Taking posts seriously

[The_Traveler]

[/list]Hmmmm, aren't you breaking your own rule here: thread. ?
Seriously, why all the written 'rules' here? If you think a title is leading the viewer too much, say so (like I did in the thread above), or if you think you're being to mild because the photog is showing his own child: deal with it yourself. So either don't comment or be as honest as you always are.

Another example: if someone actually states 'I know this is out of focus, but I really like it', that gives you some information about the photog. Wouldn't that make it easier for you to comment? Maybe you get into a lively discussion more rapidly.

What I'm saying is: I don't think it's a good idea to come up with a set of general rules like these and think they apply always and everywhere.
pascal

I'm not self-centered enough to think my advice (not rules) applies always and for everyone all the time. Neither do I think that having no guidelines makes any sense, especially for beginners.

To inexperienced people, when asked, I try to give advice in the form of guidelines that err on the conservative side (to keep them from filthy, nasty habits).

When people become slightly more experienced then they understand and can choose when/if/how they want to adhere to them.

And so, as in the title above, I tried to give enough information to make the picture more enjoyable and help the viewer solve the puzzle. I hope the viewer would look at the picture and say,"Nice color and shape, Is that a funnel? I wonder what is in those bottles, My God, that's a gas station. I wonder if that's gasoline, In plastic bottles!"

I didn't title the picture "Gasoline in plastic bottles sold in Laos."
That wouldn't be fun.

 

[Puscas]

I'm not self-centered enough to think my advice (not rules) applies always and for everyone all the time. Neither do I think that having no guidelines makes any sense, especially for beginners.

I know they're not your rules, that's why I've put the word between '..' the first time. Sorry for the mix up there. Still, you're posting this, assuming there are several general things people should live by in this forum. (put in X with the result Y). I don't believe your advice works and it's to 'OP-driven' IMHO.

And so, as in the title above, I tried to give enough information to make the picture more enjoyable and help the viewer solve the puzzle. I hope the viewer would look at the picture and say,"Nice color and shape, Is that a funnel? I wonder what is in those bottles, My God, that's a gas station. I wonder if that's gasoline, In plastic bottles!"

I didn't title the picture "Gasoline in plastic bottles sold in Laos."
That wouldn't be fun.

that's a slippery slope. You're still 'telling the viewer how to look at the picture' (that is: you are excluding the possibilty that this does NOT have anything to do with gasoline. And you ARE telling (at least leading) the viewer they should be surprised about the fact there's gasoline in plastic bottles).



pascal

 

[The_Traveler]

I know they're not your rules, that's why I've put the word between '..' the first time. Sorry for the mix up there. Still, you're posting this, assuming there are several general things people should live by in this forum. (put in X with the result Y). I don't believe your advice works and it's to 'OP-driven' IMHO.

that's a slippery slope. You're still 'telling the viewer how to look at the picture' (that is: you are excluding the possibilty that this does NOT have anything to do with gasoline. And you ARE telling (at least leading) the viewer they should be surprised about the fact there's gasoline in plastic bottles).

As I see this discussion, it has nothing to do with any contradictory ideas you have, you just want me to say that my advice is 'wrong' and you want to continue to wordsmith any interaction until you find an inconsistency and you can say 'Aha.'

Well, I like my advice and I'll stick with it - and stick with giving it - and modify my advice and own behavior when the situation suits until a more coherent set of guidelines appears.

 

[neea]

Interesting topic!!!
I was actually thinking of some of this earlier when I was in a gallery and seen a few titles like 'Critique please' or 'C&C welcome'.

I too thought there was a specific section just for this and I did feel they should've been added there instead.

However, I realized they were new (how many of us ACTUALLY read ALL the rules before posting things... I usually ignore anything that says STICKY: in front of it. haha) and decided to give them what they asked for.

Giving critique is hard. We should have a little point system so when you first sign up you're asked what level of harshness you want, 1 being low/none, 5 being as honest/harsh as people can be.
That would make it much easier for us to not hurt sensitive feelings when we're just trying to help.

I dont think my mothers famous words apply here "If you dont have anything good to say, don't say it at all".
Perhaps it should be "If you don't have anything USEFULL/HELPFUL to say" move to the next thread.
If you aren't willing to take the time to type more than a one liner (in critque sections obviously) then maybe you aren't the person to give feedback on that particular picture.

If I don't have my own ideas I move on. And I only agree with a few people. I avoid threads where the last 10 replies say "Crop it" "I agree" "I agree"....
I'm sure by this point the poster has got the point.

 

[Puscas]

As I see this discussion, it has nothing to do with any contradictory ideas you have, you just want me to say that my advice is 'wrong' and you want to continue to wordsmith any interaction until you find an inconsistency and you can say 'Aha.'

? Sorry, but that's really not me. This is not personal, I'm just trying to say that I don't agree with your 'general advice' because it's too general for what happens on this forum. I used the examples to point that out.
I hope you read my answers as a serious attempt to a discussion, not as a semantic battle.



pascal

 

[Aquarium Dreams]

Someone should sticky this.

