| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/10/2008 02:11:42 PM · #26 |
Critique Club is more "private" than this process being proposed; it would mark a pronounced change in the established way of doing things if CC critiques were posted to public threads. Not saying this is bad, just saying...
Reaction Club, if I understand its goals correctly, is about the "ephemera" of a photograph, the feelings it evokes, more than anything else. The proposed process is a little broader-based than that, more of a merging of technical and aesthetic. Or maybe I have that wrong, I donno. I'm tired right now :-(
From my point of view, the advantage of this process over CC is the option of *choice*. I have essentially stopped participating in CC because, frankly, I got tired of doing thoughtful critiques of (apparently) thoughtless images and receiving no feedback whatsoever as to whether any of the photographers whose work I critiqued had even READ the critiques, let alone appreciated them.
I know this is selfish of me, but I tend to stop doing things when I don't get feedback, when I'm operating in a vacuum...
R. |
|
|
|
11/10/2008 02:57:28 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I know this is selfish of me, but I tend to stop doing things when I don't get feedback, when I'm operating in a vacuum... |
I have to agree with you there. We all need feedback, even on our feedback. |
|
|
|
11/10/2008 03:49:53 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
From my point of view, the advantage of this process over CC is the option of *choice*. I have essentially stopped participating in CC because, frankly, I got tired of doing thoughtful critiques of (apparently) thoughtless images and receiving no feedback whatsoever as to whether any of the photographers whose work I critiqued had even READ the critiques, let alone appreciated them. |
This aspect of choice is important I think. Perhaps instead of using a random number generator to select the pictures, someone/some people should act as docents and pick interesting images that might be worth discussing. Could get towards more fertile ground, more efficiently.
Message edited by author 2008-11-11 16:22:39. |
|
|
|
11/10/2008 03:50:50 PM · #29 |
|
|
|
11/10/2008 08:39:00 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
When do we start? |
Yeah, what she said!
I enjoy taking time to really look at a photo & then think carefully about a comment. I never post comments in a challenge for fear of being attacked in a PM. It might be interesting if someone other than the photographer of that image were to have a different opinion than mine--an interesting debate could result that hopefully would not make anyone feel defensive. I enjoy learning by debate. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 01:57:43 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
When do we start? |
Soon? :) |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 02:51:03 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
From my point of view, the advantage of this process over CC is the option of *choice*. I have essentially stopped participating in CC because, frankly, I got tired of doing thoughtful critiques of (apparently) thoughtless images and receiving no feedback whatsoever as to whether any of the photographers whose work I critiqued had even READ the critiques, let alone appreciated them. |
This aspect of choice is important I think. Perhaps instead of using a random number generator to select the pictures, someone/some people should act as docents and pick interesting images that might be worth discussing. Could get towards more fertile ground, more efficiently. |
I'm 100% behind that; it makes perfect sense to me. While I assume most DPCers would be interested in any discussion of their own images, I do believe that relatively few of the images entered in challenges (of the less "successful" ones) have enough going for them to support this sort of detailed analysis and at the same time keep engaged the interest of the community members at large.
I mean, a lot of images are just what they you are, you know? Competent, even vaguely appealing, but int he end not all that interesting and with not all that much room in which to "grow". But every challenge has a significant number of entries that cause me to respond, mentally, "Oh, if ONLY...." — and in-depth discussions of these sorts of images can get very interesting.
R. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 03:16:56 PM · #33 |
I'd like to get in on this if you're still taking people.
Also, I agree with Bear and Gordon. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 04:12:30 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
From my point of view, the advantage of this process over CC is the option of *choice*. I have essentially stopped participating in CC because, frankly, I got tired of doing thoughtful critiques of (apparently) thoughtless images and receiving no feedback whatsoever as to whether any of the photographers whose work I critiqued had even READ the critiques, let alone appreciated them. |
This aspect of choice is important I think. Perhaps instead of using a random number generator to select the pictures, someone/some people should act as docents and pick interesting images that might be worth discussing. Could get towards more fertile ground, more efficiently. |
I'm 100% behind that; it makes perfect sense to me. While I assume most DPCers would be interested in any discussion of their own images, I do believe that relatively few of the images entered in challenges (of the less "successful" ones) have enough going for them to support this sort of detailed analysis and at the same time keep engaged the interest of the community members at large.
I mean, a lot of images are just what they you are, you know? Competent, even vaguely appealing, but int he end not all that interesting and with not all that much room in which to "grow". But every challenge has a significant number of entries that cause me to respond, mentally, "Oh, if ONLY...." — and in-depth discussions of these sorts of images can get very interesting.
R. |
IMHO, this is the wrong way to go. The point inst to review  IreneM's images every week. Its to figure out why something did good, bad, or just ok, as well as techniques there of. Additionally I hope we can also embark on what the heck the voters were thinking.
If we start being selective, then only the most interesting to our group will be reviewed. Thus leaving out discussion on ways to improve "not as great" images. Hopefully it isnt just ways to figure out how to "do what they did."
