Saying you like something

[pjaye]

Have you considered how damn disrespectful and dismissive of me your post is.
After all that the mods have said about not attacking someone personally?

You ought to read your own rules.

Have you considered how dismissive and disrespectful YOUR original post was to those of us that don't post critique?

 

[The_Traveler]

Have you considered how dismissive and disrespectful YOUR original post was to those of us that don't post critique?

Why don't you pick out the sentences that make you feel disrespected?
That might help me understand why you are upset.

 

[terri]

Don't do that - you'd be playing right into his hands. My impression is that Lew regards TPF as some kind of professional/teaching environment, first and foremost - and as a social site, a distant second. Out of that notion come these kinds of threads which by turn result in unfortunate comments making people feel lazy or inadequate.

This is merely another thread in a long string from Lew espousing his opinion on how members should post in the Gallery sections of TPF. Granted, correct and expansive critique goes over many elements of an image, the technical ones mentioned here as well as one’s personal reaction to it (the “I like/don’t like it” viewer response).

But nowhere in the TPF guidelines is it suggested that if you don’t have the time, knowledge, or inclination to respond to every image you view with this type of C&C means you are committing some kind of violation.
This is just Lew expressing an apparently dearly-held pet peeve. It is shared by some, but not by everyone, and you needn’t feel like you are somehow a lesser poster here for not adhering to his viewpoint. It’s not his job to guard against TPF becoming “a mommy site” - another comment that comes off somewhat poorly in tone.

People come to TPF with a wide range of experience, interests - and even the desire to learn. The camaraderie that Lew mentions in a dismissive way is actually extremely important to an international forum – and friendliness is actually among the behavioral guidelines listed in the FAQ’s here, so offering someone a simple, friendly comment is something we will continue to encourage.

Have at it! :sun:

Have you considered how damn disrespectful and dismissive of me your post is.
After all that the mods have said about not attacking someone personally?

You ought to read your own rules.

I don't have to read them; I wrote them. Have you considered how disrespectful and dismissive of the entire membership your many posts are on this subject? Do you believe you can continue to toss out bits of napalm like this and act like your fellow members should not become, by turns, upset, hurt, angry or insulted? If not, then please consider that going forward. It would be greatly appreciated.

Anything further you'd like to say, please take it to PM. Thanks.

 

[Derrel]

Pixmedic, I'm not saying the forum "isn't running right". Terri JUST stepped in with clear, pointed, editorial guidance.

As to the FAQ's...those are largely dusty, outmoded ways of avoiding doing daily or weekly or semi-monthly editorial guidance posts. The FAQ's are in the special collections room at the library--not out where the real people are. I think that the FAQ's, as good as they are, just do not really play much part in the day-to-day running of the posts and the sub-forums. What I mean is that, like in this post topic, we have one member who calls this a Photo Community, and advocates with a well-written post, a lengthy thesis about the value and import of C&C as a way to grow...so this doesn't become "a mommy site". Ouch!

I agree about C&C being helpful to some people, but I am not talking about moderating, or FAQ's...I am talking about what large media organizations call "editorial guidance", so that we, the writers [many of us write rather than illustrate out points], know what we're supposed to do. Moderating is different from editorial guidance. FAQ's, as good as they are, are NOT editorial guidance. Terri's post above **is** editorial guidance [post #29]. Not from a rank and file guy like me or Lew, but from "above".

I'm not upset about the moderating work; it's been pretty good I think. Hey, I've been warned, I've been banned, I've been reigned in...I've also posted my butt off, and so on. I love TPF. I put a LOT of effort into it. I just think we need a balanced, wholistic POV here, coming from the higher-ups. More communication. In advance. More street-level editorial guidance, and less of a "it's dealt with in the FAQ," type of approach.

I dunno. I try and offer C&C based on the user/poster/shooter and their goals. I praise cute grandbabies even if the shots are weak. I think that learning more about the nuts and bolts of photography before going out and shooting pictures is the better approach, rather than C&C after the fact. I think maybe for example, editorially, we could be encouraged to TRY SOMETHING for a week; like, say, shoot indoor flash pics; or, work with out LONGEST LENS for a weekend, stuff like that, or to shoot and convert to B&W, or to try "something", as a group, as a community, by the editors, the taste-makers, the rule-deciders. And see what happens. The FAQ's are the by-laws; the mods are the police; the prisons and jails are banning, temp and permanent.

