to give a new member a little honeymoon time as they learn their way around NPN.

Ultimately, I think the best way to handle it is how you're doing it Harley. Simply don't comment on their image. Hopefully for some the lack of comments on their images will get the message across.

Lastly, and unfortunately, the folks who need to get the message probably won't be reading this anyway.

Lon

The ratio of comments to posting is only part of the story. Worthy feedback that is thoughtful, targeted, and detailed ought to be a stronger consideration. Another critique website uses a word counter that invalidates the quick, "Wow, great shot!...another winner!" Though these short bullet statements accurately state the viewers opinion, they offer little value for improvement. Instead, they are a measure of the popularity of the photo or the photographer.

Why bother? Popularity is usually correlated to number of views...so another comment is usually not necessary in terms of identification of a highly prized photo. These shortened comments are OK...and may be misleading regarding the significance and depth....and show a great ratio based on empty comments. We could add a click-counter that allows us to sign in when we 'agree' with a comment ...let that stand for something in terms of popularity.

Then strive for comments to be more meaty and quality.

I have noticed the same Lon on M&N and Landscape now. With new members I encourage that they comment. Older members, well it is all up to them....... No real participation, no comment.

With regards to the number of views on my work, I look more at the number of comments and who is commenting. I do not get a lot of views on my images compared to many, but I do get a lot of quality comments.

I also look at the ratio. If it is very low, I generally do not comment. I find the number of people posting in the Avian gallery to be down quite a bit and so are the comments. In one of my recent posts I actually asked people to comment because the numbers have been so low. I got 3 times more comments on that one particular image. That tells me the people are still out there, they just are choosing not to comment.

If people don't comment then NPN's value goes way down. The galleries are meant for critique and if you can't get a good critique then posting is not doing a person much good other than showing off a photo. I am very concerned with the apparent drop off (long-term and likely not related to season or holidays) in participation on the Avian gallery.

Harley, I agree with you 100%. The number of comments made by the poster absolutely influences or factors into whether I will comment on his or her image. While we are on the subject, I don't necessarily agree with the "5 to 1" comment to post ratio target. I think most people want and should receive more than 5 comments on their own images on average; ergo, everyone should comment more than 5 to 1. Putting this another way, given the number of images that get 20 or more comments, it is just a matter of math that, if everyone followed the 5 to 1 ratio, most images would get far less than even 5 comments. Fortunately, many here comment much more than 5 to 1. Finally, I personally think a simple or short comment is better than none at all (usually).

I don't post images a lot and I don't post a lot of comments on others images. I don't consider whether they are posting comments in deciding whether to comment. Neither do I consider their motives in posting an image for comment. If I see an image that moves me to comment, I comment. If the image doesn't move me in some way, I don't.

I do look at the number of comments, but it is not the major factor if I comment or not. Most of the time, it is if I feel I have something to say about the photograph, be it a comment on the image itself from a tech stand point, or subject matter. I also have no problem with a simple "like" the photo. I know some have commented that a "like or nice image" is not enough of a comment, but to me it lets the poster know someone has looked at the image they posted and thought enough of it to make even a short comment. I have received comments which were helpful, and some not, but still I appreciate any and all comments made. It shows someone took the time to look.

Absolutely yes, I look at the comment/post ratio, and it has a big impact on whether or not I comment on an image. In fact, (and this may be slightly controversial) I would like to see their comment/post ratio right there with their name and image title. I also think that the recommendation to comment on 5 or so images for every one you post should be right there at the top of the Posting Guidelines. I think it's buried down in there somewhere, right? Recently, a new poster noted that they didn't know they were supposed to be commenting on others' images, and I think it really should be one of things a new member sees first that this is a "give and take" site, and there are many, many reasons why you should comment in addition to posting!

Sorry, but this is a hot button for me; I'm on slow internet, horribly slow compared to most people in the lower 48, and I do not want to spend my time waiting for an image top open, only to see that this person has posted 23 images and made 18 comments! Don't they stop and THINK about all the effort that people put into making these comments, and that they really ought to reciprocate?

Besides, I have gotten extremely frustrated over the last couple of years with people just starting with (digital) photography who want INSTANTANEOUS results, and they don't seem to want to have to put out any effort and actually learn anything, they just want the good photo, without really knowing what it takes to make it good. Can you tell it irritates me? I have taught several informal photography sessions, and every time I am blown away by the people who don't want to learn even the basics about their camera or about basic aperture/shutter precepts. Yes, I got off the subject a little bit, but I think "newbies" need to to realize right up front that it will take a little effort on their part to make those fantastic images, and learning how to look at an image and figure why it works or doesn't work is a big step in the right direction.

