| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/30/2003 01:14:44 PM · #1 |
Hey all, I'm somewhat new to the Critique Club, and I find it very enjoyable to look at photos more indepth, but I just noticed that the Critique Club has almost 300 images to critique!
Perhaps I'm out of line requesting this, but I feel that some of us may click that "Please Critique My Photo" button a little too quickly? It really is a nice way to get some indepth remarks, but perhaps some of us can save it for images in which our own experimentation or exploration is taking place (of course, for me that's almost every time!). Still, 300 is a lot of photos! I do 8-10 a week and each takes about 20-30 minutes (but its such a joy to do them, so I'm not complaining!).
Also keep in mind that with 300 images to critique, if yours does not get critiqued, you now probably know the reason.
For those who are not in the Critique Club, when those of us who do belong click on "Critique Club" in the Community menu bar, we are given a random image to critique, so we don't select them. I really like this feature as I would tend to always gravitate toward certain types of photos. Being in the Critique Club has probably helped my photography almost as much as the taking of photos.
To the ones who organized this feature: THANKS!
David
Message edited by author 2003-04-30 13:15:24.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 01:25:46 PM · #2 |
I admittedly didn't do enough last week. I'm going to do more starting now...or as soon as breakfast is done, I think of glass topics, shoot some, and come back!
Soon anyways!
M
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 01:25:52 PM · #3 |
Perhaps I´m out on thin ice (as we say in Sweden) when I say this: If I notice that my picture is doing very well (say round 6,5-7,x) I take away my mark for extra critique. This because I usually get many good comments during the voting. If we get many comments during voting we can take away our mark for extra critique and let there be more time for the Critique Club to critique those who place not so high. Get me right please, it´s a little dificult for me to explain it in English.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 02:12:40 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by dsidwell:
Perhaps I'm out of line requesting this, but I feel that some of us may click that "Please Critique My Photo" button a little too quickly? It really is a nice way to get some indepth remarks, but perhaps some of us can save it for images in which our own experimentation or exploration is taking place (of course, for me that's almost every time!). Still, 300 is a lot of photos! I do 8-10 a week and each takes about 20-30 minutes (but its such a joy to do them, so I'm not complaining!). |
I agree with that assessment David. I think that its way too easy to just click that box for the heck of it. I haven't been checking my box lately. We have enough to do and I think I'm pretty good at giving myself a reasonably objective critique anyway. I've also been getting quite a few more comments of late as well.
I wish there were some type of confirmation system in place. For instance, the photog's requesting critiques are sent an email Friday, let's say, and if they don't respond by Sunday night, they are dropped to the bottom of the queue or eliminated from it altogether. I suggested something a few weeks ago about requiring exif data. It's not always about the data itself, but it would at least give us some way to filter out some of the pictures.
I agree with Carsten about being able to uncheck the box after you've submitted the picture. If we had a couple hundred photogs that were that considerate, we'd have less to do.
I enjoy doing about 80% of the critiques I do. There are always some where I get a little stumped about what to say when a photo is too bad, or too good. I get a little touchy when it comes to the "helpful" button too. I think I got one helpful check in the 9 critiques I did, and it was from another critic. That irks me.
Done venting.....again.
-Bob |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 02:25:12 PM · #5 |
Well I'm going to keep checking the damn box until I actually get a critique, which hasn't happened yet in about six (I think, I've lost track) photos.
I notice that so many of the winners get a critique, which is OK: but I'm reasonably desperate to know why my shots aren't doing as well here as they deserve (in my opinion), and nothing's happening. If you guys are going to offer the service, I feel it behoves you to make sure it gets done, rather than asking the rest of us to stop asking.
Now, I contribute a fair amount to this site through these forums, and I think I leave commentts in at least as much depth (often way more) than any that I recieve, and I would happily volunteer for a bit of CC duty - only when my shots are averaging 5 overall I'm not sure anone would really consider me qualified.
If CC can't keep up, I suggest removing or limiting the feature.
I'll review this later - it isn't meant to sound as angry as I fear it does ...
ed
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 02:29:08 PM · #6 |
ed - the critique club members are put at the top of the queue - it also happens that a lot of CC members are winning lately so a lot of winners are participating in CC and thus getting priority.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 02:57:01 PM · #7 |
ed, it does sound angry I'm afraid. As a CC member, I can tell you that I do as many a week as I possibly can. I stopped checking "the box" several weeks ago after several people had complaints such as yours. Unfortunately, I do so even when I really want to know what is "wrong" or "right" with my picture. This week there were over 300 pics to critique. We do the best we can. Keep checking the box. You may get one, and you may not, there is no way of promising you anything.
