Utopia of Critique Forum

[abraxas]

Exactly, I think that's why it's important to know what they are using.

This is irrelevant, especially at this point. The product is what is being reviewed/critiqued, not the persons equipment- too much info to 'require.'

 

[elsaspet]

I believe I explained it quite plainly Abraxas.
I don't want someone with no WORKING knowledge of technical matters, telling me how I should do these technical matters. I'd rather have someone who actually USES the equipment tell me the best way to utilize it.
But then again, I wouldn't let a brain surgeon do my taxes either. If it's ok with you, I'll have my tax guy do my taxes.

I don't think it's at all asking to much, for someone to post a photo, somewhere, even in the bloopers section. If I were to post in the Critique section, I'd certainly like to weight the jurors stong points and weaknesses.
You don't have to agree with me on this, but my mind won't change about this either.
I'm not the queen of the proposed crit forum. If you read my original post, I am hoping for lots of suggestions, and a concensus. You have dictatorship stuck in your head.

 

[elsaspet]

This is irrelevant, especially at this point. The product is what is being reviewed/critiqued, not the persons equipment- too much info to 'require.'

Disagree.

If someone is using a point and shoot, they will get a different result than someone using a 5D 35mm 1.4 in the same exact situation, light, conditions, ect.

For the person using the point and shoot, I'd cut them a break on say, noise....but that's just me.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

Disagree.

If someone is using a point and shoot, they will get a different result than someone using a 5D 35mm 1.4 in the same exact situation, light, conditions, ect.

For the person using the point and shoot, I'd cut them a break on say, noise....but that's just me.

That information is only relevant if it has a bearing on what they want help with.
If you are talking composition then the type and quality of camera you use is irrelevant.

 

[elsaspet]

I thought you went to bed Hertz...LOL.
You are sleeeeeepy......very sleeeeeepy.


BTW-I want to clear something up.
Yes, my words are my votes, and I hope I've made that clear in my maaaaaany posts today. Just my little old vote.
Also, I'm not doing this to be a panelist. I'm doing this to have a decent working Critique Forum, that's actually an honest to God Critique Forum.
Why? Because I'd like to post in a good one here. And I'd love to learn from a great panel giving good dead on reasoned critiques.
I don't want to review. I want to learn.

The reason why I would like to see an experienced panel, full of uplifting helpful critiques, is because frankly it would be a change.
If everyone could be a reviewer, and say whatever they want, however they want....then you pretty much have the same old system that has failed time and again.

And that is my vote. (For the new way, not the old way....lol)

Now Hertz, go to sleep damnit. You are undermining my dictatorship....Hehe. Joke people, joke.

 

[Peanuts]

Now this one could easily be thrown in the trash quickly, but just a quick thought that popped into my head.

Perhaps the panel (I would say a group >6 for the reason of other commitments, lack of knowledge in specific areas etc.) is headed up by a single individual. Once an individual posts an image for critique in align with the guidelines individuals from the panel can formulate their response (why aren't their specific categories that all must be addressed, focus, exposure, 'atmosphere', other etc...) they send them to the selected 'head' panel individual who can post a singular response to the thread once 3 critiques are received.

#1
*insert response*

#2
*insert response*

#3
*insert response*

The reason why I think there needs to be such a system is to avoid any bias. Let's admit it, sometimes you can feel like a fool once you say "I strongly dislike this image due to the extreme contrasts which are unflattering" and 30 other people reply "I lurve it *insert heart emoticon here*"

It keeps is anonymous and the panel can be shuffled and shifted without people looking for critique dying for ______'s response and they are put out that they got ______ and _____ and _____ instead.

Make sense or is that just mindless rambling? (What's new?)

 

[elsaspet]

Now this one could easily be thrown in the trash quickly, but just a quick thought that popped into my head.

Perhaps the panel (I would say a group >6 for the reason of other commitments, lack of knowledge in specific areas etc.) is headed up by a single individual. Once an individual posts an image for critique in align with the guidelines individuals from the panel can formulate their response (why aren't their specific categories that all must be addressed, focus, exposure, 'atmosphere', other etc...) they send them to the selected 'head' panel individual who can post a singular response to the thread once 3 critiques are received.

