Re: New Rules for Critique

[kilifila66]

voodoo, no one is sadder than I about where I live. But sometimes in life you have to endure the barren tundra to get to the oasis!

 

[elsaspet]

Ok, I've been reading along, and this is my humble opinion on the matter.

Tuna, I am sometimes confused why some posts are removed.

However, in saying this, I will also say that I was a guilty party in part of why the forum was changed. I was one of those, "that's cool!" people. I had treated this forum just like the photo gallery. I said when I liked a picture, and maybe why I liked it, but kept my mouth shut when I didn't like it. I just moved on.

But then as I started to post more and more in the critique section, I noticed that I was more enlightened not by the post saying, "It sucks" or "It rocks" but by the suggestions on how I could make it better, or what exactly made it appealing. I have never owned a camera before Christmas of last year, and so to me, as a person who fell in love with this medium and is willing to sell my home and my car to make my lifelong dream a reality, I NEED this information. I NEED the critique section to be a critque section. To me, it's the difference between showing my photos and possibly selling them.

I'm as green as they come, I'll be the first to admit it, and that is why I find this particular area so appealing. I want to know the "why" of things.

Sorry if I'm rambling, but I really like this forum better now. Just my 2 pennies.

 

[voodoocat]

voodoo, no one is sadder than I about where I live. But sometimes in life you have to endure the barren tundra to get to the oasis!

You didn't have to take down Go Huskers. I was just giving you a hard time Try not to take me too serious

 

[Aoide]

You didn't have to take down Go Huskers. I was just giving you a hard time Try not to take me too serious

Ok... good. I'm glad you said this, because I was really confused where you were getting the Go Huskers from.

I confuse easily.

 

[ShutteredEye]

Tuna:

I think you're waaaaaaay over reacting here. Intimidation and Gestapo Tactics??!?!? Good LORD, it's an INTERNET FORUM!!!!

Lighten up, open your mind to doing things a different way, and see if you can learn something new. Have you even attempted to follow the new guidelines, or did you go straight to complaining?

the_dust:

I'm with everyone else. Come back when you can't stay as long.

 

[the_dust]

kirk charles ciaglaski

 

[Hertz van Rental]

kirk charles ciaglaski

Ah! I see. That explains everything. Give our regards to the people of your home planet.

 

[StvShoop]

When posting in the critique forum, you are looking for feedback on your photo and generally for ways it could be improved. If you are not looking for this kind of feedback, the photo would generally just be for display purposes and would be better suited for the general gallery where the responses would be more general.

If you are looking for this specific level of feedback, I'll ask that you answer a simple question. Why are you posting this photo in the critique area and what are you looking to improve? If every post addressed that simple question, I believe it would more than meet the goal we're striving for and I believe the quality of critique in the forum will continue to improve. Obviously, the more information, the better things can be, but nothing beyond that is required.

totally agree with the first paragraph. but what if the submitter wants feedback, but not a "specific level" of feedback, as you say? couldn't they post in the critique area without submitting the extra info? This would allow for more unexpected critiques. If the photo has a problem with contrast, and you state "i wish i knew how to fix this contrast issue", then you'll probably only get comments about the contrast. If you don't state something like that, then comments will come from all over the blue yonder of other photographers' experienced advice, and you'll learn interesting new things that were unexpected.
Hope that's of some use to you chase. Ask me if something was unclear, i feel like i'm being a little brief at the moment.

At the moment, I don't understand why these rules came about, i'm not quite back into the groove of tpf yet. With that in mind, i'll say that the rules (what i've learned about them from reading this thread only) appear to be overly controlling. In some of the posts there were mentionings of needing the rules because of the difficulty of dealing with the sheer volume of threads "inappropriate" to the critique area; it would all make sense to me if that's the case.

i've also gotta say in response to a trend i've noticed in lots of the replies... the image itself is information. an image that isn't accompanied by additional information is not uncritiquable. anyone who looks at a photograph with a photographer's eye will be compelled to think of a way to change it or to make it "better". A lack of additional explanation to a photo does not make the photo a void, as it seems some people are suggesting.
So perhaps the poster won't find any use of the critiques they get from an un-narrated photo. So what? If that happens, and assuming the person really wanted their photo to recieve advice to begin with, then at that point they'll try to become more specific in what they want to learn. If a person doesn't have any interest in getting input on their photo, then yeah, totally plop the thread in the general gallery.

i place a lot of importance on the act of the critique. i'm glad to see (from the huge number of replies) that lots of other people do too.
coming into this thread cold, i read EVERYTHING up to the last post before mine.
:hail: *the end is here!!*

 

[Hertz van Rental]

The guidelines came about precisely because people were not posting information with their images.
Whilst I agree totally that the image alone can elicit critical discussion, we have to keep a sense of proportion and place.
This is not an Art Gallery or Museum. This is a Critique Forum in a public access Photography Chat Board. The majority of people who post here do so in an attempt to get positive feedback and advice on improving their pictures. They want to learn.
But in order to learn they need help. Not just help with taking pictures, but help with how to look at pictures, think about pictures and talk about pictures.
These are not skills that come easily or naturally to people - I know this for a fact, having taught Photography over a wide range for more some 20 years.
There are three aspects to a full and proper critique: an appraisal of the work based on reasons which are founded in criteria.
Statements of appraisal are about the merits of the work being judged.
Reasons are statements that support an appraisal.
Criteria are rules or standards upon which appraisals are ultimately based.
Hands up those of you who actually knew all that.
In casual critiques, appraisals are abundant but reasons are rare and criteria rarer still. Judgements without reasons become nothing more than opinion polls. Just look at the 'critiques' posted in this forum prior to JonMikal.
Often the comments were just 'Wow!' or a bowing smilie. What help do comments like that give to someone trying to improve?
You can only learn when people give reasons for their judgements.
What we were trying to do in here was to put in some simple criteria guidelines so that people asking for, and giving, critiques were all playing the same game. It was to level the playing field, if you prefer, between beginners and the more advanced photographers. The ultimate aim was to get everyone to help everyone else get something useful and helpful out of showing their pictures: for people to grow and learn and become better photographers.
Whatever we did we knew that we would upset someone - but we had hoped that people would show some toleration and understanding and help us try to make this work.
The fault probably lies with us in that we failed to explain our aims and reasons - and we did not make the guidelines clear enough. We apologise, but this discussion has been very helpful in sorting a lot of these problems out and we hope that we can now improve and simplify the guides to cope with a wider range of views - and that you all understand our position and aims better and will help us make the Critique Forum the useful resource and learning centre that it has the potential to be.

Jon and I are now going to re-think the guidelines and re-formulate them taking on board all the views we have heard here (a juggling act if ever there was one).
We will then post them up for general discussion. The aim is to get a simple set of easily understood guidelines that the majority is comfortable with - along with an acceptable way of enforcing them.