What I am saying is C&C is that The_Traveler has held the opinion that C&C is a crucial element to improve. I really do not agree on how valuable it is. I think it's good, but NOT really the key to the success of TPF. I think a more editorial guidance approach to forum issues might help things run better, might make people feel more like participating.

**Please note--I had not seen any of the subsequent posts after post #29 and #30 when I wrote the above in direct reply to Pixmedic's post. Anyway...I love TPF, and will continue to TRY and behave as best as I can, and to contribute as best as I know how to. Now...I have some 27- year old film to develop...

 

[AmberAtLoveAndInk]

I have learned to love the hard comments and use it as fuel to better my work. Though lately I really haven't been given any hard critique.... it's almost unnerving now lol because I'm sure that for as long as I live I will be working towards the "perfect photographic form" and I could really use a big jerk to shake me up and get the creativity flowing again!!!

 

[terri]

I'm not saying the forum "isn't running right". Terri JUST stepped in with clear, pointed, editorial guidance.

As to the FAQ's...those are largely dusty, outmoded ways of avoiding doing daily or weekly or semi-monthly editorial guidance posts. The FAQ's are in the special collections room at the library--not out where the real people are. I think that the FAQ's, as good as they are, just do not really play much part in the day-to-day running of the posts and the sub-forums. What I mean is that, like in this post topic, we have one member who calls this a Photo Community, and advocates with a well-written post, a lengthy thesis about the value and import of C&C as a way to grow...so this doesn't become "a mommy site". Ouch!

I agree about C&C being helpful to some people, but I am not talking about moderating, or FAQ's...I am talking about what large media organizations call "editorial guidance", so that we, the writers [many of us write rather than illustrate out points], know what we're supposed to do. Moderating is different from editorial guidance. FAQ's, as good as they are, are NOT editorial guidance. Terri's post above **is** editorial guidance [post #29]. Not from a rank and file guy like me or Lew, but from "above".

I'm not upset about the moderating work; it's been pretty good I think. Hey, I've been warned, I've been banned, I've been reigned in...I've also posted my butt off, and so on. I love TPF. I put a LOT of effort into it. I just think we need a balanced, wholistic POV here, coming from the higher-ups. More communication. In advance. More street-level editorial guidance, and less of a "it's dealt with in the FAQ," type of approach.

I dunno. I try and offer C&C based on the user/poster/shooter and their goals. I praise cute grandbabies even if the shots are weak. I think that learning more about the nuts and bolts of photography before going out and shooting pictures is the better approach, rather than C&C after the fact. I think maybe for example, editorially, we could be encouraged to TRY SOMETHING for a week; like, say, shoot indoor flash pics; or, work with out LONGEST LENS for a weekend, stuff like that, or to shoot and convert to B&W, or to try "something", as a group, as a community, by the editors, the taste-makers, the rule-deciders. And see what happens. The FAQ's are the by-laws; the mods are the police; the prisons and jails are banning, temp and permanent.

What I am saying is C&C is that The_Traveler has held the opinion that C&C is a crucial element to improve. I really do not agree on how valuable it is. I think it's good, but NOT really the key to the success of TPF. I think a more editorial guidance approach to forum issues might help things run better, might make people feel more like participating.

**Please note--I had not seen any of the subsequent posts after post #29 and #30 when I write the above in direct reply to Pixmedic's post]. anyway...I love TPF, and will continue to TRY an behave as best as I can, and to contribute as best as I know how to. Now...I have some 27- year old film to develop...

I agree with the majority of what you have said, and I *think* I follow your train of thought. We must disagree about the value of the FAQ's, however. In a site this size, you must have them, refer to them, and use them as a way to guide people along in their interactions with one another.

Your comment about being encouraged to try something for a week...well, we do have the Photo Assignments and Technical Challenges sub-forum where this very notion is put to use. Again, it is member-driven, and probably came about from a member's idea. Stuff like this is what make TPF work, in my opinion - not on how well or how expansive member comments are on one another's images. I guess we agree on that point as well.

 

[runnah]

I think TPF is great up until a point. Learning and honing your technical skills is what the TPF community excels at. Finding your voice or style is where you need to branch out.

 

[pixmedic]

Pixmedic, I'm not saying the forum "isn't running right". Terri JUST stepped in with clear, pointed, editorial guidance.