Further thinking, further answer and full disclosure: I was so obsessed in the beginning that I submitted a post in every gallery every two days. That required lots of comments, all of which in the beginning were only what I liked. I've been only at close to 4:1 pretty much this whole time, and because of all many of you have done for me I commit here again to try very hard to catch up to 5:1. Also, I'm comfortable now to say what I think could be done differently about an image.

I don't really care about 5:1 with other people, though. I just generally look to see if it's about 3:1 or so, and that's okay with me. What stops me from commenting is something like Genny referred to, 23 image posts and 18 comments.

Sorry for replying twice, but I felt really guilty about not having 5:1 and still saying it bothers me when other people don't have a good comment to post ratio.

Interesting thread. I have no idea what my ratio is. I try to comment as much as I can. But I usually only comment if I have something in the nature of constructive "critique" to say. My own (equally controversial) view is that a very large % of the images posted are posted not for honest "critique" but to "showcase" images. I have some images that I know are good. I don't post them for critique. I post images that I am either ambivalent about or know need something, in hopes that the very talented folks her have something to tell me that I don't already know.

My concern about the number of "comments" I (or anybody else) makes here "critiquing" images echoes what a few others have said. What constitutes a post of a critique. "comment" and "critique" are different things. What is the "critique" point of me saying "great image" or "nice capture"?? That is certainly not what I am looking for in a critique and I am not really one to "pile on" when others have already said that.

Interesting thread. I have no idea what my ratio is. I try to comment as much as I can. However, my own (equally controversial) view is that a very large % of the images posted are posted not for honest "critique" but to "showcase" images. I have some images that I know are very good. I don't post them for critique. I post images that I am either ambivalent about or know need something, in hopes that the very talented folks her have something to tell me that I don't already know.

And, "newbie" or not, I am always glad to try to help somebody who know less than I do to improve their work. Patience is a virtue :-).

My concern about the number of "comments" I (or anybody else) makes here "critiquing" images echoes what a few others have said. What constitutes a post of a critique. "comment" and "critique" are different things. What is the "critique" point of me saying "great image" or "nice capture"?? That is certainly not what I am looking for in a critique and I am not really one to "pile on" when others have already said that.

Interesting thread. I have no idea what my ratio is. I try to comment as much as I can. However, my own (equally controversial) view is that a very large % of the images posted are posted not for honest "critique" but to "showcase" images. I have some images that I know are very good. I don't post them for critique. I post images that I am either ambivalent about or know need something, in hopes that the very talented folks her have something to tell me that I don't already know.

And, "newbie" or not, I am always glad to try to help somebody who know less than I do to improve their work. Patience is a virtue :-).

My concern about the number of "comments" I (or anybody else) makes here "critiquing" images echoes what a few others have said. What constitutes a post of a critique. "comment" and "critique" are different things. What is the "critique" point of me saying "great image" or "nice capture"?? That is certainly not what I am looking for in a critique and I am not really one to "pile on" when others have already said that.

Sorry for replying twice, but I felt really guilty about not having 5:1 and still saying it bothers me when other people don't have a good comment to post ratio.

No need to apologize Barbara. For me, the 5:1 thing is not a hard number. I like to think in terms of simply participation. Sure, you posted a lot in the beginning and clearly you were thirsty for knowledge and absorbing it like a sponge. I think people recognize that and factor these kinds of things in and not JUST some number. So don't sweat it. Keep learning and participating.

However, my own (equally controversial) view is that a very large % of the images posted are posted not for honest "critique" but to "showcase" images.

Andy, I don't think so controversial and I think this has been eluded to before. Would it be a surprise to anyone if I admitted that I like to "showcase" my images?? I would hope that I'm like many photographers and I'm proud of my images and yes, I like to show them off and get lots of kudos. Having admitted to that I will also say that receiving honest critiques is EQUALLY important <to me.> I would much rather someone tell me, "Lon, this really isn't working for me because...." rather than getting beer mugs. Do I like the kudos and atta-boys, sure. But it's also important for me and I'm guess many of those "large %" that also appreciate the honest critique. I would even go so far as to put the onus back on the critique-er. Don't be afraid of offering honest opinions about an image, regardless of who's posting it; big name or not. Just be civil and constructive. I think most everyone here appreciates that.

