| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/22/2004 09:57:51 AM · #76 |
Originally posted by blemt:
Just food for thought. If kiwiness (sorry to pick on you Gary) were the one posting, "what were you thinking?" comments would the reaction be the same? Part of the argument I'm seeing is that because GW isn't a "great" photographer, his comments should carry less weight.
Just something to consider. |
Wouldn't make an ounce of difference to me. A hypothetical photog with a 7.5 average with over 100 challenges done here at DPC leaving crictical comments worded in an insulting or deragatory manner wouldn't get any respect from me either. He / she could lay on the critcism as thick as he / she would like, but it still has to be 1) contructive and 2) POLITE. Same goes for someone who is just starting out and struggling to learn.
Message edited by author 2004-06-22 10:00:09.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:00:05 AM · #77 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
I've noticed that when people post photos in the forums for independent critique, they often get pats on the back and promises of a high score when the image actually seems rather mediocre. |
Exactly! I was thinking about this exact thing myself when I wrote my initial reply to this thread. It is easy to give somebody a "nice shot" comment. But you can't just say "bad shot" (which would require a similar amount of thought and effort as "nice shot") because that would be rude. So the alternative is to either keep your thoughts to yourself (which is what most people do) or take the time to translate "bad shot" into something that is "sugar coated" so people don't perceive you as being "rude". Unfortunately, I don't think anything is going to change that perception.
As I stated before, the point I was trying to make by joining this discussion was that these type of threads that bash feedback have the net effect of discouraging honest feedback. I'm not saying that rude feedback is good, just that a comment is still just a comment; one person's opinion.
Message edited by author 2004-06-22 10:02:48. |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:00:07 AM · #78 |
Originally posted by blemt:
Just food for thought. If kiwiness (sorry to pick on you Gary) were the one posting, "what were you thinking?" comments would the reaction be the same? Part of the argument I'm seeing is that because GW isn't a "great" photographer, his comments should carry less weight.
Just something to consider. |
If it had been Gary (who I greatly respect) I would have replied. :)
"great, then just between you and me kiwiness is full of it and mean spirited threads like this suck.
Message edited by author 2004-06-22 10:00:33. |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:00:43 AM · #79 |
Originally posted by blemt:
Just food for thought. If kiwiness (sorry to pick on you Gary) were the one posting, "what were you thinking?" comments would the reaction be the same? Part of the argument I'm seeing is that because GW isn't a "great" photographer, his comments should carry less weight.
Just something to consider. |
Something that comes to mind, from my own experiences anyway, is the fact that the most respected photographers on this site wouldn't leave rude or condescending comments...that's part of what allows the average joe like me to hold them in such high esteem. :o)
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:04:07 AM · #80 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
Originally posted by scalvert:
I've noticed that when people post photos in the forums for independent critique, they often get pats on the back and promises of a high score when the image actually seems rather mediocre. |
Exactly! I was thinking about this exact thing myself when I wrote my initial reply to this thread. It is easy to give somebody a "nice shot" comment. But you can't just say "bad shot" (which would require a similar amount of thought and effort as "nice shot") because that would be rude. So the alternative is to either keep your thoughts to yourself (which is what most people do) or take the time to translate "bad shot" into something that is "sugar coated" so people don't perceive you as being "rude". Unfortunately, I don't think anything is going to change that perception.
As I stated before, the point I was trying to make by joining this discussion was that these type of threads that bash feedback have the net effect of discouraging honest feedback. |
The "bad shot" comment is almost as useless as the "good shot" comment. If you're going to leave a "bad shot" comment, you have to add something to tell it's author what makes it bad. Same goes for the "good shot" comments. Either leave a comment that's worth something or don't leave any at all. That's one thing that Glacierwolf has going for him: he very often leaves detailed comments.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:05:11 AM · #81 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
...is the fact that the most respected photographers on this site wouldn't leave rude or condescending comments |
Shhhhhhhh! You're ruining my hypothetical model. ;)
and I agree. Most of the "good" photographers on the site won't leave those types of comments. I was just curious if people would "spin" that type of comment differently if it came from a high scoring photographer.
Clara
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:06:27 AM · #82 |
Originally posted by Beagleboy:
The "bad shot" comment is almost as useless as the "good shot" comment. If you're going to leave a "bad shot" comment, you have to add something to tell it's author what makes it bad. Same goes for the "good shot" comments. Either leave a comment that's worth something or don't leave any at all. |
I totally agree with this. Yet there is a difference. Someone who leaves a bunch of "good shot" comments is never called out publicly for leaving "worthless" comments...
