| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/20/2002 11:33:42 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by inspzil:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
[i]Gordon, those are some excellent points and guidelines for a thorough critique... thanks for posting that :)
Maybe I'm not qualified.....
[/i]
Don't give up so quickly. This list isn't mean't to be a checklist of
things you have to comment on. Just something things to look for or consider or think about while looking at a picture. It should lead you
to understand what you liked or didn't like and help you to perhaps understand what made it work or not for you. The best part about doing this is you learn a lot about what makes a good picture or a bad picture, other than 'I like it but don't know why'
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 11:40:57 AM · #52 |
John, I think I can do 30 a week.
Just like the others ... I will do my best and will try to follow the guidelines.
I think it's a good idea and project
Just one concern ... we would do additional efforts but we are still regular users voting, meaning .. we do not hold the truth more that others. Not sure to write it correctly. But I do not want to have a 'critic photographer cap' I do not want to be afraid of giving wrong comments.
count me in
Lionel |
|
|
|
11/20/2002 11:50:10 AM · #53 |
With you critiquing of past contests, do you think there may be some bias when critiquing, now that you know who the photographer of the shot is?
Just a thought,
-danny |
|
|
|
11/20/2002 11:57:51 AM · #54 |
Am I correct in assuming that since this will be a post-challenge critique, we shouldn't focus much attention on to how each photo applied to the challenge topic?
Gordon, your list was very thorough and appreciated. I just want to make sure we're all on the same page here. Will we be judging based on the actual physical and emotional values of the photo -- not on its relevance to the challenge?
-- Rob |
|
|
|
11/20/2002 12:07:19 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
Am I correct in assuming that since this will be a post-challenge critique, we shouldn't focus much attention on to how each photo applied to the challenge topic?
Gordon, your list was very thorough and appreciated. I just want to make sure we're all on the same page here. Will we be judging based on the actual physical and emotional values of the photo -- not on its relevance to the challenge?
-- Rob
I suppose I would leave that up to the critic. I would definitely comment if I thought the photo did not meet the challenge, or if it was weak in that area. I would also be commenting on the title if I felt that it was being used to prop up the photo that was weak in the challenge... just my opinions though...
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 12:08:52 PM · #56 |
|
|
|
11/20/2002 12:29:56 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
What about all my IFs??
I don't have answers to those yet... I will be trying to provide answers after I determine who wants to participate. Those who don't want to critique but a few photos each week will be able to participate, but I have to figure out a way to manage it.
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 12:38:51 PM · #58 |
I will try to chat with Drew sometime this evening or tomorrow about some possible options.
Several people here have mentioned only critiquing photos where the photographer requests the extra in-depth critique. I think this is a good idea if we can find a way to incorporate it into the site.
I think a 'check box' on the submission page requesting in depth critique of the photo could be a good idea.
If we could implement something like this, what would be the best way to handle that 'list'? We would need to find a way to distribute those requests among the people on the critique team, or generate a numbered list of photos that we could distribute to the team members.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 12:48:18 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by inspzil:
[i]Originally posted by jmsetzler:
[i]Gordon, those are some excellent points and guidelines for a thorough critique... thanks for posting that :)
Maybe I'm not qualified.....
[/i]
Don't give up so quickly. This list isn't mean't to be a checklist of
things you have to comment on. Just something things to look for or consider or think about while looking at a picture. It should lead you
to understand what you liked or didn't like and help you to perhaps understand what made it work or not for you. The best part about doing this is you learn a lot about what makes a good picture or a bad picture, other than 'I like it but don't know why'
[/i]
I haven't given up at all. Just because I can't take a great shot doesn't mean I can't see one. I don't look at things point by point so much, but more as a whole. I figure if you don't see it sticking out at you, it must be ok. I just approach it differently. I think I'm adept a critic now as I'll ever be. I typically leave lots of comments, at least a lot more than I get probably 4 or 5 fold. I've tried to make most of them worthwhile. There are a few that are just pats on the back, but the good pictures deserve some of that.
Rest assured or be nervous, depending on how much faith you have in me. I think I'm fair and objective. I won't say I'm always helpful but my intentions are always good. I've practiced my critiquing skills on Photosig a lot. The voting there is so lame though.
I figure I can do the first week. Maybe you Mod's and other more experienced people can either approve or get a good chuckle out of what I have to say. I'm sure if I stink, someone will be courteous enough to let me know.
But thanks for your concern G - Bob
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 12:48:51 PM · #60 |
Trouble is, as mentioned above, if we give the check box on submission most people will check it.
If it's something they have to tick/ request(by, say, midnight on Monday immediately following results) it's a more conscious request and will be limited to people who find they still would like more input after seeing all the voting comments, and won't include people who think they've already received adequate comments during the challenge...
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 12:50:53 PM · #61 |
well on photosig a photo is assigned randomly to a critiquer via a page on the site. This might be an idea for here.
