DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Web Site Suggestions >> Canned Comments Revisited
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 83, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/23/2002 04:08:13 PM · #51
Okay, despite the fact that if I spent the time that I''m going to spend writing this post commenting on pictures...

It seems that what everyone is clamoring for is more constructive feedback on their pictures. But some people don''t want to or don''t know how to give this sort of feedback. There isn''t anything you can do about the ones who don''t want to. But for the people who don''t know how - the ones who look at a photo and go "I like it" but don''t really know why or "nice - 5" - they might be willing to participate with more constructive criticism if they had more of an idea of how others thought about photos, what things they noticed, why it made them feel the way they did, etc.

I''ve posted this idea before, but I''ll repeat it for those who weren''t listening or forgot :-) I like the idea of a ''Critique Forum''. But the problem with that is that it would turn out more like Photosig - people love reading comments on their own photos, but have less incentive to go comment on others'' works. So you''d get a bunch of photos to be critiqued, but not many actual critiques.

I thought that an easy way around this problem would be to randomly select photos from the previous challenge (the one on the Results page). Preferrably 3 or 4, from different ranks in the voting. One from the top 25, one from the 25-50 group, etc. These would be selected for the "extra special critique" section. Which would give an opportunity for people to discuss in more depth what they thought, why they thought, what could be improved, and so on. By calling attention to specific photos, those who are unsure about their critiques would have a manageable number of photos to look for the in-depth critiques. Of course, no sort of consensus would be reached, but there are enough bored people hanging around here checking scores and posting silly things in the forums that it might be a slightly more productive use of time.

I''m thinking something along the level of detail in the thread where people critiqued John''s photo "Cruisin''". I don''t know if it was helpful to John or not, but I certainly was interested to see what others thought about the photo, what was good, and how it could be improved.

I don''t know about the logistics of this, but it doesn''t seem like it would be too difficult in a programming sense. I think you might even just be able to put an asterisk next to them or a link on the homepage to the critique photos and let people continue their comments on the results page.

This probably shouldn''t be in this thread, but it seemed to relate as to be addressing the same problem (lack of useful comments) in a less-forced and less-canned way, which seemed to be the common complaint with the previous suggestion.

* This message has been edited by the author on 7/23/2002 4:14:40 PM.
07/23/2002 04:16:40 PM · #52
kimbly, i remember you suggesting this before and i think it's a great idea! :)
07/23/2002 04:21:21 PM · #53
Originally posted by gr8photos:
kimbly, i remember you suggesting this before and i think it''s a great idea! :)


As I remember, not many other people were all that excited about it though :)



* This message has been edited by the author on 7/23/2002 4:21:06 PM.
07/23/2002 04:25:42 PM · #54
I think a critique section is a great idea... Maybe not just for challenge photos, but for any photo you have that you want feedback on...
07/23/2002 04:35:44 PM · #55
Kimbly, I am all for critqueing but I don''t end up feeling comfortable critiqueing people''s photos who submit here, even when they ask for it.

Even on John''s photo "Cruisin", which I liked very much and had John send me the original for my files, I always feel inhibited.

Maybe a place where we could critique or comment on professional photos was an idea I had. That way people can sling mud, praise to the heavens or whatever without having the photographer in the crosshairs as well.


* This message has been edited by the author on 7/23/2002 4:36:50 PM.
07/23/2002 04:38:59 PM · #56
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I think a critique section is a great idea... Maybe not just for challenge photos, but for any photo you have that you want feedback on...

Yeah, but then the problem becomes "I have 50 vacation photos I took, can you critique them?" and the volume becomes impossible to really get in-depth feedback (I''m not saying that people shouldn''t post vacation photos and the like to share though). That''s why I think the 3-5 past challenge submissions would work better. Make people focus on those images and really spending some time thinking about it (and reading what others think, and what the photographer thinks) rather than reiterating "great shot!" 60 times.

Plus, the random nature of it would ensure that a range of ability levels and scores got comments, rather than just the upper or lower ones.