To me this is more about being well rounded than just picking the images I like. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 04:22:05 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by onesaint:
If we start being selective, then only the most interesting to our group will be reviewed. Thus leaving out discussion on ways to improve "not as great" images. Hopefully it isnt just ways to figure out how to "do what they did."
To me this is more about being well rounded than just picking the images I like. |
It isn't so much picking images you like or not, rather picking ones that have anything interesting to be said about them. Most images 'just are'. They don't get a lot of comments because there isn't a whole lot to comment on. If there was, they would be a different picture and 'you should have taken a different picture' isn't the world's most helpful comment to get.
In the same way, I think any comments that start in the vein 'if this was my picture, I'd...' are mostly useless. It isn't your picture, you didn't take it, you weren't there. The picture is what it is - the discussion should start from that, not from what it would be like if it was a different picture entirely.
|
|
|
|
11/11/2008 04:38:46 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by onesaint:
...If we start being selective, then only the most interesting to our group will be reviewed. Thus leaving out discussion on ways to improve "not as great" images... |
I thought Bear (and Gordon who beat me to the punch) said it well. I'll try to put it another way:
Aren't "the most interesting" [images] where the attention is, where there is something worth studying, and aren't the "not as great" images, as you call them, not precisely those which tend to invite much unfounded criticism, the usual subjective kind that has no direction, no model to point a ratio, a facility?
Would it not be more profitable to see what works before we point out what doesn't? I, for one, need to hear the why before I can accept the what not.
Message edited by author 2008-11-11 16:40:55. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 04:39:06 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Do you plan to discuss one photo at a time or what? It's going to be kinda hard to read if there's a comment on Photo A, then B, then C, then A ...
BTW: if anyone declines, based on the comments I got, my entry would be a suitable subject for this topic ... ;-) |
a thought: does this need a dedicated forum group, and then a thread for each image, or for each challenge worth's of image discussions? |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 04:43:23 PM · #38 |
| i personally would like to see one thread per image. It will be a whole lot easier to read and learn that way. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 04:45:12 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by onesaint:
If we start being selective, then only the most interesting to our group will be reviewed. Thus leaving out discussion on ways to improve "not as great" images. Hopefully it isnt just ways to figure out how to "do what they did."
To me this is more about being well rounded than just picking the images I like. |
Originally posted by Gordon:
It isn't so much picking images you like or not, rather picking ones that have anything interesting to be said about them. Most images 'just are'. They don't get a lot of comments because there isn't a whole lot to comment on. If there was, they would be a different picture and 'you should have taken a different picture' isn't the world's most helpful comment to get. |
But that's partly the point here as I see it......even though an image "just is", it still evokes something from you.
You have to be able to try and give some insight as to why it misses the mark as it pertains to those of us who offer ourselves up for giving thoughtful, reasoned feedback.
One reason why IMNSHO we should perhaps ask before we review an image.
I know I've had images critiqued before that I just didn't want critiqued.......that doesn't stop some people but we have to be aware of the very real possibility that if people think we'll review their images whether they want it done or not, they may think twice about an entry they're not confident will pass muster.
Although I'd certainly think we'd be more diplomatic and graceful than some voters/commenters.
Originally posted by Gordon:
In the same way, I think any comments that start in the vein 'if this was my picture, I'd...' are mostly useless. It isn't your picture, you didn't take it, you weren't there. The picture is what it is - the discussion should start from that, not from what it would be like if it was a different picture entirely. |
True that, BUT.....offering a view from your perspective can offset the personal note of saying that they SHOULD have done something different by couching it as your viewpoint as opposed to the "correct way to fix" the image or some aspect of the image.
|
|
|
|
11/11/2008 05:14:49 PM · #40 |
Maybe this isn't going to work after all. Nobody agrees on even the basics.
Sometimes, if the photo leaves me cold & the only thought in my head is to look at something else as quickly as possible, if I keep looking anyway slowly, grudgingly I can see it. For me, this is almost any landscape or scenic shot.
Just because the photo leaves me cold, though, is no reason for me to decide that the world would be a better place without it, or that the photog should change his/her ways to get shots that I like better. I have to shoot from the truth of who I am. I have no other option. If my work leaves you cold then I expect you to turn your attention to something else. I do not expect you to try to reform me. The judgemental, almost evangelical, attitude of some photographers seems wierd to me.
It would be an interesting exercise to take the last-place finish in the free study challenge & try to understand it just as a photograph. Not within the context of the challenge, why it finished last--or within the context of why did the photog bother in the first place. But just try to understand it for what can be seen in it.
|
|
|
|
11/11/2008 05:18:00 PM · #41 |
Seems like a LOT of cooks in this kitchen--I think we need to hear what  Hot_Pixel suggests after digesting the comments.
In the meantime:
Originally posted by Hot_Pixel:
We are creating this group to have a discusion about images that have been already voted on and we will attempt to disect them and discuss the composition, technicals, asthetics and other things that have led to that images score.
|
Sounds like a discussion of images with a range of scores--lower score does not necessarily mean poor image.
