| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/13/2006 10:25:28 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Now, if only they'd "SHOW ME THE RIBBON"....lol.
|
That is too funny, I've gotta steal that...
"SHOW ME THE RIBBON" (DPC'ized version of Jerry McGuire) |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 10:32:34 AM · #52 |
Forget the dead horse...
Beating a dead camel is so much more fun. You know you've really succeeded when you've finally beaten the hump into submission.
;)
*****
The truth is that critiques are just like votes. They are influenced by individuality, both of the photographer and the reviewer. They will be varying and different. The hope is that all will be fairly diligent to highlight technical improvements and to give a good feel for the emotional/stimulating impact as felt by said reviewer.
And perhaps this is not a school. But I'm not too sure I could learn more in a school than I have on DPC. But most of all, this should be fun.
I'd say the biggest issue with the CC is that for the longest time no one new if they received a critique because no mention was made. Hence, in my template I make it clear as day that it's a critique club entry and not a simple comment. I remember how frustrated I was when I wasn't getting (or at least thought I wasn't getting any) critiques. But I probably did. Policies were implemented to encourage all critiquers to denote the entry as such and also PM the user.
I think there has been great improvement in the CC's effectiveness in the past 6 months.
I definitely think it's a good/useful thing. It's not perfect. Nor is DPC a perfect photo site. By the way, if you DO find the perfect photo site. Don't join it it. You'll ruin it and destroy it's perfection. Because we are imperfect creatures. But hey,...we can strive for improvement and enjoy what we have.
:)
- Saj |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 12:43:31 PM · #53 |
Curious discussion...
Critiquing the INTENT of the photographer is a quantum leap beyond critiquing the photographic merit and technical quality of a photograph.
The vast majority of DPCers need help with the basic fundamentals of photography. All most want to know is how to get a higher score.
Working with individual photographers that wish to discuss their INTENT and how to better communicate it is fine, but trying to institutionalize it into DPC's critique club is probably beyond the scope of this site.
|
|
|
|
10/13/2006 02:15:26 PM · #54 |
Ah yes, I see what you mean. For clarification, I meant the "intention" of the critique process not necessarily the intention of the photograph. In detail, I submit for critique with the "intention" of opening myself up to the feedback process. I am assuming the author of the critique has the "intention" of sharing his/her opinion...on whatever level that may be. However, my reaction to that critique may vary. Will I suspend my own judgement for another's? No way.
However, will I test any idea presented to me for those who care to comment with the greater "intention" to expand my own perspective as a photographer. You bet!!!
Truly, I believe that intention IS within the scope of the critique process.
Edit: But, of course, I would be lying to say that on the list of my SECONDARY intentions is..."Show Me the Ribbon!!" LOL
Message edited by author 2006-10-13 14:22:52. |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 02:22:11 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
Originally posted by HBunch:
Manic, Konador or me. i don't think karmat has much to do with the CC. I could be wrong though.
My only comment on this is that 'You didn't provide your thoughts on this image, so I'm not gonna waste my time critiquing it' is NOT a valid CC comment. I don't care how you look at it. |
oops.. I meant you, not Karmat. hehe. |
Whew.... glad you got that straight! For a moment I wasn't sure which purty gurl I'm married to....!!!!! :) |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 02:27:28 PM · #56 |
This is not an actual CC comment, but I think it's a pretty good example of what I like to get -- I find it speaks to both the technical and thematic ("intent") issues without getting into specific settings ...
For this photo: 
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
A very difficult shot to pull off, so don't feel too bad. The blown sky is one of the issues that would have been quite hard to overcome. I'm not even quite sure how you'd do it. Does the tree seem to you like it's ready to fall to the right? I get that feeling and don't know if it's just me or the crop or what.
The mist probably limited you a bit too. I'm guessing it wasn't falling "down", but rather floating around. Had the drops been more like rain and falling, I would have tried a longer shutter speed to add some motion blur. The horizontal sun rays and vertical rain blurs may have been cool.