#1
*insert response*

#2
*insert response*

#3
*insert response*

The reason why I think there needs to be such a system is to avoid any bias. Let's admit it, sometimes you can feel like a fool once you say "I strongly dislike this image due to the extreme contrasts which are unflattering" and 30 other people reply "I lurve it *insert heart emoticon here*"

It keeps is anonymous and the panel can be shuffled and shifted without people looking for critique dying for ______'s response and they are put out that they got ______ and _____ and _____ instead.

Make sense or is that just mindless rambling? (What's new?)

Good Point!

 

[smcaskil]

they send them to the selected 'head' panel individual who can post a singular response to the thread once 3 critiques are received.

I like the idea of this because it would keep the critique anonymous, but that presents its own problems that have to be worked out.

By having one person as the 'head' of the panel, if that person is unavailable, you'd have to have something in place for them to pass the torch to another member of the panel so that things continue to run smoothly.

You might also want to include in this type of system the fact that the first 3 critiques are used, regardless of who wrote them / what they say. That creates a system where the head of the panel can't cherry-pick critiques from certain members of the critique board or can't not post "bad" critiques to try and save someone's feelings.

 

[Peanuts]

I vote LaFoto for head of the panel. She is always around

You do raise a good point. One option is to have a single account with access to say two individuals, perhaps a primary and secondary. If the primary is unavaiable for a tiem period, the 'torch' is passed to the secondary. Mind you, I am renowned for complicating simple issues, so, keep my thoughts in check here!

 

[smcaskil]

Well one thing we could do gets back to an idea I had earlier about how to setup the forum.

We have 1, 2, possibly 3 folks who have Moderator rights on the Critique Forum.

The posts stay hidden until 3 critiques are written on the post.


Once a post has 3 critiques, one of these three folks edit them into one single post, delete the originals and then approve the post. It can then be seen by the public. But no one will have seen who the original author of the critiques are, just that there are three of them.

This would let there be multiple folks responsible so someone does not feel as though they have to babysit this one forum all the time. The members of the Critique Board can select the submitted posts to which they have the most expertise, namely if they have been wedding photographers for 10 years, they can offer their critique on those types of pictures first. Once a picture gets 3 critiques, they are combined and published.

The one problem with this method is that some submissions may get stuck in limbo waiting for that elusive 3rd critique, so it might be necessary to have something in place to say if you see a post that has 2 already, write that critique first, so a group of submissions don't lanquish in the queue.

 

[kundalini]

There seems to be some very enthusiastic and well thought out ideas and desires for a revamped crits forum. I can barely have an input, as this was my first forum to join and I am an idiot that pushes a shutter button once in a while. I only chime in at this time because Peanut had a mindless ramble that I was fond of, with a little twist.

The idea of a lead member and X number of sanctioned support team along with X number of revolving alternates seems appropriate. The lead panelist could direct/delegate the posted image to the support team with specific skills or expertise with the appropriate entry/request form. The three blind responses could then be drawn to a final conclusion by the lead member, conferring with more detailed input from those that gave their response, if necessary.

I prefer to have transparency with knowing who the members are that will be on hand to provide critique, but find it unnecessary to know who the actual crit's were. This may take the personality sting out of the equation.

 

[Battou]

I haven't had the opportunity to read the whole thread yet (I'm still working on it bout half way) I just wanna pop a few Ideas up.

One:
for a temporary holdover for those who really want the crits is the possibly via subforuming the general gallery into OK to CC and Not OK to CC/show and tell. One to act basically as Gen Gallery does now with some low end crit work and questions and the other where none are permitted period. Yes this suggestion actually goes in the opposite direction in a sense but it could be of some use for the time being.

Two:
Once this does get up and running I would like to see a subforum strictly for introduction to critiquing. A Q&A section for all users to learn how to properly give critiques. There is more to critiques than analyzing imagery, knowledge of gear or skills in post processing, we all know this. We need a place to teach users how to deliver true form critiques in full in stead of relying on a small group of people to do them all.

Three:
Also "High End Critique" and "Basic Critique" subforums. Basically separating the critiques into two divisions. The High End for extensive critique by a set panel of proven individuals and basic for critiques from any one who has insight. This can double as a proving ground for new/replacement panel members for the advanced section.

