Some thoughts on critiquing and increasing responses

The camera club I belong to is part of a Northwest regional camera club group (Columbia Council of Camera Clubs). In their photo competitions they use a 9 point scale in judging their photos:

(1-3 not applicable for NPN submissions)
4 points: The image has no significant technical defects. The composition is not well handled.
5 points: The image is acceptable, but does not create any significant interest.
6 points: The image is solid creating some interest. Technical aspects and image content handled well.
7 points: The image is very strong. Handling is a notch above competent and rewards contemplation.
8 points: The image is exceptional.
9 points: The image is of the highest quality, worthy of publication.

I wonder if such a system might draw more responses to photos. It is sometimes hard to come up with a critique, other than "nice photo" or something along those lines. I think we all have an opinion about every photo that is submitted to NPN, but we can't always put our feelings about a photo into words. This scoring system might provide viewers with a reasonable way to respond. A more detailed critique can also be given (which is what we do in our camera club) and is encouraged.

Just a thought.

I'd wonder if something like would inadvertently make things more competitive, with some people striving for points and upset at low scores. Obviously we now have instances where folks want more comments, so I suppose it's not too dissimilar, but I do wonder if it would really be a positive change.

Max

I don't think that system would be beneficial. It would likely lead to a lot of people leaving comments such as:

4
or
9

I think what you are getting at is people would utilize that "scale" as a jumping point for comments but I don't think that is likely to occur. Furthermore, if you've looked at any "publication" featuring nature photography, you would know that it's not only the "best" images that make it in them haha

Attempts to start a dialogue like this are helpful though as they hopefully can snowball into something productive. My fear, however, is that with todays younger generation (which I am very much a part of), critiqueing is meaningless - they seek to gain as many "likes" and "nice shot" comments as possible.

From my extensive experience on NPN, when things were going really well here, I'd guess that the average age of contributors was 40-50 years old. As that demographic gets pushed out by scores of people posting on various formats, there just isn't interest in a critique site anymore.

My fear, however, is that with todays younger generation (which I am very much a part of), critiqueing is meaningless - they seek to gain as many "likes" and "nice shot" comments as possible.

Hi Luke, from my perspective the younger generation of wanting to see many "likes" and "nice shots" is quite acceptable. However, as in the past during this issue being bantered about there never is a real consensus or resolving point. I think where the item is missed is the fair share ratio of comments to posts. That leads me to passing on commenting on what I call "post and run" types. They never even make the 5 to 1 acceptable ratio. So, once again unless that were to change we merely see nice images scrolling along from page to page.
My point quite bluntly is based on seeing a person the other day with more posted images then comments........Really?

there just isn't interest in a critique site anymore

@Luke - that's an interesting comment and one that I might disagree with. It suggests that people are no longer interested in learning.

It may, of course, be that people's images are receiving so many 'likes' or "ooos" or "wows" or or other such banal feedback on other sites that they don't feel that they need to grow at all? Or that they get their thoughtful feedback elsewhere (and I’d be interested to know where that might be). As a result, maybe we're just witnessing the death of NPN as one generation of photographers (who learned a lot from NPN) move on either to the business of life, doddery old age or to be famous photographers.

I'd say that one of NPN's key strengths is (was?) to promote learning (one glance at 10 years of NPN would tell you that) and the "live" critique is (was?) central to that (irrespective of what Stan says ).

A 9-point (or any other) scale doesn't tell a photographer much at all and provides nothing from which to learn. One thoughtful critique will tell someone much more than a bunch of 4’s or 5’s. It is possible that a rearrangement of NPN’s galleries would be useful with one gallery for people requesting thoughtful critique and the rest for show casing (where the number of views could be taken as a measure of how much the photographer or his/her images are adored and where the peanut gallery can fill space with as many 'likes' or "ooos" or "wows" or or other such banal feedback as they wish …).