I like the fact they can choose if they want a more in depth crit. On submitting they could then check this box and type in an extra field their level of exp etc. Camera should also be viewable during the week (because like gordon says, there is no point telling people without a toprange camera to change their DOF, cos they prolly wont be able to.
This means we could comments during the challenge, along with the other comments, which in my opinion would be better than after the challenge, and I personally don't get back to my photos to check for new comments really.
The comments left would be more likley to be read during the voting week.
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 12:52:33 PM · #62 |
I just read what kavey said. Good point.
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 01:04:13 PM · #63 |
| If you feel I could contribute usefully I would be happy to help with critiques |
|
|
|
11/20/2002 01:07:39 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by Konador:
well on photosig a photo is assigned randomly to a critiquer via a page on the site. This might be an idea for here.
I like the fact they can choose if they want a more in depth crit. On submitting they could then check this box and type in an extra field their level of exp etc. Camera should also be viewable during the week (because like gordon says, there is no point telling people without a toprange camera to change their DOF, cos they prolly wont be able to.
This means we could comments during the challenge, along with the other comments, which in my opinion would be better than after the challenge, and I personally don't get back to my photos to check for new comments really.
The comments left would be more likley to be read during the voting week.
I like Gordon's idea of critiquing after the challenge so we can readily have all that information... I don't think it's a good idea to display that information during the challenge...
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 01:08:03 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by Konador:
well on photosig a photo is assigned randomly to a critiquer via a page on the site. This might be an idea for here.
I like the fact they can choose if they want a more in depth crit. On submitting they could then check this box and type in an extra field their level of exp etc. Camera should also be viewable during the week (because like gordon says, there is no point telling people without a toprange camera to change their DOF, cos they prolly wont be able to.
This means we could comments during the challenge, along with the other comments, which in my opinion would be better than after the challenge, and I personally don't get back to my photos to check for new comments really.
The comments left would be more likley to be read during the voting week.
I say we make the check box on the submission page an application, not necessarily that their name is added to the list of in-depth critiques. It should be confirmed some other way, maybe by e-mail. In some cases, the comments from the challenge might take care of their queries.
I think it should be limited somehow so the in-depth's don't include every photo every week, with say, 2 in-depth's per month per person.
Maybe the critics can have their shots done every week since they are volunteering.
If I knew I was going to be getting comments after the challenge was over, I would at least check my profile page to see if the number changed. If you have to verify after the challenge is done, you should know that you WILL be getting at least one more comment.
All for now - BoB
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 01:11:53 PM · #66 |
Maybe an automatic email response if a comment is received after the voting week?
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 03:59:07 PM · #67 |
John,
In terms of the easiest way to assign photos out, I think your idea of saying you get rankings #3, 13, 23 etc every week (or whatever the breakdown happens to be) is the best.
However, that means that certain people always get to critique the top ranking photos. It could also, by some strange fluke of coincidence, mean that any given critiquer might end up not having to critique any photos if it's decided to let people choose whether or not they get critiqued. (Believe me, I realize what the odds are of this happening.)
If it were up to me, and since all the people volunteering are forum readers anyway, I'd just post a quick list every week that breaks down which photos are to be critiqued and who gets which ones. You could either make it very anonymous or not so much.
Something along the lines of:
jimmythefish: 4, 15, 26, 37, and 48
patella: 5, 16, 27, 38, and 49
jmsetzler: 6, 17, 28, 39, and 50
The next week it could rotate:
jmsetzler: 4, 15, 26, 37, and 48
jimmythefish: 5, 16, 27, 38, and 49
patella: 6, 17, 28, 39, and 50
I especially like the idea of skipping every X number of photos where X is the number of critiquers. That gives you a nice slice, on average, of lots of different... quality, skill levels, artistic interest? Instead of just saying you take the first 20, I'll take the second 20, and you get the last 20. So one person's getting the "dregs."
Ack -- must leave -- maybe more later....
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 04:16:28 PM · #68 |
Patella,
this is what i had in mind initially. The list of participants would rotate every week also so that everyone would start with the 1/11/21 seqence also.
The question at the moment is that some people who want to do these critiques don't think every photo should be critiqued. I have to come up with a plan for that first.
I personally think we should critique every photo, whether it's asked for or not. If we have enough volunteers to make that manageable, I would want to do it.
Critiquing photos is a lesson for the giver as well as the receiver...
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 04:27:28 PM · #69 |
John
I don't mind the idea of critiqueing every photo - and it was what I tried to do myself for all photos when I started voting here - and did so for a few challenges.
I am just thinking that given the extra time people are kindly volunteering here that it may be more beneficial to limit it to people who actually really want it.
If it proves to be popular more and more people will start requesting to be included but also more people may volunteer to help out and it may well end up that all photos are then able to be included.
Im my (not particularly expert) opinion, as a start it might be nice to do ones where people definitely want it.