Message edited by author 2004-06-22 10:07:12. |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:06:37 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by Glacierwolf:
Three or four submissions I wish I could have given negative numbers to. Which one did I dislike the most? I can’t say now – but – as soon as this challenge voting is ended I am going to write about it. It showed the utmost lack of imagination possible - something I see allot on this site.
Glacierwolf |
I'll be waiting for this can of worms but till then I'm done with this thread. :) Keep up the good work folks and don't let the fools of the world bring you down :)
Sean |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:07:16 AM · #84 |
I tend to take harshly worded comments less seriously than comments where the commenter obviously took the time to communicate their point in a tactful manner.
It seems to me that people who make such provocative comments are:
1. Just too inconsiderate to take the time to phrase their comment in a manner that is constructive.
-or-
2. Totally ignorant of how to communicate effectively.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:07:22 AM · #85 |
Actually, at one point while reading the No Way thread, I thought it would be funny to comment on every photo with "What were you thinking?!"
Any takers?
Message edited by author 2004-06-22 10:07:52.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:09:31 AM · #86 |
Originally posted by Beagleboy:
Originally posted by blemt:
Just food for thought. If kiwiness (sorry to pick on you Gary) were the one posting, "what were you thinking?" comments would the reaction be the same? Part of the argument I'm seeing is that because GW isn't a "great" photographer, his comments should carry less weight.
Just something to consider. |
Wouldn't make an ounce of difference to me. A hypothetical photog with a 7.5 average with over 100 challenges done here at DPC leaving crictical comments worded in an insulting or deragatory manner wouldn't get any respect from me either. He / she could lay on the critcism as thick as he / she would like, but it still has to be 1) contructive and 2) POLITE. Same goes for someone who is just starting out and struggling to learn. |
I agree with you completely, Beagleboy. The only facet that I agree with from supporters of the original thread is that there is something to be said for having the guts to provide negative criticism.
But as you already stated so well, negative criticism does not have to be deliberately mean or sarcstic (re: "duh" and other comments). All that serves to do is take what could have been a constructive comment and instead turn it into a personal attack. There is no reason that negative criticism cannot be polite as well as constructive.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:09:40 AM · #87 |
Originally posted by BikeRacer:
Actually, at one point while reading the No Way thread, I thought it would be funny to comment on every photo with "What were you thinking?!"
Any takers? |
Ok. Let me get my flack jacket out. Ok... GO!
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:09:48 AM · #88 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
I totally agree with this. Yet there is a difference. Someone who leaves a bunch of "good shot" comments is never called out publicly for leaving "worthless" comments... |
I really love that snowflake photo you took, Eddy.
Was that comment worthless?
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:10:25 AM · #89 |
Originally posted by Nazgul:
Well Eddy its quite possible to leave comments on what could be done better without putting yourself on a high horse at the same time!
Comments like "what where you thinking" dont have any meaning what so ever to peoples photography! |
Often I'd like to ask that. In many cases it would be good to actually spend the time to understand your motivations, and really, carefully think about why you did certain things. If your answer is 'I don't know' then that in itself should be a valuable lesson. Many pictures I've seen (and taken) could have done with a lot more thought before the shutter was pressed...
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:13:32 AM · #90 |
Originally posted by jab119:
Originally posted by EddyG:
Originally posted by Nazgul:
Comments like "what where you thinking" dont have any meaning what so ever to peoples photography! |
How is that comment any different from "nice shot", other than that the latter is a pat on the back that people have no problem with? That is basically my point. They only want "feel good" comments. |
This was the comment that was left on my desat photo
"A boring picture in color doesn't get better when you take some color away. What were you thinking??" |
So lets take this example, as you've brought it out in to the open.
You obviously don't have to reveal what your shot is, but:
What were you thinking ? What was your motivation for desaturating that particular subject ? Was it that you took the particular shot because you felt it would really benefit from selective desaturation ? Or did you have to take a shot for the challenge, and then desaturate it ? Is it a subject that you feel is especially well suited to selective desaturation ?
'What were you thinking ?' is just a question. I guess if you can't answer it or feel that what you were thinking should be blindingly obvious to everyone else in the world it might possibly be considered an insult - but I don't quite get this huge indignation in this thread from a lot of people about being asked why they did something. Surely, if your picture is good enough, it is easily defendable ? and if it isn't - well - what where you thinking ?