If you think you can offer constructive comments, please sign up for CC. Obviously, we need all the help we can get.
PS -- Just in case anyone wonders, CC members are all volunteers, not rewarded in any way except personal satisfaction.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:02:47 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by e301:
Well I'm going to keep checking the damn box until I actually get a critique, which hasn't happened yet in about six (I think, I've lost track) photos.
I notice that so many of the winners get a critique, which is OK: but I'm reasonably desperate to know why my shots aren't doing as well here as they deserve (in my opinion), and nothing's happening. If you guys are going to offer the service, I feel it behoves you to make sure it gets done, rather than asking the rest of us to stop asking.
Now, I contribute a fair amount to this site through these forums, and I think I leave commentts in at least as much depth (often way more) than any that I recieve, and I would happily volunteer for a bit of CC duty - only when my shots are averaging 5 overall I'm not sure anone would really consider me qualified.
If CC can't keep up, I suggest removing or limiting the feature.
I'll review this later - it isn't meant to sound as angry as I fear it does ...
ed |
Ed, this is a 'service' but there is no guarantee that anyone gets a critique. There is no guarantee that anyone gets a critique.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:04:32 PM · #9 |
Why are you so keen on having it reviewed? Do you really think that by having it reviewed it will make you a better photographer because someone on DPc says it is?
In the end photography is an art, and art isn't trainable up to a certain point. you can work on your technique, etc. as far as technical means, but in the end what you capture is up to you.
However, if your point is to WIN on here, then do ask for people's opinions so you know what they're looking for.
Originally posted by e301:
Well I'm going to keep checking the damn box until I actually get a critique, which hasn't happened yet in about six (I think, I've lost track) photos.
I notice that so many of the winners get a critique, which is OK: but I'm reasonably desperate to know why my shots aren't doing as well here as they deserve (in my opinion), and nothing's happening. If you guys are going to offer the service, I feel it behoves you to make sure it gets done, rather than asking the rest of us to stop asking.
Now, I contribute a fair amount to this site through these forums, and I think I leave commentts in at least as much depth (often way more) than any that I recieve, and I would happily volunteer for a bit of CC duty - only when my shots are averaging 5 overall I'm not sure anone would really consider me qualified.
If CC can't keep up, I suggest removing or limiting the feature.
I'll review this later - it isn't meant to sound as angry as I fear it does ...
ed |
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:06:03 PM · #10 |
what if a loose group of friends decided to do critiques on pics on the site? and they didnt tell people that they had formed this little group. if u received one, you'd be happy. if you didn't you wouldnt have anything to complain about because it would just be some people out there following their own agenda, trying to do others a favor while improving their own critical skills.
That in essence is the critique club, except that they allow people to know of their existence. that's why it's not a right to get a critique. anymore than it's a right to get a comment from any given person.
Message edited by author 2003-04-30 15:10:30.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:08:56 PM · #11 |
Actually, the way we have this process setup, basically the same people are getting critiques every week because the CC members always go to the top of the list. After the CC member critiques are completed, the list moves randomly into the rest of the photos.
The issue at hand is the number of critiques the collective club does each week is not very far above the number of members in the group, so there are only a few 'random' photos that get critiques every week.
There is no way to fix this problem and keep everyone happy.
There are several options for change available and when I have tossed them out they get shot down quite rapidly.
I would love to see the CC group vote to NOT have their own photos at the top of the queue so that non members would have a better opportunity at getting critiques. Some feel that they should have a critique since they are giving them...
Based on this, it's probably about time to review the process again and make some changes to improve the group and the 'service' it provides to the site.
I will start a new thread on this topic and see what happens...
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:22:12 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
The issue at hand is the number of critiques the collective club does each week is not very far above the number of members in the group, so there are only a few 'random' photos that get critiques every week... |
Mathematically, that would suggest that each member is only averaging 1-2/week. If everyone could do 2-3 you'd cover a lot more photos...
That said, I appreciate the critiques, including the ones on photos other than mine, which I browse pretty frequently. |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:37:30 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by e301:
...If you guys are going to offer the service, I feel it behoves you to make sure it gets done... |
The service we are offering is the chance that you MAY get a critique, based on random allocation after we critique each other. In that respect, I believe we provide what we offer.
I think perhaps the expectation or understanding of what we provide isn't necessarily clear and perhaps something we need to look at improving.
Originally posted by e301:
I would happily volunteer for a bit of CC duty - only when my shots are averaging 5 overall I'm not sure anone would really consider me qualified. |
Look at my entries and you'll see that, if anyone makes assumptions about the worth of my critiques based solely on my entries here, they will assume they are of no value. Yet, judging from the feedback I've had on my critiques, both from the recipients themselves, and even from other DPCers who have happened across them and thought to email me about them, my critiques have often (though not always) been seen as very helpful.