Don't sweat it too much. You really did take on a hard, hard shot.
EDIT: after reading the other comments, they did a better job of relating that the mist doesn't quite look like rain and confused people. I was getting at that in my paragraph above... |
|
|
|
|
10/13/2006 04:19:41 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by HBunch:
My only comment on this is that 'You didn't provide your thoughts on this image, so I'm not gonna waste my time critiquing it' is NOT a valid CC comment. I don't care how you look at it. |
I stopped doing that at your request and I was still booted from the critique club. That being said, I never did find out why I was kicked out.
|
|
|
|
10/13/2006 06:51:16 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Curious discussion...
Critiquing the INTENT of the photographer is a quantum leap beyond critiquing the photographic merit and technical quality of a photograph.
The vast majority of DPCers need help with the basic fundamentals of photography. All most want to know is how to get a higher score.
|
I disagree with this almost entirely, Steve.
To begin with, critiquing the perceived intent is the intention - of course no-one can divine that 'actual' intent, even if there could be said to be any.
The technical quality judgment is easy - which is what makes that assessment in an 'in depth' critique so pointless.
'The photographic merit'? Why is that so easy to assess? In fact, what 'merit' is you're talking about? Appeal to the voters? No-one needs more of an assessment of that than their score. Appeal to a certain sub-set of the community? Again, they'll let you know ... Or do you, also, think there's some kind of attainable goal in photography that can be 'achieved'? I would argue that there isn't: If I were to tell you that I find the landscape work of Ansel Adams, or the portraiture of Manuel Librodo Jr. boring, does that make me some variant of a blind person? Or does the fact that I find most of Elliot Erwitt's photographs exemplary make me a paragon of judgment? Neither - just my own judge, and interested enough to have an opinion.
The vast majority of DPC'ers do not need help with the basic fundamentals of photography. There's a button on the top of your camera, you press it when you see what you want to see in the screen/viewfinder. A lot of people may need a guide through the processes, and through the history of what has been photographed, and more interestingly what hasn't. 'The vast majority' may simply want to take better photographs of their family. Those people are not my concern here - I'm concerned with those that are prepared to try to make really interesting photographs. I'm concerned for them out of fear that this place, along with a general trend in photography all around us, is being swamped with the marketeers and the pushers of soulless prettiness.
'All most want to know is how to get a higher score'. I concede, you may be right here. But the way to that aim is to learn how to make people sit up and take notice; and the way to that is not to follow some preposterous imaginary set of 'rules'.
And if you want know whether you've made people sit up and take notice, what you need is a critique that is more wide-ranging than "your depth of field is bad", or whatever.
e |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 06:58:54 PM · #59 |
I'm sorry, but this thread makes me wanna puke. As if we can't find enough to complain about in the comments we receive, now you are all up in arms that the critique club contributions are not up to par either.
My gosh, what a bunch of whiners we are.
|
|
|
|
10/13/2006 07:13:55 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by nards656:
I'm sorry, but this thread makes me wanna puke. As if we can't find enough to complain about in the comments we receive, now you are all up in arms that the critique club contributions are not up to par either.
My gosh, what a bunch of whiners we are. |
I apologise of the disctinction between care and whining is not apparent to you. But puke away.
e |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 09:06:51 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by e301:
And if you want know whether you've made people sit up and take notice, what you need is a critique that is more wide-ranging than "your depth of field is bad", or whatever.
e |
As a new person here at DPC, I've spent alot of time studying how this site works and I definitely fall under the "vast majority" category.
However, I am also a somewhat curious person. Perhaps, I am not following the spirit of the critique process correctly. Would you be able to provide an example of such a critique mentioned above? (As GeneralE gave an example below with his critique by DrAchoo). I make this request sincerely and respectfully in an effort to have a greater understanding of your perspective which I find very intriguing. |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 09:09:23 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by e301:
The vast majority of DPC'ers do not need help with the basic fundamentals of photography. |
I ABSOLUTELY DISAGREE...
