| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/12/2003 04:59:19 PM · #1 |
Greetings to the Critique Club :)
I would like to pause formal operation of the group until the new coding on DPChallenge is in place to manage the distribution of photos for the group.
After the new coding is in place, I will be asking for everyone to re-volunteer for the group.
I want to maintain a HIGH standard of critiques for the group as well. Most of the critiques that have been posted by this group are excellent. They contain a lot of thought and detail. We need to maintain that standard at all times.
I would like to ask for comments on the following items:
Should there be any criteria for being a member of the Critique Club, such as a minimum number of critiques per week? Certain level of detail on posted critiques?
Do you think that the new system of randomly assigning photos by request will work out well? Do you think you should be able to reject an assigned critique by the automated system in the future?
John Setzler
|
|
|
|
01/12/2003 05:13:22 PM · #2 |
I'd like to get some random photo's assigned anyway. I have a meeting on wednesday evening, that I have to work out on thursday and friday, so three or four is enough.
As long as the system takes our own entries into account and doesn't assign them to yourself, I see no reason that you should be able to reject a random assigned photo. Perhaps you should be allowed to pass 1 one per week, in the case you got one of a relative, a close friend or someone who you had last week.
As to criteria: Quality above Quantity! I think it should be open for anyone, but you must be on the list to get photo's assigned. As too quantity per timeframe, I think we should leave that open. I could do ten in a vacation period and none for four weeks in a row when I am abroad in some remote place. I don't think I am the only one in that situation. I'd hate too see that I have been kicked off when I get home or when something happens (connection down, relative ill or worse) and I can't go online for a week. It shouldn't be too much trouble (and not too much work for you or Drew/Langdon) to announce being away, if announcing your staying away for a while needs to be announced.
Message edited by author 2003-01-12 17:14:55.
|
|
|
|
01/12/2003 05:57:47 PM · #3 |
Late Update:
Langdon has finished coding the random selection of images. I will post the link after midnight. You will need to bookmark the link I give because it will not appear on a menu at this time.
You will be able to go to a page and select a random photo to critique. If you select a photo, you must critique it. If you try to skip it, you will be given the same photo when you come back to select another one.
We will try this out this week and see how many photos we get done and how well the new assignment pages work out...
Cheers :)
John Setzler
|
|
|
|
01/12/2003 06:22:48 PM · #4 |
Hi John
I'd be a fan of a reasonably low volume requirement - perhaps only 2-3 minimum over a month, no maximum. This should allow for times when people are very busy and also for those who want to contribute (and can write wonderfully useful critiques) but just can't commit to more than one or two a week. Chances are there will be a few critiquers who will also do a lot more than average too and this will even out. Personally I'd much rather receive a really good critique from someone who only critiques for the club on a low volume basis than a brief churn-them-out type of critique from someone who is just breezing through without much depth.
I disagree strongly about being able to reject an image that's been assigned to you. This week I've provided indepth critiques to 6 images in the Song Title challenge during voting. If I draw any of these to critique for the club next week I know that I can add very little more to what I have said already. I guess I can just repeat what I already said but that seems a waste of my time and the photographer's.
Additionally there are occasionally pictures about which I just have nothing to say. Not often - but sometimes. Since the club is not only about providing critiques to photographers but also about enjoyment and learning on the part of the critiquers I disagree with forcing anyone to critique an image they don't want to critique. Whilst this might mean that on occasion more than one critiquer rejects a specific image in a challenge, leading to a failure for that image to get critiqued at all, this surely won't happen often (since we all have such different tastes) and on occasion perhaps this might simply mean that an image just doesn't inspire much comment. Generally I don't think it will lead to all low-scoring images failing to be critiqued since I know I am not the only one who enjoys critiqueing images from across the results table.
Trust me when I say I take the CC seriously. I think if you look at the crits I have done so far you will hopefully agree with that. But I do also think we need to retain some of the fun of it - isn't this something we're doing for enjoyement? Not as a soul-less paid job? I dislike the somewhat prisonwarder approach of insisting that each critiquer do a certain number of images each week or that a critiquer must do any image assigned regardless of their own feelings about it.