6

 

[The_Traveler]

Giving critique is hard. We should have a little point system so when you first sign up you're asked what level of harshness you want, 1 being low/none, 5 being as honest/harsh as people can be.
That would make it much easier for us to not hurt sensitive feelings when we're just trying to help.

I dont think my mothers famous words apply here "If you dont have anything good to say, don't say it at all".
Perhaps it should be "If you don't have anything USEFULL/HELPFUL to say" move to the next thread.

This might be a good place to insert an quote from an old acquaintance of mine. He posted this on another photo site in 2003:

I have realised that among the members of the community there must be a huge number of different native languages, and that for many English is not a first language. Indeed even amongst those of us that consider English to be our mother tongue there are many strange and varied ways of saying the same thing. So I thought I would produce this a handy guide to .... (my own critique code), It’s the Sarf ( Local pronunciation of South ) London version of English.

It’s a simple what I say and what it means guide.

“Utterly stoating” The ultimate comment. Never used, as yet, but means a picture so good I wish I’d taken it.

“Cracking Picture” - I’m impressed with this.

“Well Nifty” – I like this a lot.

“Nifty Picture” – Good, but not as good as Cracking or Well nifty
( 3 stars not 5 ).

“Interesting” – You just got away with this.

“May I suggest” – Borderline picture than can be rescued with the use of Photoshop.

“Obviously a personal view” – Very close to rubbish.

“A Considered View” – You must have thought about posting this for ages because lets face it - it’s rubbish.

“Crafted” - You have smacked this to death with a load of filters and it’s still rubbish.

“Personal memento” - Please remove this picture from here immediately, it is SO bad. Delete it from your computer and never let it be seen again.

“Please post more” – While you are doing that we can all avoid the post and not have any more of your pictures inflicted on us.

“Charming” – I’m going to vomit it’s a twee horrible kiddie picture.

“Stunning” – Your audacity at posting this turgid picture.

"Superbly Done"...No one else could have made such a pigs ear of such a great scene

'Your picture is brilliant , i hope you don't mind but i've played around with it''. ...Your picture is pure crap , but with a bit of help from me , i'll make it viewable

"Adequate Depth of Field" ... the tip of her ear is in focus but little else.

"Great depth of field"...there isn't a single point in this pic that is in focus you numpty

"Quite a A large panorama".... You need to crop it as the focus of the picture is lost.

"Novel Portrait".... This person needs the assistance of a plastic surgeon, or a better photographer.

"Intimate moment".... If you are going to put this sort of thing up on the web, you should take advantage of the content and charge for this rude trash.

"I love this picture"...Because it is soooo BAD it makes mine look awesome.

"A veritable cornucopia of delights".... Really good picture I have no idea why, and you have no idea of what I’ve said. So we’re even

“Induces a sense of intense calm” .....I was so bored I fell asleep

"Nice to see an exurban gallery"..... You need to visit a town and stop doing THAT to the sheep.

Please feel free to add to this.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

"Totally awesome!" ... I don't have a clue what to say but I have to say something to stop people thinking I don't participate.

"Excellent use of the rule of thirds" ... I don't have a clue what to say but I want people to think I'm an intellectual so I can't use 'totally awesome'.

"We can all learn a lot from you" ... about how not to take pictures.

 

[Alex_B]

The worst crit - and there an awful lot of them around - is when the person giving it tries to tell the photographer that he, the critic, would not have taken the picture in that way but would have done it differently.

Then, from your point of view, I better should not give any critique on this forum, since ALL my critique comes from my very personal point of view, which means "I would have taken the picture differently". I see no reason why I should obscure this fact in phrasing it differently.

Saying I would have done it differently clearly states this as a personal opinion.

I would not know what other type of critique to give.

An alternative would be to say "you should have done this differently" .. without any "maybe" in there, this would sound much more dogma-like, as if someone is selling some universal truth... not my taste.

 

[The_Traveler]

Are we treating photography as different from the other art forms?

It seems that in criticism of painting, music, dance, etc. the emphasis is on review of what has been done rather than what could/should have been done.

 

[Alex_B]

Are we treating photography as different from the other art forms?

It seems that in criticism of painting, music, dance, etc. the emphasis is on review of what has been done rather than what could/should have been done.

I am very sorry, but I personally post here to learn and improve.

And if people in here tell me what they think of what I have done, that is nice. But I much more appreciate when they give me some hints how I could improve. And that means, how I could have done it better.

If people refuse telling me so, even though they have an idea about how they would have done it to make it better ... sorry then this is very sad.

 

[The_Traveler]

I am very sorry, but I personally post here to learn and improve.

And if people in here tell me what they think of what I have done, that is nice. But I much more appreciate when they give me some hints how I could improve. And that means, how I could have done it better.