Being one who has learned most of my basics thru my being on DPC. |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 10:54:03 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Being one who has learned most of my basics thru my being on DPC. |
And this is what you will get from this site.
As the cliche goes..."You get what you pay for."
A formal school would show you alot more things, and expand your eye with exploration of photography,knowing your camera, history of photography, theory of photography, dark room science, computer manipulation of images, dark room manipulation of images, and the differances between portraiture and minimalism, and so on and so on.
From a formal school, critiques would be shown in front of a student body by a teacher. Disecting the individual details, and elements of an image. "Nice shot" would never be considered as a good critique and would earn a student a low grade.
A job in the industry will show you alot more tricks.
DPC, and especially the CC does not do this.
|
|
|
|
10/13/2006 10:59:35 PM · #64 |
| Well, heck, I'm still doin' critiques anyway. :-) |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 11:17:27 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by American_Horse:
A job in the industry will show you alot more tricks.
|
I work in the computer world, and I will tell you that what you learn from a book or in a formal school can provide the core basis. But, the most useful knowledge I have gained came from direct "hands-on" experience. The "real" world is quite different from the formal platform of the classroom. When put together, the formal education plus the real world experience can provide the professional level of service.
However, I cannot help but wonder could the critique process be used for all of us to add the weight of "hands on" experience of others to our own experience, and not necessarily as a replacement for formal education for which I personally have a deep respect?
Hmmm...just a thought. Happy Trails...:-) |
|
|
|
10/13/2006 11:21:28 PM · #66 |
I grew up the hard way, and all I learned was life is a bitch.
PS: I never got the t-shirt either!
|
|
|
|
10/13/2006 11:40:54 PM · #67 |
While this debate appears a little heated it is essential to step back and consider the fact that what you have are two trains running past each other with zero communications between them because of the ideals involved.
I have never met John Setzler but I have read most of what he had given DPC. He loves to set his readers thinking and examining their motives. He is also very thorough and very passionate about what he does. Does not like the half hearted effort. So he starts the CC but he wants to shape it into what he considers a valuable tool. Such a venture means that a touch of seriousness is required to make anything worthwhile work. Since he is to take his valuable time in writing a critique he is merely asking that the petitioner spend a few minutes to provide some data. Now, the other train:
Here we have a majority group that wants a CC but figure that such thouroughness would not be practical so as to accomodate the bigger numbers. They would like a top notch system but because of the numbers and the practical aspect they just want the the unit to move on because it will serve a good purpose regardless.
It is then not a matter of who is right or wrong but rather the direction that is implemented. This is something that happens a lot when organizations grow and grow. Much is sacrificed in order to maintain a momentum and steady flow.
|
|
|
|
10/13/2006 11:48:22 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
While this debate appears a little heated it is essential to step back and consider the fact that what you have are two trains running past each other with zero communications between them because of the ideals involved.
I have never met John Setzler but I have read most of what he had given DPC. He loves to set his readers thinking and examining their motives. He is also very thorough and very passionate about what he does. Does not like the half hearted effort. So he starts the CC but he wants to shape it into what he considers a valuable tool. Such a venture means that a touch of seriousness is required to make anything worthwhile work. Since he is to take his valuable time in writing a critique he is merely asking that the petitioner spend a few minutes to provide some data. Now, the other train:
Here we have a majority group that wants a CC but figure that such thouroughness would not be practical so as to accomodate the bigger numbers. They would like a top notch system but because of the numbers and the practical aspect they just want the the unit to move on because it will serve a good purpose regardless.
It is then not a matter of who is right or wrong but rather the direction that is implemented. This is something that happens a lot when organizations grow and grow. Much is sacrificed in order to maintain a momentum and steady flow. |
I like that explanation of two trains, but I'd say there are at least half a dozen trains on this thread.
|
|
|
|
10/13/2006 11:51:52 PM · #69 |
(Minor interruption of serious conversation)
But if the first train left the station at 10:00 traveling southbound at 45 mph and the second train was traveling on a track in another continent, would the tree falling in the woods make any sound even if the female was wrong?
