| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/11/2002 07:40:55 PM · #1 |
Greetings to everyone in the Critique Club :)
I have a few questions that we need to discuss.....
1) After what we have done so far, are most/all of you comfortable that you can stick with this project for the long haul? I think we are at a point where we need to decide in what permanent direction that we would like to travel with this group where the DPC website is concerned. I would like to have some solid participation committments before we try to make this project a permanent feature/function of this community.
2) This group, IMO, is a very beneficial addition to DPC. I think it should be treated as a semi-formal organization with some rules and guidelines for participation, as well as a membership cap. We are currently just below 35 members, so I would suggest a cap at 35. Does that sound reasonable?
3) The quality of the critique and comment that we write must maintain a high standard at all times. If we don't feel that we can provide this level of comment, then we should consider our options again.
Now....
Here is what I have in mind and this is open to discussion and change, so lets tackle this as soon as possible.
If *I* could have this project setup on DPC any way I liked, I would do the following:
1. When a photographer posts a photo to a challenge, he/she/it has a checkbox available to request post challenge commentary on that photo. At this point, the photograph gets listed in a holding queue until the challenge is over. DPC members and non members will be eligible for these critiques. This is only fair to everyone. We can't rightfully deny critique to anyone based on membership status if we want to maintain a friendly and dynamic group.
2. When the challenge is over, there would be a page on the DPC site where critique club members could go to ask for a photo to critique. When you ask for this photo, it becomes assigned to you and it would be your responsibility to execute the critique once it is assigned. You would not have any control over which photo you were assigned. When you complete that critique, you could request another photo that would be assigned from the queue. The order in which the photos would be assigned is still an issue that will be discussed at a later date. The site administrators will have direct and ample input, and hold the ultimate decision on how this list will be sorted. There may be some determining factors as to which photos get assigned first from this queue.
This method seems fair and reasonable. With this approach, you would not have to critique any more than you wanted to and you could critique extras if you are motivated to do so. As a member of the club, you would be expected to execute a minimum number of critiques each week. I believe that we would probably set this number to five. Five seems to be easy enough to work with at this point.
3) We would not guarantee a critique to everyone who asked for it. If we had 350 photos in the queue, it would obviously not be possible to do all of them. We would attempt to do what we can an be happy that we are doing it :)
The next item.......
My own ideas on starting this critique club were two-fold. First of all, I wanted to make a valid attempt to provide everyone with the opportunity to get some detailed and useful feedback on their photography efforts. Secondly, I had hoped that it would spawn new life into the critique/comment effort sitewide. I hoped that everyone, not just club members, would start offering more feedback during the challenges and increase the overall number of comments that everyone receives each week.
Let's discuss...
|
|
|
|
12/11/2002 08:28:51 PM · #2 |
John --
Your proposal sounds very reasonable. An initial cap of 35 members in the Critique Club also seems like a good idea. Maybe the Critique Club could grow over time to accomodate increasing photo submissions (if most photographers show an interest in having their photos reviewed).
I'm looking forward to working with the Critique Club, as it seems like an excellent way to learn while hopefully helping other members of DPChallenge.
Alan |
|
|
|
12/11/2002 08:35:37 PM · #3 |
| John, I think this is a great idea to integrate within the site. I think a cap might be fine, but as the site grows and more are entered into a challenge the club could grow too. I think the club helps two fold. It helps others with in depth critiques and then it helps the critiquer look at the photographs in a different way and help develop their own skills. Thanks for the great idea of the club. |
|
|
|
12/11/2002 08:37:40 PM · #4 |
1. I feel comfortable that I can stick with this for the long haul.
2. I agree that CC is extremely beneficial to DPC. I believe that like me, most folks are here to learn and to become better photographers. In depth commentaries is certainly one of the better ways for that to happen. I have learned much from my two critiques. (I think that the critiquers also have an a great resource from which to learn as they do the commentaries) 35 sounds good but I think you will need a way to replace CCers that either quit, fade-away, or don't hold up there 5 per week.
3. The entire project is basically based on the commentaries being done at a high standard. If not it becomes a joke that would be bad for everyone. You may want to have a way that members can report a critique that they feel was not up to those standards for whatever reason so that it could be checked.