I agree that my main interest years ago in NPN was to gain Knowledge from Knowledgeable shooters. To get critiques and to grow. After many years as a member I still acknowledge the site as a place to learn and grow. However I do find that quite often I just want to share an image. Critique is still welcome, just not necessarily sought on every shot. As working professionals we often have selected one of the 40 shots we took and processed it and are using it, selling it or sold it as posted and we just want to share the image. To say this is not a good place to do that would be ridiculous. So you post it and take critiques that we realize are just other peoples opinions. Maybe we should have a gallery for finished works?? Another thing this site needs is a better way to follow posts we have commented on or wish to follow. I have to manually remember what I posted where and when to check back for a response....time consuming and I often just give up trying to recall all of the things I am trying to follow. Especially since I follow 5 different photo sites ....all of the others I can follow conversations and forum posts...and receive notification when new comments and feedback are added (even if its not my post). I would not mind seeing some kind of rating scale added to the site. Maybe just in the a new gallery finished works...you post your rating only...no other critique? It would mean everyone is using the same scale for comparison. Everyone's scale is still going to vary. My 8 might not be your 8...but over time you would get a feel for where other members ratings compared to your own. NPN needs change. Brainstorming is only the first step. Maybe management should start a forum topic and ask for brainstorming ideas from members. Another idea I have had for a long time is that we the members should be voting on WP....that's how its done most other places...Right now I could not tell you how images are picked...moderators choice....its not views....its not comments....So why not give us another venue to participate in. Voting for our picks would generate more participation.

As a moderator, I make WP choices on a combination of views, comments, and intangibles. Often there are multiple images that are very close, so that my choice today might not be my choice tomorrow. One problem with letting everyone vote, and it's easy to see on other sites, is that the WOW factor dominates. That means pushing the saturation, pushing the novelty of the scene or the view and leads to things like the person who crashed his personal drone into Yellowstone's Grand Prismatic Pool, with the possibility that it might plug the outlet and ruin the view for future generations. For me, there is often a large difference between an image that grabs my attention immediately and an image that I'd hang on the wall and look at daily for years. The latter rarely comes with the tons of the drama that seeking internet attention requires. I'd also say that the members already have a say in the WPs through their views and especially through their comments.

Various rating schemes for NPN have been discussed in the past and were generally rejected, since a simple rating says nothing about how one truly feels about a certain image. One idea was to have a rating scheme that would only be 'active' if the viewer wrote a critique. Such an idea might work, but would require significant changes to the code.

In my opinion, the current system is all that is needed. However, in order for it to be successful, members need to write meaningful comments that not only help the photographer, but also generate additional comments and discussion. Also, while I'm at it: Members who post images and want feedback should seriously consider commenting on the work of others. It really is a two-way street.

With regard to the WP's, I believe the current system is the most equitable, and does work. Sure, we may not always agree with a moderator's choice for a WP, but as Mark says, there is more than simply the 'wow!' factor that comes into play.

--P

I agree with Gary that the site should have a means to follow comments on photos that you have commented on without manually checking back. Too time consuming and misses the opportunity for some good give and take.

A rating/scoring system does not interest me at all. I was a member of PhotoNet for ten years or so and the whole rating "game" was completely messed up and detracted from both learning and my experience with the website.

Does anyone have any further thoughts on the subject?

--P

"there just isn't interest in a critique site anymore."

I'd certainly disagree as that was the whole reason the site was suggested to me and I joined fairly recently. My LR catalog is full of photos that would have benefited from camera composition knowledge I've gained this year by reading and receiving critiques. And post processing work has also benefited greatly. I'd never touched dodge and burn until someone made a suggestion on one of my images. I don't get better living in a cave.


"5 to 1 acceptable ratio"

I stalked this site for a few months before joining and read through a lot of the content. So I was aware of this from the start. Giving people the benefit of the doubt, I wonder if people miss this. At the moment when you go to the post a photo page it just says "Please contribute to these galleries by posting your comments too!" Be more explicit with the message such as: "Kindly maintain at least a 5 to 1 comment to post ratio so we can all learn from one another."

Also, the "Welcome to Nature Photographers Network!" email doesn't mention this. If sharing critiques is one of the most important aspects of this site (and I believe it is), it would be good to spell it out in that email.

I like what Gary is saying. Maybe a separate gallery just for seeking and giving critique, and another for displaying finished works. You could even combine some of the categories since participation is down. I've learned a ton from this site, but after 10 years my needs and wants are slightly different than what they were starting out.