Message edited by author 2004-06-22 10:15:15.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:15:04 AM · #91 |
Hahaha, this guy is hilarious...
check out some of his commenting on other people's pictures:
You can't be serious thinking this is a decent picture to enter for a challenge? You truly need new glasses or to invest in an auto focus camera.
You have a high tech digital camera and the entire month of March to take a decent picture - and the best you could do was the top of some lumber from Home Depot? It's the photographer that makes the picture - you need to work on your creativity or start visiting places where interesting things happen you can photogpraph!
I would be hard pressed to make a picture look this bad with my 10D and the lenses I own.
I look forward to seeing more of his tactful comments! |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:16:47 AM · #92 |
In reading the responses to this thread, I am heartened and made optimistic by one single fact:
Most of the people responding definitely seem to have a clear idea of the distinction between polite constructive criticism, even if the comments are negative, and rude bashing.
A few don't but they seem to be in the vast minority. This makes me glad and feel positively for the future of this site.
Keep up the honorable work, people! :)
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:21:37 AM · #93 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Often I'd like to ask that. In many cases it would be good to actually spend the time to understand your motivations, and really, carefully think about why you did certain things. If your answer is 'I don't know' then that in itself should be a valuable lesson. Many pictures I've seen (and taken) could have done with a lot more thought before the shutter was pressed... |
I was reading on SportsShooter.com yesterday (sorry, can't remember the exact thread) that a pro photog mentoring to an intern would do that EXACT thing - when he presented shots to his mentor he would be asked what he was thinking when he took the shot. |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:23:18 AM · #94 |
Originally posted by BooZon:
Originally posted by Glacierwolf:
Which one did I dislike the most? I can’t say now – but – as soon as this challenge voting is ended I am going to write about it. It showed the utmost lack of imagination possible - something I see allot on this site. |
I hope you don't single out an individual photo. I don't think that will be in the spirit of this site. |
you could just leave your comments on that picture right now, during the voting phase, that would be all right... posting something like that in the forums is not... |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:38:58 AM · #95 |
Even though I don't agree with his comments about my pic, or his tone, he has some valid general comments mixed in with his harsh and wordy commentary on this forum.
I liked the photo that I entered. That is what counts for me. Constructive feedback that can help me improve is also important. Several people at the office have commented positively on it, as have others on this site. Given the quality of some of the other entries, it is not going to be an award winner, but I like it better than anything in Glacierwolf's portfoilo. (I look forward to seeing his entry)
I found there to be a number of photos in this challenge that were exceptional. (Way better than mine). There were also a lot frompeople who, like me are learning. That is why I subscribe to this site, to learn. The ones that I gave the highest score to were those shots that I found to be exceptional and which also made use of desaturation to enhance the image.
Message edited by author 2004-06-22 10:40:13. |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:39:41 AM · #96 |
Originally posted by Glacierwolf:
Which one did I dislike the most? I can’t say now – but – as soon as this challenge voting is ended I am going to write about it. It showed the utmost lack of imagination possible - something I see allot on this site.
Glacierwolf |
I hope he does not do this in the forums because that would be rude and very mean spirited and I can almost guarantee that one of his shots will receive the same treatment. Please think twice about this.
Deannda
If he does this, can we add an "ignore photographer" option to the site? |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 10:53:11 AM · #97 |
Originally posted by GlacierwolfLast night I rated half the de saturation entries and received a ton of hate mail for my comments.
Glacierwolf,
I was not one of the people who sent you a hate mail; however, I can definitely understand why one would have been inclined to send you one.
First of all, here is the comment you left for my entry:
You chose a bad picture for this challenge - if it doesn't look good in color, it doesn't get better when you take some away. Ugly
Ugly. Was that really necessary? I thought you had made your point when you said the first part.
ALSO, you never gave me any constructive advice on how I could have made the picture better. How is your message even worth reading if you just insult and do not give any advice on how to correct the mistakes you claim exist in the pictures?
I do not mind getting negative feedback on my pictures. Constructive critism is GOOD! However, I do mind when someone does it with the intent of just being insulting, and not with the intentions trying to help another.
You told me that the picture "didn't look good"....but you didn't explain what it was about it you didn't like.
You said it was "ugly", but you didn't explain what I did wrong, or how to correct the problem.
I think that you have quite the ego, and need to eat a little peice of humble pie...
Which one did I dislike the most? I can’t say now – but – as soon as this challenge voting is ended I am going to write about it. It showed the utmost lack of imagination possible - something I see allot on this site.
hope he does not do this in the forums because that would be rude and very mean spirited and I can almost guarantee that one of his shots will receive the same treatment. Please think twice about this.