If people refuse telling me so, even though they have an idea about how they would have done it to make it better ... sorry then this is very sad.

I didn't say that we shouldn't.

I was trying to make the point indirectly that in most formal art criticism, the artist has full control of their tools and so a criticism of their physical/technical abilities is unwarranted whereas here we are not really doing critique but a combination of criticism and teaching.

OTOH, a commenter must also recognize that what the commenter sees as 'wrong' may be merely a different choice of style or vision.

BTW, I didn't understand what you were sorry about but don't worry. I didn't take offense.

 

[Alex_B]

I was trying to make the point indirectly that in most formal art criticism, the artist has full control of their tools and so a criticism of their physical/technical abilities is unwarranted whereas here we are not really doing critique but a combination of criticism and teaching.

I agree. OK, maybe I read it too quickly so on first reading I did not get what your post implied.

OTOH, a commenter must also recognize that what the commenter sees as 'wrong' may be merely a different choice of style or vision.

I agree, that is why one can always start with "In my opinion", or with "I think" if we want to make that clear.

BTW, I didn't understand what you were sorry about but don't worry. I didn't take offense.

Well, that was more a phrase, not meaning that I am really sorry for anything But for a second I thought that my way of giving (and expecting) critizism on this forum was maybe not appreciated here.

EDIT: on re-reading your post, it is all clear to me now. Now I can be sorry for getting it wrong!

 

[LaFoto]

Something makes me believe (though I am guessing here) that on an art forum (lets think about painting for the moment) there can also be given critique as to the technique of a painting, the strength with which the brush was put to the canvas, the size of brush, the stroke of brush, the colours, their density, distribution, all this apart from any other critisisable aspect, and all this apart from all the personal-style aspects.

So whether you try to create an image of whichever kind with pencils, ink and feather, paint and brush or a camera with or without pp software does not make that much of a difference.

Each time this image/photo will be an expression of yourself.
And as with words, for example, some can express themselves better and some can express themselves less good. And as with words, for example, everyone can learn. You can learn to write a pleasing and correct (grammatically, with regards to spelling, with regards to how to build it up etc) essay, and you can learn to express yourself in your photography.

Only much later will come a point where one finds he can even write a novel and make this a success, or a drama, or poems or so, whereas the other does not have this gift. And only much later will someone who likes to draw or paint realise that he is not going to find his way into any arts lexicon in later years but will just have to enjoy being creative for himself. And while all can learn and learn more and learn even more about photography, some will become Ansel Adamses or Henri Cartier-Bressons, and others will stay the very normal, simple, enjoying herself "LaFoto of TPF", but no more.

Bearing in mind that the top of the mountain is a tiny space only on which only few can stand, there is all the area of the slopes. From the very foot always leading to the top.

And talking about one's photos on here, on TPF, not necessarily always in the form of serious critique, but also equally well in the form of nothing but a nice CONVERSATION on the photo, helps everyone to climb.

It is also a matter of sensibility towards our other members here on TPF whether you use harsh words or milder words. What works with some in the form of critique does not work with others.

So TPF can teach us even more!
Not only can it teach us to look at our own work more carefully, to become more selective in what we show (for example), and to plan future work better, it also helps us to learn how to deal with our fellow men!

Now isn't this a wonderful place?

 

[Hertz van Rental]

Then, from your point of view, I better should not give any critique on this forum, since ALL my critique comes from my very personal point of view, which means "I would have taken the picture differently". I see no reason why I should obscure this fact in phrasing it differently.

Saying I would have done it differently clearly states this as a personal opinion.

I would not know what other type of critique to give.

As has been stated by others above, when giving a crit on a picture you have to talk about that particular picture.
If you say 'I would have taken the picture differently' well d'uh! If this wasn't the case then we all be taking the same picture.
Stop and think for a moment. How does telling someone that you would have taken the picture differently help anyone? It's a self-evident fact.
People who want to improve need to be told how they can improve. They don't want to be told how to take pictures like someone else.
So now we come to the essential bit.
How can we give a crit that does this?
We can only make suggestions on how to improve a picture if the photographer tells us what they were trying to achieve. It doesn't have to be an intellectual analysis or some deep and meaningful symbolism. Just a clue or two as to what the photographer was trying to get people to see when they look at the picture.
Why do we need to know this?
Suppose a photographer takes a picture of his/her child. The intention is for us to see the child through the photographer's eyes. The photographer sees the child as beautiful and wonderful.
Now, if the picture makes the child look anything other than beautiful and wonderful it is clear that the photographer hasn't got it right.
This gives the person doing the crit a way in. They can try to analyse the image to find out why the picture doesn't work and then make constructive suggestions on how to rectify these faults.
You are then not telling the photographer how you would have taken the picture but giving them useful insight and helpful advice.
Surely that is the point of a crit?

The bottom line is that without at least some information from the photographer regarding their intentions no-one can give a crit that is anything other than their opinion and what they might have done in the same situation.
A good crit should be two-way communication.