Thoughts on the Photo of the Year submissions

[Designer]

Fire away.

 

[terri]

I guess you felt it was important to offer your unsolicited C&C of every shot.

Personally, I find this objectionable.

You wrote that your "thoughts would like to be recognized," so please let them know I recognize them as unnecessary.

Can't imagine what kind of good will you expect them to elicit, but that's just my opinion.

 

[qmr55]

Where is the photo of the year thread? I must have missed that.

Edit: nevermind, found it.

 

[pixmedic]

Where is the photo of the year thread? I must have missed that.

Edit: nevermind, found it.

2017 Photo of the Year Voting

 

[pixmedic]

@Designer

gotta be honest here, i really dont understand the point of your post.
is it some sort of disagreement on the photos that won POTM?
do you hope to influence peoples votes on POTY by offering this critique?
seems to me that the proper place for critique is in the actual thread the picture was originally posted in.

 

[Derrel]

Can I reply with, " In Before Lock"...or is that too much like sandbagging in a friendly weekly poker game?

 

[JonA_CT]

I think it’s more than a bit pretentious and condescending that you think your ideals of photographic perfection are greater than the collective hive of the forum that votes. It’s amplified by the fact that I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a photograph of your posted here.


I’m also not sure why you would take the time to write all of that out, and then edit your post to remove it because the feedback was negative...which you must have known was going to be the case.

 

[jcdeboever]

Darn it, I missed it.... I felt like making some popcorn for breakfast since we're getting blasted with snow and freezing rain.

 

[SquarePeg]

This is why we have “the rule” on another site I frequent. The first person to respond to a controversial post must always quote the post in its entirety in case the OP decides to edit/remove.

 

[Peeb]

This is why we have “the rule” on another site I frequent. The first person to respond to a controversial post must always quote the post in its entirety in case the OP decides to edit/remove.

In this case, I'll support the OP in deleting the post- I honestly don't think it was intended to be unkind, but it certainly was.

When someone posts a pic and says: "Please critique my work" - then a critical review is helpful. When someone is nominated for POTM, they didn't ask for that 'honor', and so any critique of that entry is unsolicited, and hence unhelpful.

I initially posted a condemnation of the OP, but quickly deleted it as unhelpful- @Designer later followed suit with a delete the original post, which in fairness to the nominees was the right thing to do. In the end- this thread really has nowhere else to go...

 

[terri]

This is why we have “the rule” on another site I frequent. The first person to respond to a controversial post must always quote the post in its entirety in case the OP decides to edit/remove.

In this case, every word is retrievable, of course.

But it's better that the OP removed it. I'm glad.

 

[SCraig]

I think it’s more than a bit pretentious and condescending that you think your ideals of photographic perfection are greater than the collective hive of the forum that votes. It’s amplified by the fact that I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a photograph of your posted here.

Well, see that's the great thing about photography. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and nobody's opinion is more important than that of anyone else. Just because the "Collective Hive" thinks a photograph is great doesn't mean everyone else has to agree or even that it happens to be. The corollary is also true in that if the so-called "Collective Hive" thinks a photograph is trash doesn't mean that someone else can't like it.

There are some on this forum who will disagree with that but in my personal opinion they will generally be the ones who feel their opinion truly is the only one that matters.

 

[vintagesnaps]

I saw this last night (but didn't post a comment); my opinions were quite different on many of the photos (which I had to go look at before coming back to read the critique).

I thought the purpose was maybe to comment on or critique the critique? to discuss how choices were made in voting? Which I didn't feel like doing last night... I'm not sure this came across the way it might have been intended. Maybe it would have been better posed as a more open ended question as to how photos could be critiqued/judged for voting.

 

[Overread]

This is why we have “the rule” on another site I frequent. The first person to respond to a controversial post must always quote the post in its entirety in case the OP decides to edit/remove.

Mods can always view and even un-edit posts if so desired so users can't get a free escape that way if it warrants bringing the content back. That said as this thread is now without any opening post and since there is clearly no desire to return to the original subject lets consider the matter closed now.

Note - I'd remind people that all the galleries, with the exception of the "just for fun", allow for and encourage critique of work posted. That said critique should be constructive and informative and its often best kept within the thread where the creator posted the photo - so as they can benefit and interact with those offering critique.