1b. Agreed on members vs. non-members
2b. I assume that this will be done for both the members and open challenges. Right now that would only mean probably 2-3 critiques per CCer for a member challenge. That could certainly grow. 5 sounds about right for open challenges. However, when the challenges are staggered that still comes out to 5-8 critiques per week. Fine for me but could be a few too many for some CCers. I think the anonymous assignment idea is excellent.
3b.I hope that the assignments will not just be "high end" weighted. If we can't get to all of them, the lower half may benefit more. I find it harder to critique those but feel as if I am doing a greater service at the same time.
A couple of thoughts:
Site administrators may want to enable us to make the Critiques "official" by some method. Perhaps a standard heading on the comment or a check mark on the CCers icon. Just to make sure that at some time down the road someone doesn't jump in with their own critique posing as a Critique Club member and hurting some feelings.
Another benefit that I think "could" come from this is that when the community is entering their shots, they may begin to add more to their details on the submission page. Sort of a way to let the CCers know why something was the way it was before the Critique. That would be beneficial to everyone. Many times I have run to a shot at the end of a challenge to see more information only to be dissapointed. If it will help them when they get their Critique, they may be more liable to add that info in the beginning.
I think this was an incredible idea that could become a big part of DPC. I know that the buzz this week was many people waiting to see the Critique on their shots. It is one more thing to look forward to on DPC and another way to keep people interested.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
12/11/2002 08:39:29 PM · #5 |
I agree with virtually all of this, though I don't know about the technical side of how you want to assign the photos... Have you checked with the admins as to if this is a) possible and b) something they want to commit to?
I think we need to consider a couple of other things... People are going to need breaks... I fly to Singapore several times a year, and I'm not sure if that means I will have more time, or less time to do critiques. (I'll find out in January), and I plan to go on a cruise next September and my wife has threatened my life if I log in to DPC during this cruise... I think we need to commit to what we can, but be aware that folks will need weeks off from time to time.
Which brings me to another point... I'm not sure why you want the cap at 35... My experience with this sort of thing is that we will see a high attrition rate in a month or two... The more alternates we have, the better we will be positioned to go forward when some folks need/want to drop out. Also with more folks we can do more critiques. Just a thought, maybe cap at 50 and don't make it a hard cap... Be flexible...
I have a few other concerns like quality assurance, and getting someone to critique # 80 in the Blue challenge, but I'll leave those for later :)
|
|
|
|
12/11/2002 08:53:23 PM · #6 |
I'm a long haul kind of gal.
I think CC is super and loads of fun.
You've done a good job, and new suggestions sound fine by me.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2002 09:02:07 PM · #7 |
I have just a couple of suggestions regarding assignments and quality control. When you develop criteria for determining which entry will be assigned when a CCer requests one, make sure you include a filter to exclude their own submission. You may also want to have a "pass" option just in case someone gets a photo they REALLY can't cope with.
Since you're proposing a whole new interface (for assignments), I'd make it so that when the CCer completes their critique, it is placed into a second queue, where it will be delivered to a different CCer when they ask for a photo. That second person can check the critique for glaring errors or omissions, and a note/comment if they want, and then they actually "submit" the critique to be attached to the photo's public results page. If they find a major problem, they can refer it back to the original reviewer or the group for resolution.
I've been there...you will pre-empt a lot of griping with this or something similar to it, and will save time in the long run.
This is a great project, and I really hope everyone's able to keep up the momentum. |
|
|
|
12/11/2002 09:03:35 PM · #8 |
I have found nothing posted above that I disagree with.
My intent is to stay "permanent", but two things may interfere going forward.
1st, I will take on a new job soon that will entail more travel. There will be times, I think, when doing 5 may be tough. But I can't know until I get there. 2nd, I know vacations may become an issue, depending where I am and whether I have access to a phone.
And, I would like to see the cap raised. I will guess that this site will grow soon because of two things - 1. Christmas will add a number of new digital users, 2. The reputation of this site as a learning site will also grow. We will have more pictures to critique. So, the more CC members, the better.