Anyway, those are my thoughts...
Your mileage may (and likely will) vary!
:)
Message edited by author 2003-01-12 18:23:35.
|
|
|
|
01/12/2003 06:41:28 PM · #5 |
Oh, just wanted to ask how long the pause will last, but this was a rather short one ;-) I'm really looking forward to this new system. Many many thanks to Langdon (and Drew probably, too) for their support!
To answer some of your initial questions: I think there should be no minimum number of critiques. I don't see any reason for it and if somebody only has time for one critique then so be it. Every little helps.
The level of detail should of course be as higher than the average comments. But I'm unsure what could be a good way how to "monitor" if people really put some effort into it. Maybe in the future a system for letting people vote on the critiques whether they were helpful or not helpful would solve this. Or assigning scores to the critiques and giving out ribbons ;-) But for now just pointing to examples and discussing if they really are _in depth_ critiques would be ok for me.
I'm confident that the new system will work well. Especially with the support from Langdon/Drew to fit this system to our needs :-) The only problem I see is that on Saturday/Sunday, when I have time for the CC, all photos are already out and assigned ;-)
Regarding the possibility to reject photos... Personally I don't see a reason. I think when a photo from my brother or somebody else I know is assigned to me I would have no problem doing a critique like for everybody else.
So far my opinion. End Of Transmission ;-)
|
|
|
|
01/12/2003 07:28:29 PM · #6 |
1. As for a minimum number of critiques per week: I don't think you could require a minimum on a weekly basis because of vacations, etc. Maybe if one hasn't done a critique in the last 4 weeks or in the last calendar month then remove them from the list just to keep the list up to date. They could always sign up again if they wanted to. If someone does one good critique a week then I think we need them.
2. Certain level of detail on posted critiques: we could set a guideline for a minimum number of words on a critique, maybe 150 words or about 8 sentences. The system could do a count of characters in the critique and not post if under x number of characters.
Have examples for critiquers to read such as the link that was posted for that site that had I think 8 professional critiques and you could get your image critiqued for $19.95 or something (I forgot the url). Maybe suggest an outline something like this:
Critique Club critique:
Composition/Content: point of focus, lines, framing/cropping, subject, challenge, etc.
Lighting: light source(s), use of light, etc.
Background: use of background elements, color, brightness
Camera Work/Technical: color, contrast, exposure, focus, angle, areas of detail/lack of detail, etc.
Digital Processing: artifacts, saturation, contrast, sharpening, color cast, white balance, etc.
My Opinion: "This Rocks!", etc.
and suggest that a critiquer try to use at least 5 of these points or something similar as a guidline.
3. a new system of randomly assigning photos: I am assuming that a critiquer will be requesting one image at a time and that is where the image would be chosen at random and assigned to him or her to critique. I think this should work out well, as long as one doesn't get their own image. I don't think it would be a problem even if I got one of my family member's photo to critique. I have mixed feelings on a "pass" button. I would prefer not to have one unless it was programmatically limited and one couldn't keep "passing" on images until they got one they wanted.
I still think we need to set up a statement of purpose and guidelines for the CC explaining our goals and desired methods of reaching those goals. I also think someone should monitor critiques to keep the quality up. Maybe spot check some critiques and if found to be less than desired then work with the critiquer to help improve the quality of the critique.
Did I answer your question? lol, is this answer long enough??? lol.
|
|
|
|
01/12/2003 08:33:48 PM · #7 |
I don't know about minimums. Certainly if a person is on vacation or out of town they should be able to make their "status" off line so as not to get assignments while they are away. (I've heard a few of us even have lives. I'm still saving up for one. ;-)
As for being able to pass on an assignment, I think that could be a good idea. The person should have to state in the rejection why they are passing (to be seen by the moderators only). It could be that the person was offended by the photo, or just knew the photographer. In either event, I think the system would be better served by allowing a person to pass the assignment on. With a required reason to the moderators, it should keep people from dumping assignments just because.
-alex |
|
|
|
01/12/2003 08:35:55 PM · #8 |
Locking this thread for now... see the new thread :)
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/24/2024 05:21:22 AM EDT.