As to the FAQ's...those are largely dusty, outmoded ways of avoiding doing daily or weekly or semi-monthly editorial guidance posts. The FAQ's are in the special collections room at the library--not out where the real people are. I think that the FAQ's, as good as they are, just do not really play much part in the day-to-day running of the posts and the sub-forums. What I mean is that, like in this post topic, we have one member who calls this a Photo Community, and advocates with a well-written post, a lengthy thesis about the value and import of C&C as a way to grow...so this doesn't become "a mommy site". Ouch!

I agree about C&C being helpful to some people, but I am not talking about moderating, or FAQ's...I am talking about what large media organizations call "editorial guidance", so that we, the writers [many of us write rather than illustrate out points], know what we're supposed to do. Moderating is different from editorial guidance. FAQ's, as good as they are, are NOT editorial guidance. Terri's post above **is** editorial guidance [post #29]. Not from a rank and file guy like me or Lew, but from "above".

I'm not upset about the moderating work; it's been pretty good I think. Hey, I've been warned, I've been banned, I've been reigned in...I've also posted my butt off, and so on. I love TPF. I put a LOT of effort into it. I just think we need a balanced, wholistic POV here, coming from the higher-ups. More communication. In advance. More street-level editorial guidance, and less of a "it's dealt with in the FAQ," type of approach.

I dunno. I try and offer C&C based on the user/poster/shooter and their goals. I praise cute grandbabies even if the shots are weak. I think that learning more about the nuts and bolts of photography before going out and shooting pictures is the better approach, rather than C&C after the fact. I think maybe for example, editorially, we could be encouraged to TRY SOMETHING for a week; like, say, shoot indoor flash pics; or, work with out LONGEST LENS for a weekend, stuff like that, or to shoot and convert to B&W, or to try "something", as a group, as a community, by the editors, the taste-makers, the rule-deciders. And see what happens. The FAQ's are the by-laws; the mods are the police; the prisons and jails are banning, temp and permanent.

What I am saying is C&C is that The_Traveler has held the opinion that C&C is a crucial element to improve. I really do not agree on how valuable it is. I think it's good, but NOT really the key to the success of TPF. I think a more editorial guidance approach to forum issues might help things run better, might make people feel more like participating.

**Please note--I had not seen any of the subsequent posts after post #29 and #30 when I wrote the above in direct reply to Pixmedic's post. Anyway...I love TPF, and will continue to TRY and behave as best as I can, and to contribute as best as I know how to. Now...I have some 27- year old film to develop...

I guess its just the definition of editorial guidance that is eluding me.
you have a much broader scope of forum experience here having been a member since '09, and probably have seen many different "leadership" styles come and go along with the usual membership turnover.
I just wish I had a better understanding of what I could do in a preemptive moderating sense, as apposed to moderating after the fact.

 

[Civchic]

At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy. Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules. I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group. Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will. Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.

Although I do really like this place. What I took away from Lew's original post (what I chose to take away) is that "good pic" posts are nice, but I *do* wish I got more truly critical analysis on my photos. A lot of the time I post things to show off what I've learned, or accomplished, and the pats on the back are awesome (keep em comin!). A posting that gets nothing but crickets tells me just as much as a solid critique - it's a boring photo. But a true, solid critique (such as when I posted my first soccer photos) is really a leap forward in knowledge for me and I love it.

 

[pixmedic]

At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy. Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules. I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group. Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will. Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.

Although I do really like this place. What I took away from Lew's original post (what I chose to take away) is that "good pic" posts are nice, but I *do* wish I got more truly critical analysis on my photos. A lot of the time I post things to show off what I've learned, or accomplished, and the pats on the back are awesome (keep em comin!). A posting that gets nothing but crickets tells me just as much as a solid critique - it's a boring photo. But a true, solid critique (such as when I posted my first soccer photos) is really a leap forward in knowledge for me and I love it.

I think one of the best ways to get the kind of critique you want, is to be specific about it when you post a picture.
post a picture, and try to express as best as possible what you want to get out of posting it.
technical critique, processing options, ways to improve, artistic critique, just sharing...whatever it is you are looking for.
I think the trap most of us fall into is that we post a picture without really having a good idea on what we expect to get out of posting.

 

[snerd]

At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy. Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules. I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group. Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will. Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.