(Returning thread to meaningful discussion.) |
|
|
|
10/14/2006 12:17:12 AM · #70 |
error
Message edited by author 2006-10-14 00:28:39. |
|
|
|
10/14/2006 12:19:06 AM · #71 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
(Minor interruption of serious conversation)
But if the first train left the station at 10:00 traveling southbound at 45 mph and the second train was traveling on a track in another continent, would the tree falling in the woods make any sound even if the female was wrong?
(Returning thread to meaningful discussion.) |
It might depend on the perceived quality of the intent of the critique...
...but seriously, this thread has brought to the fore another aspect of photography that I had spent little time considering; that is, the emotional appeal of my photos, to me and to the viewers, and additionally, "Why did I take this photo?"
I'm glad that Ed brought this up, and that John remained to state his thoughts.
I may never "get it" but I can look at the images from a different point, now. I'm sure I'll learn more, and try more.
Thanks for everyone's contributions.
Message edited by author 2006-10-14 00:24:00. |
|
|
|
10/14/2006 12:20:48 AM · #72 |
There is no real need to change anything. Everything is fine as is. If we feel compelled to write a critique, we can do so in any style we like. We don't have to use the critique club tool to do this. We can pick and choose the photos we wish to work with rather than taking a randomly assigned image.
My final statements on this issue are as follows:
The critique club should examine itself and see what it is doing to grow. Don't consider yourself a simple service organization that has X amount of work to do in X amount of time. If you are an avid member of the critique club, go look at the last 50 critiques you have given and see if you have learned anything by giving those critiques. Consider yourself to be growing if your critique spends equal or more effort discussing what an image means to you instead of discussing the execution of it. If you aren't learning anything by giving critiques, you are probably wasting your time. Your primary purpose for giving a critique should be to teach yourself something in the process.
Remember that critiques aren't right or wrong. They are subjective and objective opinions.
Someone earlier mentioned that they believe most people just want critique that helps them do better in challenges. It may have been Artyste, but I'm not sure. The kind of critique I want to give is that very type. It just doesn't focus on technical aspects of the image. Being a technical wizard with the camera does not create winning photographs. It does play a role in it, but if you look closely at challenge photos here, you will see that lots of very low scoring photos have no technical issues. If a photo is technically good and still scores poorly, what is wrong with it? Why didn't it score well?
The answer lies in the choice of subject and the way the photographer chose to present it. What the photographer was thinking, why he chose a subject, and how he approached it is a huge part of a successful photograph. All this happens before the shutter is pressed. In the cases of impromptu and candid photography where there is little or no forumlation of "attack" for creating the image, considerations have to be made about why the photograph has emotional or subjective impact. What is it about a particular candid capture that moves you? Why do you think it's a good image? This is simple 'recognition' rather than an 'approach' to making an image. We know we like what we see, so we need to understand why we like it. Understanding these things allow us to repeat it more often and be more successful in challenges. This being the case, I believe that these aspects of a photograph (the elements that are NOT part of the technical execution) play a much larger role in the success of any given photo.
You can take any or all of this with a grain of salt, but it's what I believe.
|
|
|
|
10/14/2006 12:28:08 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
While this debate appears a little heated it is essential to step back and consider the fact that what you have are two trains running past each other with zero communications between them because of the ideals involved.
I have never met John Setzler but I have read most of what he had given DPC. He loves to set his readers thinking and examining their motives. He is also very thorough and very passionate about what he does. Does not like the half hearted effort. So he starts the CC but he wants to shape it into what he considers a valuable tool. Such a venture means that a touch of seriousness is required to make anything worthwhile work. Since he is to take his valuable time in writing a critique he is merely asking that the petitioner spend a few minutes to provide some data. Now, the other train:
Here we have a majority group that wants a CC but figure that such thouroughness would not be practical so as to accomodate the bigger numbers. They would like a top notch system but because of the numbers and the practical aspect they just want the the unit to move on because it will serve a good purpose regardless.