Critique-ing is a different skill to producing, though, of course, one does need understanding of the concepts, techniques and such.
I'd suggest you go ahead and give it a go. Look through past critiques by a range of CC members to give you some ideas.
Originally posted by General:
Mathematically, that would suggest that each member is only averaging 1-2/week. If everyone could do 2-3 you'd cover a lot more photos... |
Indeed.
However, I'd like to think that critiques done by a member like myself, who tends to do only one or two a week, are just as valuable, individually, as critiques done by a member who does many more.
I believe most CC members put in the amount of time that they are willing to put in and that it's not fair to ask or expect more than that.
If this means that only x number of non CC members get critiques, then surely that's x people that are getting something they wouldn't be getting without the existence of the CC?
Anyway, probably better for me to invest this time in doing another critique!!!
Message edited by author 2003-04-30 15:38:09.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:38:55 PM · #14 |
I can see several approaches:
1/ Make it member only
2/ Make it critique club only (like mag's informal group of friends) Nothing wrong with this approach - if you want a critique, you have to give a critique. Anyone can sign up, but you have to keep a 'positive' balance of critiques given vs received.
3/ Increase the barrier to requesting a critique. If you want a critique and someone to spend the time considering your picture, you should spend the time to provide actual details on the shot. What you were thinking of, what you are trying to show, where you'd like comments and feedback. If you can't provide some input, I don't feel that you should expect a detailed critique.
Or any combination of these. |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:42:49 PM · #15 |
We currently average less than two per person per week...
There is a catch 22 to this problem though....
We could require a minimum number of critiques per week and then two things could happen.... 1 - people don't participate because they don't wanna do that many critiques and 2 - the quality of the critique is diminished because people feel pushed to do the critiques. I don't particularly want either.
I'm gonna be hated by someone no matter which way it goes :)
Some CC members do a lot of good critiques every week. Some do one good critique ever week. Some do one good critique every month. Some do 10 mediocre critiques a month... everyone has their own style and approach.
I don't particularly care how many get done each week. Obviously, I would love to see everyone who wants one to get one.
I have let just about everyone who wanted to be a CC member in the group without much question at all. Some of them do a few critiques and then give up... some of them never even start.
I'm burned out on worrying about it to be quite honest :)
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:45:25 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
However, I'd like to think that critiques done by a member like myself, who tends to do only one or two a week, are just as valuable, individually, as critiques done by a member who does many more... |
No argument from me on that point at all! I don't have any complaints about the CC either... |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:01:06 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Actually, the way we have this process setup, basically the same people are getting critiques every week because the CC members always go to the top of the list. After the CC member critiques are completed, the list moves randomly into the rest of the photos.
The issue at hand is the number of critiques the collective club does each week is not very far above the number of members in the group, so there are only a few 'random' photos that get critiques every week.
There is no way to fix this problem and keep everyone happy.
There are several options for change available and when I have tossed them out they get shot down quite rapidly.
I would love to see the CC group vote to NOT have their own photos at the top of the queue so that non members would have a better opportunity at getting critiques. Some feel that they should have a critique since they are giving them...
Based on this, it's probably about time to review the process again and make some changes to improve the group and the 'service' it provides to the site.
I will start a new thread on this topic and see what happens... |
I'm perfectly willing to see CC members NOT go to the top of the group automatically, or not go to the top until they have done at least n critiques, or are probability weighted (CC member twice as likelt as a non CC member to come up when a club member presses "request a photo to critique).
-Terry
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:08:52 PM · #18 |
Okay, I just did 10 critiques. Out of those, 8 had nothing in the details field at all. The other two had comments bascially saying that these were quick shots they'd taken or not given much thought to.
While I'm not complaining, I do think that if you are going to check the I want a detailed critique box, that it wouldn't be asking too much to expect you to provide some input on what you were trying to achieve, what you think works well, what doesn't and what kind of feedback you are looking for.
This doesn't mean you have to be a great photographer. It doesn't mean you have to be a great critic. But only you knew what you were thinking when you took the shot. Only you know the decisions you made, or what restrictions you felt you took the shot under. If you want resonable feedback, I think it isn't unreasonable to demand that you provide input into the process.
I know I'm guilty of this too so it isn't a blame thing. But it might help to raise the bar on people asking for a critique in the first place and also help improve the quality a lot too.
I think at a minimum, the exposure info must be provided if avaliable - if you can't bother finding that out, then don't expect a critique. Second, some level of thought process should be described in the details - this helps you to understand what you were doing and also helps the person writing the critique.