Whew. good thread.

Lon

Lon: Thanks for your comment. I agree with what you are saying. I guess my point is just that I am not inclined to just add another vote (beer mugs, etc.) to the many that are often already there. Occasionally I do, when an image just really impresses me. But mostly, I don't. I do try to give constructive comments when I see an image that I think justifies it. So that probably means my "comment count" is lower.

I am a "relative" newcomer here (a few years, but not enough to be part of the "history" of the site) and so am not sure why, but I understand that once there was a "showcase" area and a "critique" area (I could very well be wrong on my information here). My own frustration with the critique setup today is that there are so many posters (obviously, as Martha would say, "thats a good thing"), that an image gets pushed off the page very rapidly and it is hard to keep a "thread" going on any given image. I jumped in for a while, but have backed off recently, partly due to just being really busy in my "day job." I need to get back in.

This is an interesting thread.
Being one of the new guys, it is uncomfortable for me to be "critical" of other people's work.
I can find something I like in 99% of the images posted, and I'm more comfortable posting that than something negative.
Maybe after a few years on here I will feel differently, but now is one of my best comments (sorry Lon )

There are so many talanted folks on this site, and I have learned so much from them by just looking at their images and reading how they were captured, that I feel very fortunate to have found this site and appreciate what a valuable educational resource it is.

So a large THANK YOU to everyone that posts, images or C&C...

Tom,

When you see an image you like, write a comment as to 'why' you like it. Such comments are very valuable, not only to the poster of the image, but for you, as well; you will be seeing, rather than just looking. In time, you will be able to state not only the positive aspects of an image, but also the aspects you don't particularly care for.

--P

I would like to add on to Preston's comment about writing "why" you like it. Try looking at the image first, before you read any of the other comments. Maybe at this point you're not sure what to write, so look down through the other comments. If there's a comment about something specific in the image, go back and look at the image and see if that is the same thing that you feel. Whether you feel the same way, or just the opposite, you have something to write about.
Images affect each of us very differently, and that's what is interesting: the degree of impact and whether is is pleasing or jarring or stimulating or intriguing. If you find the image boring, try to figure out why, and that's actually quite difficult. For me, sometimes it's just the subject matter that I might not be interested in. If it's something you care about, it's generally easier to figure out why you like/don't like it.
For those or you who say you are new and don't feel like you have much to say, on the contrary, you are very likely to have an honest opinion that's probably less-biased by technical mumbo jumbo than the pros!

Preston and Genny,
Thanks and that is exactly what I am attempting to do.
I agree the "why" is my favorite part of the deal and it has clarified a lot for me also.
There are a lot of really quality images on here and it is interesting to read comments about images I like a lot, with others suggesting ways to improve them.

I really appreciate this thread, too. I'm also a relative newbie (one year on NPN) and am just getting comfortable critiquing the work of others so I guess my post to comment ratio is low. This site is jam packed with a lot of great talent and often feel that I'm not in a position to offer a suggestion to someone who's talent and knowledge is obviously greater than mine, even if there is something about the image that I don't like! I'm still on a learning curve so I welcome serious feedback, but to critique that of an established "pro" can be a little daunting especially when I see a bit of a love fest for an image I think is good, but not great, and maybe not up to the photographer's usual standards. I have to say I've done more reading of others' critiques on various shots as part of my learning process.

Jean,

I understand your trepidation about critiquing an "established pro." I think many new members might feel the same way. Maybe this will help.

I think Ansel Adams was a mediocre photographer. He was a MASTER printer, but his images are no more special than the average image here on NPN. There, I said it. Now of course Ansel isn't here to defend himself, but what I'm trying to say is that it's OKAY for anyone to offer an opinion/critique on ANY image no matter who posted it. Sure, you're probably not going to suggest to Marc Adamus on how to focus stack a landscape, but you can certainly tell him what you like or don't like about the image. In the end, we learn a LOT about our own photography the more we evaluate and critique others.

I hope the photo Gods don't strike me down for this post.

Lon

I think Ansel Adams was a mediocre photographer.

Sacrilege! Repent, Lon--REPENT!! or prepare for an eternity in the unquenchable fires of hell!