It is then not a matter of who is right or wrong but rather the direction that is implemented. This is something that happens a lot when organizations grow and grow. Much is sacrificed in order to maintain a momentum and steady flow. |
I like that explanation of two trains, but I'd say there are at least
half a dozen trains on this thread. |
While what you say is true I am referencing John's Train and the Train of the SC which to a large extent represent the D&L founders. The myriad of other trains are the expressions and feelings of the members at large and while their cooperation is important it must first be brought together to affectuate a change in the SC which maintains DPC.
|
|
|
|
10/14/2006 01:07:11 AM · #74 |
JMSetzler says (forgive me for not doing the quote thingee) "Remember that critiques aren't right or wrong. They are subjective and objective opinions.
Now, I have read this thread just about all the way through with great interest and, I hope, with understanding for all arguments presented.
And the above statement, without modifiers or qualifications, is exactly how I feel about the Club.
I've also done a couple of hundred Critique Club comments. For reasons having nothing to do with the Club I've not been able to do that recently. Nevertheless, I have paid a few dues to this exceptionally fine segment of DPC. And thus feel qualified to comment here.
It's important to remember in this discussion, that each critiquer is an individual with an individual's take on the image under discussion. Each critiquer is going to give an individual and original critique. Whether he or she "should" do it this way or that way, really doesn't matter.
Each of us gives something of him/herself in a critique. I take about 20-30 minutes on each one. Other critique club members may take more time, some take less. Nevertheless, we are each giving something of ourselves to try to help someone else. Sometimes it helps, occasionally it doesn't.
Now, frankly, I don't care if the person who took the image gives me technical details, or what the intent of the image is. I can only interpret the resulting image as to what it means to me, the viewer. Others have a different take on the matter.
So, the person getting the critique gets an individual and personal critique on his/her image. Is that so bad? I don't think so.
|
|
|
|
10/14/2006 01:25:26 AM · #75 |
...and this is why I haven't been around here in years.
I stopped submitting photos a long time ago (just after John started the CC) because I found that I was going nowhere in terms of creativity and technical ability. In this site, so many get caught up with the winning photos and popular photographers that they can't 'find themselves' in terms of what their photographic passions are.
The most value I got from being around here, was looking at the equipment that photographers were using, what the exposure was, shutter speed, etc. etc. After all, I was a true begginer with a point and shoot digicam with 'manual' mode :-) The artistic value is lost by the mere basis of the site - a competition. The winning photos (or high rated photos) are subjected to 100's of eyes that judge them in a split second. Eyecandy is everything here...but does that mean that the learning photographer needs to learn how to shoot vivid blue skies with orange tinted 'anything'? Absolutely not! The artistic learning is something that one cannot teach you, it is in you to discover what your passion is. There are many successful photographers out there that, if entering a photo here, would end up in the bottom of the list...because their passion, their artistic mind, their subjects do not appeal to most here.
So, to critique someone's work on technical is GREAT...there is true value in that. But for the serious 'learner/begginer', the artistic learning has to be done on their own. Use other's photos to inspire you, but do not think that you have to shoot the same things the same way.
Now, having said that, there are lots of begginers here that may need some guidance in their artistic journey...but I wouldn't call it a critique. And then there are those who don't really want to learn, but still find the need to have people tell them what they should do.
John, I hear you. I know where you are coming from. And I think the only way for you to be back on the CC is for the admins here re-think the objective of this site. A competition? Great...leave it at that, no critiques. A learning environment? Then all users need to put in their profile how serious they are about learning. Each submission needs to have 'a purpose' in regards to learning. "I took this photo because...I wonder if anything could be done different." If the member simply wants to enter the contest, then don't expect feedback/critique...darn, don't even allow comments ;-)
My 2 cents... (shoot, this is long...sorry)
Message edited by author 2006-10-14 01:28:23. |
|