I see nothing wrong with some pictures eventually getting 2 critiques after all have gotten at least one. We all win that way. Thus, the more critiquers, the better, in my opinion.
BTW, thanks for starting this. I think I have learned as much by giving critiques as I have in taking photos and getting comments & critiques.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2002 09:37:43 PM · #9 |
Everything sounds good to me, I like the "cookie jar" idea, doing a minimum of five and then doing extra if and when we have the time. I think it's important to keep the standard of the critiques up, I know for me the test critique and the guidelines at the beginning of the project helped me a lot, I now have an idea of what to look for . I recommend any new members receiving these guidelines and also trying to use the format of the headings. Oh yes, count me in for the long-haul too.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2002 09:56:19 PM · #10 |
I'm willing to commit for the long term. It is a great idea and a great service.
I'd like some way of reading the other critiques without having to slog through all the images each time. Other than the critiques on my own images, and a few others I have stumbled across, I have no real way of judging whether mine are up to standard or in a generally agreed format or whatever. This is very much a learning exercise and I'd like an easy way to do research.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2002 10:38:29 PM · #11 |
John, I also agree with most of what you said but I have a different opinion on one or two points.
- I'm not sure if I understand you correctly but a member cap means that you want to limit the number of participants in the CC? Why? I think we should welcome as many people as possible. The more people participate, the more helpful will be the feedback by the CC. I wouldn't like to see this capped.
- I think the quality of the critiques depends on personal experience of the critic and the effort put into the critique. Now I think that nobody stops learning new things but there are different levels of experiences. But I won't exclude less experienced people as long as there was some effort put into the critique. The goal is to discuss the different aspects of a photo instead of just saying "I like it". In my opinion it's not so important whether the assessment was correct or not as long as there was a more detailed view on the different things which can make a good or bad photo.
I think we should start making a collection of these things one could look after when viewing a photo. We can start with the already very good guide made by Gordon and add the great suggestion made by someone in the forum (sorry, don't remember the name. I miss the forum search) to imagine you want to explain the photo to someone who can't see it. This really helped me a lot to recognise the key elements of a photo. Maybe we can expand the 9 Guidelines for Giving and Receiving Feedback by Patella? Then we can point everyone new to the CC to this tutorial. This will help to maintain the high standards as you describe it.
- I like the mechanism of how CC members can ask for photos. That way everybody can decide themselves how many photos one wants to write a critique for. This will solve the problem of people beingon vacation and so on.
But I think it would be better if the photographer can decide _after_ the challenge and not when submitting the photo if s/he wants a CC critique. On some photos you get a lot of comments and another in-depth critique doesn't seem to be necessary so much. Other weeks again you aren't really satisfied with the comments you got and then you really would like to request an CC critique.
So far my thoughts...
|
|
|
|
12/11/2002 11:00:50 PM · #12 |
I would just like to say that I hope there won't be a membership cap, because although I don't have time to get involved in the Club right now, I would love to get into it in a few months time when my participation in the site is (I hope) going to be closer to the level it used to be.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2002 11:18:02 PM · #13 |
John, I agree with most of what you said also. I think it is good to stop and evaluate. I plan to stay in for the long haul.
The CC member cap might need to be stretched to a soft cap of 50 or no cap at all. I think your concern is to keep the critiques at as high a quality as possible and a cap might help do that, but in the long run you might need as many as you can get. Just have to see how that goes.
To keep the CC going with quality critiques I think we need to do the following:
1. first putting into writing the purpose and guidelines of the critique club and publish them somewhere on the site.
2. there will be turnover in membership which creates an ongoing need for a way of introducing new members, a quick start training guide for critiquers of some kind.
3. monitoring the critiques/critiquers on a constant basis would be neccessary to insure the quality we want. There might even be a place for feedback on the CC.
To do all of this I think you need a core group of a few CC administrators to help you lead this effort.
The selection que is a great idea.
Richard |
|
|
|
12/11/2002 11:45:49 PM · #14 |
John
I agree with your ideas in principle. I will be in for the long haul.
I think that we will find that membership will fluctuate over time as people come and go. I think that the idea of setting a cap is a good idea otherwise the critique club might get difficult to manage.