* This message has been edited by the author on 7/23/2002 4:40:16 PM.
07/23/2002 04:41:45 PM · #57
Hmmm... the photographer in the crosshairs... If the photographer didn't want to be in the crosshairs, why would they ask for critique? I want to be fired upon.

I wouldn't worry so much about making stern and forceful critiques on anyone's photo, especially if they submitted it for critique. Afterall, critique is what you see in a photo that is bad and good, right? If someone is going to be upset by critique, why would they post their work in a public critique forum?
07/23/2002 04:44:18 PM · #58
Originally posted by Kimbly:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
[i]I think a critique section is a great idea... Maybe not just for challenge photos, but for any photo you have that you want feedback on...


Yeah, but then the problem becomes "I have 50 vacation photos I took, can you critique them?" and the volume becomes impossible to really get in-depth feedback (I''m not saying that people shouldn''t post vacation photos and the like to share though). That''s why I think the 3-5 past challenge submissions would work better. Make people focus on those images and really spending some time thinking about it (and reading what others think, and what the photographer thinks) rather than reiterating "great shot!" 60 times.

Plus, the random nature of it would ensure that a range of ability levels and scores got comments, rather than just the upper or lower ones[/i]

Random sounds good... use photo number 1, 25, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150, etc for post party critique, as long as the photographer agreed to it in advance. Maybe when a photo is posted, there could be a flag set to allow or disallow public critique after the show... if number 50 had declined, move down the list to the next one that did not decline...
07/23/2002 04:47:19 PM · #59
I like the idea of a controlled critique too.. What I'd do is pick a moderator who picks a photo for critique -- maybe two a week? Maybe just one? -- then contacts the photo's owner and asks if they'd be comfortable having their photo critiqued. If the answer is yes, great. If not, move on to another photo.

I'd actually try to keep away from the winning photos (or those in the top 10 or so) -- they're harder to critique. If it were up to me, I'd go back through forum posts and find the ones people thought got "robbed" -- there were obviously reasons some people thought they were excellent, and reasons other people thought they weren't so great. Seems like there could be lots of good discussion over one of these as to its merits and detractions.
07/23/2002 04:47:42 PM · #60
Originally posted by hokie:
Kimbly, I am all for critqueing but I don''t end up feeling comfortable critiqueing people''s photos who submit here, even when they ask for it.

Well, I certainly am somewhat "inhibited" (hey, look left - psych) commenting. I don't want to come out and say "this sucks, it's boring, you shouldn't have even taken this photo". Which I'll admit I sometimes feel. But with the assumption that the person wanted to take the photo in the first place for some reason, I can usually if I think hard enough come up with some techniques/elements I like in the photo and/or some things I don't like or ways to improve it. I'm not sure that slinging mud is the object, and all human interaction is always somewhat inhibited.
07/23/2002 04:49:12 PM · #61
Originally posted by Patella:
I like the idea of a controlled critique too.. What I'd do is pick a moderator who picks a photo for critique -- maybe two a week? Maybe just one? -- then contacts the photo's owner and asks if they'd be comfortable having their photo critiqued. If the answer is yes, great. If not, move on to another photo.

I'd actually try to keep away from the winning photos (or those in the top 10 or so) -- they're harder to critique. If it were up to me, I'd go back through forum posts and find the ones people thought got "robbed" -- there were obviously reasons some people thought they were excellent, and reasons other people thought they weren't so great. Seems like there could be lots of good discussion over one of these as to its merits and detractions.


Thats probably the best idea i have heard all day... :))
07/23/2002 04:51:42 PM · #62
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Thats probably the best idea i have heard all day... :))

But some of us moderators don't know nuttin'. And besides, it would be awfully hard not to pick my own photo :-) Especially this week.
07/23/2002 04:55:26 PM · #63
Would welcome very much the opportunity of a critique section for a picture or a small group of pictures that is representative of the sort of work one is doing. Would prefer to keep the challenge pics out as if otherwise it seems an attempt to second guess/correct the original comments made (and might discourage some people even more from making comments).
07/23/2002 04:56:48 PM · #64
I'm really in favor of a critique forum. I remember what it was like when I was beganing college and we had critique sessions. I remember how uncomfortable it was and I couldn't seem to articulate what I was thinking. Then I was so impressed when we finally got to hear what the teacher had to say and it sounded so simple but, of course, it wasn't, it takes experience. Many people here simply havn't learned how to critique well but they can certainly learn and they don't need to be top photographers to do it properly. I think it would be great if each week two or three completely 'random' pictures were selected for a forum critque. I think everyone would learn something from it. Perhaps the owners of the photos would be asked for permission to have their photo critiqued so they could decline if they wished and another photo would be selected. This way nobody would be put on the spot if they were uncomfortable with their photo being critiqued.