One of the critiques I wrote did talk about the flaws in the image - this is really useful info - I don't feel I have to point those out then or I can look beyond that - after all, otherwise I might just have pointed out the flaws the submitter was aware of and stopped there.
Does anyone think asking for this info is expecting too much or is unresonable ? (Btw - I don't mean all the EXIF data - I want to know what was in your head, not what the camera) |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:13:21 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
if you want a critique, you have to give a critique. Anyone can sign up, but you have to keep a 'positive' balance of critiques given vs received.
|
I think this is fair enough. But I can see a little language problem here. Personally I could easily do 5-10 critiques a week if it wasn´t because of the language problem. Perhaps if there was a sort of form to fill in with some standard things to critique (focus, composition, colours ...). And at the end you could write some lines about the picture in general.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:15:01 PM · #20 |
i have an idea, maybe only the bottom 20 results of each challenge should be critiqued by the cc.
i would appreciate that more, some constructive criticism, and solutions on where the problems occurred, so then i could take the points on board and apply them to the next challenge |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:15:23 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by carsten:
Originally posted by Gordon:
if you want a critique, you have to give a critique. Anyone can sign up, but you have to keep a 'positive' balance of critiques given vs received.
|
I think this is fair enough. But I can see a little language problem here. Personally I could easily do 5-10 critiques a week if it wasn´t because of the language problem. Perhaps if there was a sort of form to fill in with some standard things to critique (focus, composition, colours ...). And at the end you could write some lines about the picture in general. |
All this expects is that for each one you request, you've done at least one in return. While I'm sympathetic to the language issues, I would really dislike to have any sort of form based critique. I find that about as useless as a score from 1 to 10 in terms of providing useful input. |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:17:02 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by aurora:
i have an idea, maybe only the bottom 20 results of each challenge should be critiqued by the cc.
i would appreciate that more, some constructive criticism, and solutions on where the problems occurred, so then i could take the points on board and apply them to the next challenge |
I could do that more usefully if the submitter gave as much detail as they understand on what they were trying to achieve, what technique they used, what things they feel are lacking or where they want advice.
Otherwise it is almost impossible to find a place to start for a lot of the low scoring pictures, that wouldn't turn in to an intro to photography text. |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:19:16 PM · #23 |
Yeah, OK - I was a bit off. Unintended if any offence was given (and hey, no-one pulled me up on the 'I contribute to this site ...' bit).
I appreciate that you're all volunteers, that there is no qualification, that there is no remuneration, and I think it's a cool and good thing that you all do (though, were I a member of CC, I'd vote for the 'go to the bottom of the list' thing). I do think that the tick box is perhaps a bit misleading - it gives the impression that one's going to get a detailed crit of one's work, and for me that hasn't happened.
In the end, how many people have how much time to devote to the site? It's by far the most useful, informative and interesting place I've found on the web for ages - and participatory too.
Senor paganini - touche (how does one do an e with an acute accent?). :-)
Yeah, I'm not sure about the winning/doing-your-best-work thing: it's arguable that one can set oneself a technical challenge to uncover and carry out a winning entry for DPC, as a learning thing. In the end, I have a dual agenda - I want to develop (forgive the pun) as a photographer, and I want everyone else to see just how wonderful a photographer I am (I hope I don't need to point up the irony there).
We all have our own plan, I guess. I usually have a shot I think would do better thhan the one i enter these days, but that doesn't stop me entering the one I like best. I enjoy being pushed into shooting subjects I wouldn't normally consider - that's where I get most out of DPC.
Ed
Message edited by author 2003-05-01 02:12:35.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:21:36 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I'm gonna be hated by someone no matter which way it goes :)
|
I can tell you right now that, whatever you decide, I certainly won't hate you!!
As far as I am concerned, when you propose changes to CC I make my opinions known and then wait and see what the majority of other CCers think.
If a change is voted in that I personally dislike, I have the choice of simply stepping out of CC.
No hard feelings and certainly no animosity on my part.
Please don't let it become a duty or chore for you, that makes you feel bad or keeps you awake. If it has become that to you, let it go. I know that's easier said than done, I admin a private board with some exceptionally volatile members who often forget that it's not a paid job and decisions are not personal! Shrug. I've taken to shrugging and muttering about passing their message on to the paid staff!!!!
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:43:39 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by e301:
Senor paganini - touche (how does one do an e with an acute accent?). :-)
Ed |
Windows: Alt-0233
Mac OS: Opt-e plus e (the opt-e gives an acute accent over the following vowel) |
|