I am on vacation from the 6th January to the 18th January so will not be able to participate during this period no internet in the bush!
Iagree with these points made by goodtempo
To keep the CC going with quality critiques I think we need to do the following:
1. first putting into writing the purpose and guidelines of the critique club and publish them somewhere on the site.
2. there will be turnover in membership which creates an ongoing need for a way of introducing new members, a quick start training guide for critiquers of some kind.
3. monitoring the critiques/critiquers on a constant basis would be neccessary to insure the quality we want. There might even be a place for feedback on the CC.
To do all of this I think you need a core group of a few CC administrators to help you lead this effort.
I think the queue idea is good
Thanks for all the effort you're putting into this.
Sandy |
|
|
|
12/12/2002 02:28:08 AM · #15 |
| I think if we can crit peoples photos who request crits it would be best.I am in this for the long haul--I do think feed back about the crit is valuable for standards as well as showing whether the photographer is interested or has issues with the crit |
|
|
|
12/12/2002 05:46:47 AM · #16 |
1) After what we have done so far, are most/all of you comfortable that you can stick with this project for the long haul?
Probably yes, but I'd like an option to step out for a few weeks, because of vacation, family things (birth to death), work etc. A checkbox or something and a way to specify how long you are going to stay away.
2)We are currently just below 35 members, so I would suggest a cap at 35. Does that sound reasonable?
I think it could be higher. 45 to 50, but people must not forget that they are free to leave their own in depth comment without being a CC 'member' and without the use of your proposed mechanism.
Why limit to 35?
As a member of the club, you would be expected to execute a minimum number of critiques each week. I believe that we would probably set this number to five. Five seems to be easy enough to work with at this point.
When I look to the comming months I think that four is enough, given that I want to participate, vote and do regular comments as well in 2 to 3 challenges a week and do all the other things I need and want to do.
Maybe you can take on unlimited CC'ers, ask their personal limit and when they fail to meet that, perhaps 'kick' them out?
|
|
|
|
12/12/2002 07:41:14 AM · #17 |
Yes- long haul
Five? okay but I'd prefer four
Deadline? is there one for finishing critiques?
??cap - I feel funny about the word Club too. If you sound too exclusive, new members will be intimidated about joining the fun... resentments just seem to crop up everywhere
Notification system? - to tell recipients when the critique is done |
|
|
|
12/12/2002 10:53:43 AM · #18 |
|
|
|
12/12/2002 11:56:56 AM · #19 |
I'm here for the long haul. I agree with GoodTempo's post.
One thing I'd like to add, what ever automated system is put in place, it shouldn't allow us to choose a different one if we don't want to review a particular photo. I think this would have people dumping the lower rated ones so they can review those of the better (in their opinion) ones.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2002 01:01:46 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
After what we have done so far, are most/all of you comfortable that you can stick with this project for the long haul? |
Yes I would like to stick with this for the long haul.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
We are currently just below 35 members, so I would suggest a cap at 35. Does that sound reasonable? |
I don’t feel we should cap membership to 35 – if we have a larger group then we can cover more images each week.
Perhaps when people want to join they can do an in depth critique of a couple of images from the preceding challenge (assigned to them by you or your support team – see below), posted without the banner of the CC, and have these assessed by you/ your team before acceptance.
Other than for quality control, I’m not sure it’s necessary to restrict membership to a specific number.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
The quality of the critique and comment that we write must maintain a high standard at all times.
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Since you're proposing a whole new interface (for assignments), I'd make it so that when the CCer completes their critique, it is placed into a second queue, where it will be delivered to a different CCer when they ask for a photo. That second person can check the critique for glaring errors or omissions, and a note/comment if they want, and then they actually "submit" the critique to be attached to the photo's public results page. If they find a major problem, they can refer it back to the original reviewer or the group for resolution. |
|
I agree that we need to maintain a high standard.
However I don’t want the quality assurance process to get out of hand – I don’t want commenters to start to feel that they are being appraised and reviewed – one gets quite enough of that at school/ work!
I certainly don’t feel that it is necessary to have each and every critique verified by another critiquer before being posted. Since most of us feel differently about individual images it would be hard for the person assessing the critique to distinguish between a poor critique and one they simply disagree with. It would also add more time to the process and reduce the time left to do the actual critiques.