T
07/23/2002 04:59:56 PM · #65
Originally posted by Patella:
I'd go back through forum posts and find the ones people thought got "robbed" -- there were obviously reasons some people thought they were excellent, and reasons other people thought they weren't so great. Seems like there could be lots of good discussion over one of these as to its merits and detractions.


Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Thats probably the best idea i have heard all day... :))


I like this idea as well :-)

The slinging mud thing was just to say sometimes you want to say "this sucks" or "that is b.s." without all the flowery apologies or "this is just my opinion".

And John is right to a point. People that do submit to a site for critique should be prepared for a critique but I have even seen when someone says something and even thought the photographer of the photo took the comment just fine some of his supporters didn't..then it gets into a Jets vs. Sharks kinda WestSide Story thing. :-) Which I am not against in theory minus the connection of a DP Challenge photographer and his photo in the middle of it. :-)
07/23/2002 05:08:21 PM · #66
Originally posted by Kimbly:
But some of us moderators don't know nuttin'. And besides, it would be awfully hard not to pick my own photo :-) Especially this week.
[/i]

Kimbly, actually I didn't necessarily mean one of you moderators (though it could be) I just meant someone who was in charge of moderating and leading the discussion on the photo.

07/23/2002 05:13:21 PM · #67
<< I'd go back through forum posts and find the ones people thought got "robbed" >>

Careful with that approach! You set up a scenario for a pissing contest. Threads with people protesting their votes and appealing via the Critique Forum. The poor voters, meanwhile, when voting on challenges, feel more and more reluctant to stick out their necks with honest comments. The comments will become increasingly bland and politically correct or even fewer comments than now.
07/23/2002 05:18:48 PM · #68
Originally posted by Journey:
<< I'd go back through forum posts and find the ones people thought got "robbed" >>

Careful with that approach! You set up a scenario for a pissing contest. Threads with people protesting their votes and appealing via the Critique Forum. The poor voters, meanwhile, when voting on challenges, feel more and more reluctant to stick out their necks with honest comments. The comments will become increasingly bland and politically correct or even fewer comments than now.


This was one of my thoughts when saying if we wanted to debate photgraphy style we should pick professional photos. Just like real photo schools study stuff.
07/23/2002 05:44:57 PM · #69
If a critique is what you are after, with no holes barred, then have the option (checkbox) to keep the critique anonymous. It seems that most people are afraid of confrontation. This problem is what is promoting the ?atta-boy? atmosphere here. ? This may be a can of worms to attempt, because many people might just become belligerent and vulgar. But if only the administrators could trace inappropriate comments back to the originator,? it could still be policed.

For what it?s worth John, Mr. Setzler ;) ? Your comments are sincere and much appreciated. And you have the ability to shoot a good picture, which commands respect of your opinions. Others might hesitate to expose their own weaknesses by making comments out of ignorance that they might regret. ? And they genuinely do not want to hurt anyone?s feelings.

The excellent suggestion of many checkboxes per photo would lengthen the voting process considerably.
My 2-1/2 Cents

07/23/2002 05:47:22 PM · #70
I like the critique forum idea and think it would be a wonderful way for people to demonstrate what they mean in comments. The image being critiqued could be put somewhere in it's full, uncropped, unresized, unsharpened, unanythinged glory and instead of just a "should have cropped closer" or "Sharpen", the critique can include a 'remix' of the original to back up the thought.