But then again, take my opinions with a pinch of salt as I've only volunteered to do 10 for the moment...
8-D
Kavey
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 04:28:08 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Critiquing photos is a lesson for the giver as well as the receiver...
Ahh...now you know why teachers have always accepted **** wages despite their equal level of education with other professionals -- and even though they are entrusted with what is arguably the most important job we have... |
|
|
|
11/20/2002 04:33:28 PM · #71 |
As of this writing, I have listed 17 volunteers. Some others have posted here but not actually volunteered. My list is as follows:
1. jimmythefish
2. muckpond
3. Azrifel
4. Gordon
5. Patella
6. stephan
7. jimmsp
8. Gracious
9. inspzil
10. sulamk
11. zadore
12. BigSmiles
13. Konador
14. Kavey (no more than 10)
15. lionelm
16. andrewm
17. jmsetzler
If I have added someone to this list who doesn't want to be on it, let me know. If I have overlooked you, let me know as well. If all of these people actually work with this project, we could critique all photos in a 350 photo challenge with everyone doing 20. It wold work out to 15 each on a 250 photo challenge.
I would like to wrap up the volunteer selection process tonight or tomorrow. Since we have 17, i would really like to round it off at an even 20 if possible :) 3 more????
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 04:35:48 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
John
I don't mind the idea of critiqueing every photo - and it was what I tried to do myself for all photos when I started voting here - and did so for a few challenges.
I am just thinking that given the extra time people are kindly volunteering here that it may be more beneficial to limit it to people who actually really want it.
If it proves to be popular more and more people will start requesting to be included but also more people may volunteer to help out and it may well end up that all photos are then able to be included.
Im my (not particularly expert) opinion, as a start it might be nice to do ones where people definitely want it.
But then again, take my opinions with a pinch of salt as I've only volunteered to do 10 for the moment...
8-D
Kavey
Kavey, I am defnintely going to pursue this plan, but I need to do some more thinking and chatting with the powers that be at this site :) I would like to pursue this, but we need to present a plan. We also need to see how many people who have volunteered are going to actually play the game once we start...
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 05:57:16 PM · #73 |
John,
I think most of us want to do a good job on critiquing, and want to do for those who ask for it.
A thought.
You keep with your distribution process as you have outlined it so far.
If I am critic # 1 of 20, in week one I get the photos that have placed 1,21,41,61, etc. If however, photo # 21 has not asked for a critique, I automatically move to # 22. That way #22 gets one extra one - a bonus. And if I were #22, I would love the extra critique. After #22, I return to my list, doing # 41.
All you need to do is to have an identifying check box on a photo's summary page to let us know if the artist wants a critique or not. I suppose at worst, a person makes that his first statement in the Image Details box.
* This message has been edited by the author on 11/20/2002 5:55:21 PM.
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 06:04:30 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by Kavey:
[i]John
I don't mind the idea of critiqueing every photo - and it was what I tried to do myself for all photos when I started voting here - and did so for a few challenges.
I am just thinking that given the extra time people are kindly volunteering here that it may be more beneficial to limit it to people who actually really want it.
If it proves to be popular more and more people will start requesting to be included but also more people may volunteer to help out and it may well end up that all photos are then able to be included.
Im my (not particularly expert) opinion, as a start it might be nice to do ones where people definitely want it.
But then again, take my opinions with a pinch of salt as I've only volunteered to do 10 for the moment...
8-D
Kavey
Kavey, I am defnintely going to pursue this plan, but I need to do some more thinking and chatting with the powers that be at this site :) I would like to pursue this, but we need to present a plan. We also need to see how many people who have volunteered are going to actually play the game once we start...
[/i]
It's your baby and a superb idea - I'll follow...
But I daren't commit to more than 10 until I see how much time it takes me...
|
|
|
|
11/20/2002 06:13:22 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by jimmsp:
John,
I think most of us want to do a good job on critiquing, and want to do for those who ask for it.
A thought.
You keep with your distribution process as you have outlined it so far.
If I am critic # 1 of 20, in week one I get the photos that have placed 1,21,41,61, etc. If however, photo # 21 has not asked for a critique, I automatically move to # 22. That way #22 gets one extra one - a bonus. And if I were #22, I would love the extra critique. After #22, I return to my list, doing # 41.
All you need to do is to have an identifying check box on a photo's summary page to let us know if the artist wants a critique or not. I suppose at worst, a person makes that his first statement in the Image Details box.
Jim, in the beginning we will not be able to have the 'identifying' checkbox for the photo critique requests. This may be possible in the future, but it will not start out that way. If we prove to be successful with our critiques I will definitely look for better ways to do it.
I don't feel comfortable asking the site administrators for changes to the site until I feel that we can make this process work. I would feel really bad about asking for those changes before I felt confident that the 'critique club' is going to stick together....
|
|