I would imagine that it’s enough to say that if anyone (member of CC or not) spots a critique which does not seem up to scratch that they should have a quiet word with you/ your team and things can then be handled as you see fit.
When I refer to you/ you team – what I am suggesting is that it might be wise to follow goodtempo’s advice and establish a small group of CC moderators who could try and keep an eye on critique quality. I’d be happy to step forward, and I am sure others would do to.
Again, I certainly don’t think it necessary for every single critique posted to be evaluated and “passed” either by other critiquers or by a CC moderator team.
Perhaps establishing a CC page where we can store the critique guidelines as they stand, plus any comments and revisions to them, would help everyone to be consistent and to consider all areas.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
When a photographer posts a photo to a challenge, he/she/it has a checkbox available to request post challenge commentary on that photo. |
I still feel that this is missing the point a little – which I see as providing indepth critiques to photographers who feel they need them even after voting (and regular commenting) is over. Putting the check box into the submission page will just tend to lead to 90% plus of submitters checking the box.
However a number of those submitters may actually find that during the course of voting they have received adequate feedback on their image and aren’t so fussed about an additional critique. I’d rather we implement a system which allows those photographers to check a box, which will then lead to a pop up when they first view the site after results are announced, asking if they still want an indepth critique.
Then again, this may be making things more complicated, so I guess it’s not a big deal. I’d just like to find a way of making it a post challenge request rather than a request on submission.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
<> the photograph gets listed in a holding queue until the challenge is over. DPC members and non members will be eligible for these critiques. When the challenge is over, there would be a page on the DPC site where critique club members could go to ask for a photo to critique. When you ask for this photo, it becomes assigned to you and it would be your responsibility to execute the critique once it is assigned. You would not have any control over which photo you were assigned. When you complete that critique, you could request another photo that would be assigned from the queue. The order in which the photos would be assigned is still an issue that will be discussed at a later date. |
Superb idea – I like it very much.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
This method <> seems fair and reasonable. With this approach, you would not have to critique any more than you wanted to and you could critique extras if you are motivated to do so. As a member of the club, you would be expected to execute a minimum number of critiques each week. I believe that we would probably set this number to five. Five seems to be easy enough to work with at this point. |
Given that your suggested method of assigning images for critique allows for a critiquer to request one assignment at a time, I am not sure I see the need for setting an absolute limit for number of images to be critiqued.
A member who only has time to do one, high quality, in depth critique per week should surely not be excluded?
Some of us will have time to do more and others time to do less and this will change for each of us each week. Since we’re not promising to try and cover every entry each week, I see no need to assign a strict minimum per member.
If we allow for greater numbers to be members, provided they show evidence of (and maintain) critique quality, then we can also be more flexible in number of images members need to critique.
We could say something such as “Each member should aim to critique a minimum of 4 images per month to demonstrate commitment and active status – and contact the CC Admin in the event that this is not possible in a given month”.
I did have another thought, but it’s escaped me for the moment, so I’ll post this as it is for now.
Kavey
|
|
|
|
12/12/2002 01:14:44 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
If *I* could have this project setup on DPC any way I liked, I would do the following: |
These all sound like doable ideas to me. When you guys come up with something concrete that you want to go forward with, just let Drew and I know what you need.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2002 01:23:01 PM · #22 |
|
|
|
12/12/2002 02:47:46 PM · #23 |
| John, Count me in for the long haul. The CC has been beneficial to me in that I am studying images more carefully. Also I really want to encourage other photographers. So whatever the rules, I'll adhere to them. :-) |
|
|
|
12/12/2002 05:01:54 PM · #24 |
|
|
|
12/12/2002 05:44:19 PM · #25 |
Was there a problem with the way it was working previously? I like the idea of randomly being assigned 5 or 6 photos to critique and receiving these assignments through email at a given time each week, then if we want more then that we could go and request for more.
I also am not sure about a limit of 35 people but I guess I will think about that some more.
There was quite a bit to read above so I may have missed some things. I just like the idea getting assigned several photos at once so I don't have to spend time requesting them.
T
|
|