Four:
Threw discussions with some Mod staff I have found that TPF does not believe in a hierarchy in moderation staff (Moderators whos moderating ability is restricted to certain sections of the forum only) but, I feel a dedicated moderation staff for a critique section is a must to keep egos in check with the ability to disallow users into the section (I know VB supports this). When users who can not comply to the guidelines on either side of things be it repeated image submission failure or critique failure, simply kick them out of the critique forum.

Five:
I saw something about showing proof imagery and fears of it being considered hijacking or something to that effect. I do like the idea of showing people and giving them the comfort of the opportunity to look and see for themselves whether they want your advice or not, I would think (and currently do) posting a link to onsite threads to images that show your ability in the particular aria you are trying to assist with is a great Idea.



Sorry if I mentioned anything already mentioned or come of as rude/arrogant but......I may still yet have more but I have some more reading to do.

 

[Chiller]

Wow...there are a lot of really excellent ideas tossed around her. :thumbup::thumbup:

Battou...the subforums idea sounds like a workable idea too. With different levels of photography here, it could work.

smcaskil...thank you for taking the time to create the lists. Really diggin that.

Thanks to everyone for keeping this thread going. It is definatly a start. I agree with Elsaspet, that this is only a possible foundation, and hopefully a start in repairing some damage done to the forum. Obviously there have been some issues, and I think everyone can agree. I have seen more people unhappy with the way things have been going then people who are content with it.
Thanks for all your imput, and Im sure this thread is being looked at for possible solutions.
Take care everyone
o.k...Im off to my crypt for sleep.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

Also "High End Critique" and "Basic Critique" subforums. Basically separating the critiques into two divisions. The High End for extensive critique by a set panel of proven individuals and basic for critiques from any one who has insight. This can double as a proving ground for new/replacement panel members for the advanced section.

Everything is possible but, as I keep saying and will keep saying until it sinks in, just concentrate on getting a basic simple crit forum for beginners up and working first.
The more complicated and involved you make something the more there is to go wrong and the harder it is to find it and fix it.
With a simple structure it is easy to tweak it to remove any rough spots. Then once you have it tuned you can build a more complicated edifice on top to cater for the various levels - I suggest a maximum of three (beginner/intermediate/advanced) - and the various disciplines (again I would suggest just three broad groups - any more and the system will become unwieldy).
A basic crit may not be everyone's idea of a Utopia but it is better to get something that works than have nothing at all. So please stay focussed on the immediate job in hand and develop patience (both necessary traits to have if you want to be a good photographer)

 

[Battou]

Everything is possible but, as I keep saying and will keep saying until it sinks in, just concentrate on getting a basic simple crit forum for beginners up and working first.
The more complicated and involved you make something the more there is to go wrong and the harder it is to find it and fix it.
With a simple structure it is easy to tweak it to remove any rough spots. Then once you have it tuned you can build a more complicated edifice on top to cater for the various levels - I suggest a maximum of three (beginner/intermediate/advanced) - and the various disciplines (again I would suggest just three broad groups - any more and the system will become unwieldy).
A basic crit may not be everyone's idea of a Utopia but it is better to get something that works than have nothing at all. So please stay focussed on the immediate job in hand and develop patience (both necessary traits to have if you want to be a good photographer)

Thus is why I suggested the temporary hold over of subsections of ok to CC and none at all, this is going to take time and effort to get right and I know this. I felt that suggesting a section where no crits are permitted period will help in separating out the show and tells wile also still offering a simple space to recieve some semblance of critiques to those who want them wile a true section is in the making as opposed to allowing the general critiques run amok in their respective galleries wile we wait.

Yes the holdover suggestion will likely be a lot of work to get up and running but it should buy a pile of time to do the real section right with out a lot of guff from people wanting to learn. I know you know this but, not everyone is patient enough as well as the new users joining everyday who will nodoubt have no clue it's in the works, constant bombardment by those people will endup leading to rushed flaws in the outcome and I can tell that is the last thing you want to see.

My thoughts and ideas where posted mearly to get them into the air and can be considered individually when the time is appropriate, not necessarily a "do it now thing". I don't believe in demands like that.

And I like three three teir plan far better than a two teir plan.