Originally posted by Hot_Pixel:
The way that we will approach the images, is we as a group will pick a challenge that is currently in voting, I will create a random number generator that I will be able to provide a maximum number of entries to and we will allow it to choose 10 images from that particular challenge. The group will then pick a minimum of 3 of these images and try to evaluate it here in the thread and this will be how we form our discussion of each photo to better understand them. We can also talk about the actual latest challenges in the entry process to make more people understand the "whats expected" from the challenge.
|
Random selection of 10 helps to eliminate some of the wrangling over which images should be selected, but it will sure be interesting to see how long it takes for the group to agree on 3 selections from those 10 :-) Maybe just a random selection of 3? :-) Then the discussions ABOUT the images can commence, rather than the back and forth about Which Images....
For me, I am fine if Hot_Pixel just selects the 3 images himself, based on whatever criteria he sees fit, which could evolve as he sees the resulting response and participation. And in some challenges it might be interesting, for example, to discuss two similar images--one that scored well, one that scored lower (not an option with totally random selection). If we have to select the images by committee, I think this will become an exercise in frustration for many.
I say Hot_Pixel selects 3 images by OP Executive Decree, and the discussions on images get started--it will evolve over time, no doubt.
My 2 cents, probably not worth that full amount, as Hot_Pixel has not confirmed (or denied) my membership here, yet.
Message edited by author 2008-11-11 17:23:41. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 05:19:23 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
It would be an interesting exercise to take the last-place finish in the free study challenge & try to understand it just as a photograph. Not within the context of the challenge, why it finished last--or within the context of why did the photog bother in the first place. But just try to understand it for what can be seen in it. |
Given the particular image, the thread might end up in the rant forum pretty quickly. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 05:27:52 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
Maybe this isn't going to work after all. Nobody agrees on even the basics... |
We need agreement only where it impairs the process. We do not have to agree on individual approaches and methodologies. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 05:29:37 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by pixelpig:
It would be an interesting exercise to take the last-place finish in the free study challenge & try to understand it just as a photograph. Not within the context of the challenge, why it finished last--or within the context of why did the photog bother in the first place. But just try to understand it for what can be seen in it. |
Given the particular image, the thread might end up in the rant forum pretty quickly. |
Everything here is a rant, it's just a matter of degree. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 05:35:37 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
I say Hot_Pixel selects 3 images by OP Executive Decree, and the discussions on images get started--it will evolve over time, no doubt.
|
Ill Second that. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 05:53:28 PM · #46 |
| I'm sincere of my offer of serving up my Free Study entry for dissection -- I just missed the Brown this time, and "composition, technicals ..." seem to have had much to do with that. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 06:05:44 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
It isn't so much picking images you like or not, rather picking ones that have anything interesting to be said about them. Most images 'just are'. They don't get a lot of comments because there isn't a whole lot to comment on. If there was, they would be a different picture and 'you should have taken a different picture' isn't the world's most helpful comment to get. |
I appreciate what you are saying, but respectfully disagree. I think that this train of thought is what leads to only leaving comments on "more interesting" images. Personally, when someone leaves a comment on my image saying "you might try this" or "another creative take is this" I appreciate it greately. Its effectively that person saying "If that photo were mine I would have..." but thats the point of constructive criticism.
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Aren't "the most interesting" [images] where the attention is, where there is something worth studying, and aren't the "not as great" images, as you call them, not precisely those which tend to invite much unfounded criticism, the usual subjective kind that has no direction, no model to point a ratio, a facility? |
Zeus, I appreciate the clarity and I understand the perspective. As we are all attemptign to join a comment group, I would hope were more interested in discussing these images than just bashing them. But you never know. I must say I fear the shakey snapshot image that apprears for discussion, but I think the thread will die quickly in that case.
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Would it not be more profitable to see what works before we point out what doesn't? I, for one, need to hear the why before I can accept the what not. |
Yes and No. We can follow Napoleon becuase his campaigns worked, but its the one that didnt work that is important. If we understand what the issues are with an image shouldnt that help us to avoid them? What a great discussion! =^)
Message edited by author 2008-11-11 18:12:27. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 06:16:47 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Hot_Pixel:
Here are your random numbers:
115
185
300
282
340
361
334
32
5
3
|
What happened to using these random choices from the freestudy? |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 06:33:34 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by Hot_Pixel:
Here are your random numbers:
115
185
300
282
340
361
334
32
5
3
|
What happened to using these random choices from the freestudy? |
Yes--per the original plan, the group now has to agree on which three of those to select.
(marking my calendar for 1st qtr 09 to check back and see if agreement has been reached :-)
Message edited by author 2008-11-11 18:34:03. |
|
|
|
11/11/2008 07:11:41 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by onesaint:
... We can follow Napoleon becuase his campaigns worked, but its the one that didnt work that is important. If we understand what the issues are with an image shouldnt that help us to avoid them? What a great discussion! =^) |
Well, there you go. I hear you. |
|