By the way, someone said earlier you could put canned comments in word and cut/paste... Macros work well too... But I don't think the folks that want the canned comment option want it so they can MAKE canned comments... I like the idea, but would continue doing most of mine by hand... I think the 'pro-can' camp are looking to GET the canned goods rather than 200 votes with 5 comments...

But that's just me :)
07/23/2002 05:47:31 PM · #71
Originally posted by hokie:
Originally posted by Journey:
[i] << I'd go back through forum posts and find the ones people thought got "robbed" >>

Careful with that approach! You set up a scenario for a pissing contest. Threads with people protesting their votes and appealing via the Critique Forum. The poor voters, meanwhile, when voting on challenges, feel more and more reluctant to stick out their necks with honest comments. The comments will become increasingly bland and politically correct or even fewer comments than now.


This was one of my thoughts when saying if we wanted to debate photgraphy style we should pick professional photos. Just like real photo schools study stuff.[/i]


There should be a couple of moderators, their photos not eligible for review to keep them open minded. No photos that were known as "being robbed". No one in the previous weeks top 10. Only two per week with anyone interested being able to test theories on what is being discussed or explained. Each week repeat. Should help a lot of us. The reason for no more than two is it will be too hard to keep up on all that might be going on with more than that.

07/23/2002 05:51:11 PM · #72
Originally posted by Journey:

Careful with that approach! You set up a scenario for a pissing contest. Threads with people protesting their votes and appealing via the Critique Forum. The poor voters, meanwhile, when voting on challenges, feel more and more reluctant to stick out their necks with honest comments. The comments will become increasingly bland and politically correct or even fewer comments than now.


This is why I'm in favor of the random idea. No one gets to choose who it is, so there's no protesting or people feeling embarrassed, etc. Besides, there's some assumption that a photo that got 'robbed' is a good photo. While it's useful to have people point out things about photos that are good that others may have missed, I think it would be also useful to have a discussion of what makes a mediocre photo. Ideas on more interesting lighting, composition, post-processing techniques, etc. that could have turned a 4.5 photo into a 5.5 photo or something. I think that's what would be most useful for the educational purposes of this site.
07/23/2002 05:58:37 PM · #73
It would be easy, after voting on all the photos, to also check a box to vote on a photo to discuss. the one with the most votes would be a good candidate.
07/23/2002 05:59:10 PM · #74
Originally posted by Journey:
Careful with that approach! You set up a scenario for a pissing contest. Threads with people protesting their votes and appealing via the Critique Forum. The poor voters, meanwhile, when voting on challenges, feel more and more reluctant to stick out their necks with honest comments. The comments will become increasingly bland and politically correct or even fewer comments than now.

Hence the reason for a moderator. If it really became an issue, then part of the critique process could always be that the photographer was not allowed to discuss their own work (or maybe not allowed except as a final comment). If people started to "abuse" the whole thing, it's very easy -- just don't critique their photos. If people attack comments that others have made during voting, or during the critiquing, same thing -- or simply cut their comment and/or ask them to write a new one. (Note: I'm not saying that a critique of a critique might not be valid. But there are ways to politely tell someone they're wrong while simultanesouly helping them learn something new.)

I'm not saying I've thought the whole process out, just sketching out the basics. No matter what you do, there will be problems. The trick will be twofold: First, think up the best system. Second, look for solutions to problems, not just try to find the problems.
07/23/2002 06:01:58 PM · #75
Originally posted by darylbrown:
There should be a couple of moderators, their photos not eligible for review to keep them open minded. No photos that were known as "being robbed". No one in the previous weeks top 10. Only two per week with anyone interested being able to test theories on what is being discussed or explained. Each week repeat. Should help a lot of us. The reason for no more than two is it will be too hard to keep up on all that might be going on with more than that.


But when you introduce moderators, you introduce bias. The purpose really isn't to highlight the photo - it's to 'practice' critiquing and have a small number of options to that it can be very focused. The randomness is key - otherwise it defeats the purpose and just becomes another sort of contest for people to appeal enough to one or two moderators to get them into the critique forum. And cutting people out because others thought they were robbed or they took a good photo the week before doesn't seem to make any sense at all...
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 06:56:19 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 06:56:19 AM EDT.