Deannda
I agree completely.
Bethany
www.sketchesbybethany.net
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 11:14:05 AM · #98 |
So Glacierwolf, one could conclude from your elaboration that you enter challenges only when you have great pictures to show, they are exceptionally well composed, you gave a subject matter a lot of thought and you never ever make any half hearted attempts. In other words, you give it your best, obviously with the help of your ex-photo judge wife.
So how many ribbons do you have to your credit ? What ? None ? How is that ?
Maybe you just do not see that while you can judge objectively on technical aspects of a photo, from the point of view of composition and subject shown the judgment is very subjective. There is no point in arguing about taste. So if you do not see that insulting people, like you did commenting on my picture, on the basis of their taste being well below your standards, whatever they might be, cannot achieve anything so be it. However, it would not hurt you or anyone else if instead of insulting people you simmply commented that a given picture does not look appealing or attractive to you. That is if you indeed are interested in your oppinions being valued. |
|
|
|
06/22/2004 11:14:36 AM · #99 |
I find this thread bizzare. Maybe it is a cultural thing or something. But I see plenty of posts that start 'I come here to learn but who the hell does this guy think he is telling me my picture isn't good and he hasn't got any pictures that I like anyway'
So lets break it down:
The original post starts by establishing some credentials, explaining that he is new to the technique then describing the various steps he went through to learn it - including posting a tutorial to the site on how to do the technique du jour.
Then he described some of the steps he went through to select his entry, and gives a detailed list of the many faults he saw in a lot of the entries. After that there were some suggestions on how you could perhaps improve in the future.
So if you are here to learn - rather than complain about phrasing - what could you learn from this ? If you are here to learn, what educational value to you feel you get slamming someone who has posted tutorials and is going out of his way to provide fairly detailed feedback on common issues with a lot of entries ? If you aren't just here for 'nice shot' comments and uneducational flattery, what do you do to encourage or provide detailed, critical directed feedback ?
On the issue of 'his pictures suck - who is he to tell me what to do?' there is nothing much in common with skills at providing feedback and skills in actually taking pictures. The photographic world's most respected (by some) critics don't even take pictures. AD Coleman springs to mind as probably the foremost writer about photography, yet as far as I know, he doesn't take pictures at all.
Feel free to continue to shoot the messenger though. Possibly not the best way to improve or foster a location for learning. I realise it is hard to check your ego at the door, particularly when it comes to getting criticism on something you've done. But the fact remains that if you've only just tried a technique for the first time or given it a couple of days (or even a week) worth of time - the results are likely to be pretty bad.
Consider this. Think about the things in your life that you think you are good at. Sports, work, arts - any aspect of your life. How many of those things were you good at within a week ? Why should any particular aspect of photography that you spend a week on for a challenge be any different ?
The 'painting with light' challenge that I won is a good example of a technique based challenge. I'd been working with that technique for over 9 months before I started getting pictures I was really happy with. It took another 3 months before a suitable challenge came up and offered an opportunity to use a technique that I'm now at least reasonably comfortable with. That is a year worth of background in the technique. I have shots I took in the first week of trying out painting with light that are terrible. It would have been helpful if someone had mentioned that at the time :)
Perhaps the original poster could have been more tactful in how he phrased his posts. He could have taken more time to flatter everyone's respective egos before pointing out the relative immaturity of technique or lack of thought of many of the entries. Platitudes would maybe have endeared him to more readers and that may have helped more people get the message - but the basic comment is the same - you can take it or leave it I guess.
Message edited by author 2004-06-22 11:18:53.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2004 11:15:13 AM · #100 |
At the risk of being 'typecast', I find that I agree with Glacierwolf in many respects.
Most of the entries in "Desaturated" are abysmal. I didn't enter this one because I could not produce a photo worth entering!
People with technical (engineering) backgrounds generally have poor artistic skills, myself included. There are notable exceptions, witness Labuda.
I can relate to Glacierwolf's comments though I think they are harshly worded and do not properly reflect his sentiment to be helpful.
My approach to photography tends to be unartful but I am trying to learn. Like many others with a technical background, those things that made us good engineers also make us less artistic and a lot less tactful!
That is not to say we can't recognize good work! I have no quarrel whatsoever with the selections that take top honors on DPC, they are excellent. Just wish I had that kind of talent!
So don't be so hard in Glacierwolf. He is trying to be helpful (engineers want to fix things), just has a more direct and candid manner than most! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 03:45:27 AM EDT.