Although I do really like this place. What I took away from Lew's original post (what I chose to take away) is that "good pic" posts are nice, but I *do* wish I got more truly critical analysis on my photos. A lot of the time I post things to show off what I've learned, or accomplished, and the pats on the back are awesome (keep em comin!). A posting that gets nothing but crickets tells me just as much as a solid critique - it's a boring photo. But a true, solid critique (such as when I posted my first soccer photos) is really a leap forward in knowledge for me and I love it.

I think that's the underlying principle at work here......................... who can take constructive criticism and who can't. Until one can figure out who is who, one doesn't offer C&C because they might come off as a mean person. Can't say as I blame them.

 

[Civchic]

At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy. Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules. I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group. Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will. Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.

Although I do really like this place. What I took away from Lew's original post (what I chose to take away) is that "good pic" posts are nice, but I *do* wish I got more truly critical analysis on my photos. A lot of the time I post things to show off what I've learned, or accomplished, and the pats on the back are awesome (keep em comin!). A posting that gets nothing but crickets tells me just as much as a solid critique - it's a boring photo. But a true, solid critique (such as when I posted my first soccer photos) is really a leap forward in knowledge for me and I love it.

I think one of the best ways to get the kind of critique you want, is to be specific about it when you post a picture.
post a picture, and try to express as best as possible what you want to get out of posting it.
technical critique, processing options, ways to improve, artistic critique, just sharing...whatever it is you are looking for.
I think the trap most of us fall into is that we post a picture without really having a good idea on what we expect to get out of posting.

You're probably very correct. When I posted the soccer photos it was clearly aimed at "The noise in these photos is terrible, how can I fix it?" and got clear, informative answers back. Which may have included what some would interpret as meanness (ie, "Yes, it IS terrible, you've underexposed them all and the noise is coming from the attempt to repair your mistake"). But that's not mean, it's helpful!

Snerd, I suppose you're correct as well - but anyone who cannot take a little bit of "This is wrong...but here is what I would do" probably shouldn't be showing people their pictures (or writing, or poetry, or woodworking...)

 

[Derrel]

This whole thread has grown pretty long, and difficult to follow.

I understand that the site is member-driven, but of course, any organization can be improved. I suspect Lew's intention in his OP was to put out there what he thinks would make TPF a better site. I agreed with some of his points, and offered a contribution on photo C&C, and in another post I stated my fundamental disagreement with Lew's position on 1) the singular nature of TPF as "a photo community" and 2) on the idea that we need to respect picture-takers and picture-makers alike, and that we need a sort of multi-cultural outlook. Annnnnd, a little while later, I saw some very good editorial guidance provided.

I think we can improve things here. Maybe we can all work on it.

 

[Overread]

I'm just going to point to the bit in my signature advising people that if you want certain input on your photos say so when you post them. Much of the time detailed critique takes time to write, people want to feel that their time spent writing it is WORTH their time writing it out. If you just post a photo then those responding have no idea if you'll respond to the critique or just ignore it or heck say nothing at all (not even thanks).

If you take the effort to detail and outline with your photo your own thoughts when you post it up then its much more likely that others will chip in - set the tone in the first post and others will respond. If you just post a photo chance are you'll get likes and "nice photo" comments.

 

[pixmedic]

At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy. Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules. I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group. Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will. Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.

Although I do really like this place. What I took away from Lew's original post (what I chose to take away) is that "good pic" posts are nice, but I *do* wish I got more truly critical analysis on my photos. A lot of the time I post things to show off what I've learned, or accomplished, and the pats on the back are awesome (keep em comin!). A posting that gets nothing but crickets tells me just as much as a solid critique - it's a boring photo. But a true, solid critique (such as when I posted my first soccer photos) is really a leap forward in knowledge for me and I love it.

I think that's the underlying principle at work here......................... who can take constructive criticism and who can't. Until one can figure out who is who, one doesn't offer C&C because they might come off as a mean person. Can't say as I blame them.

and theres another trap...
properly giving C&C -vs- properly (IE graciously) receiving C&C.
you could probably fill a dozen pages debating that one, but the main point is....when just one of those things fail, it can bring down the whole thread.
of course, one persons definition of "constructive criticism" might be wildly different than anothers...or the person receiving it.

I think, if you post in the spirit of helping someone, and tailor your post as such, then the OP should be able to do the same.