Wish you received more critiques?

<p>I'm not going to rant about bad ratings and/or not getting enough critiques. But I'm gonna try and do something about it.<br /> <br /> Here is what I might call "my problem", and the solution I'm proposing:<br /> <br /> A. My problem<br /> Sometimes, a picture of mine gets an annonymous 3/3 rating without critique. Useless - and confusing. <br /> High ratings with short comments like "great picture" are also useless to me (but, hey, at least I'm flattered). I can almost hear that person thinking: "Keep up the sh*t work, but could you please reciprocate my 6/6 rating".<br /> Obviously I'm interested in critiques, and no rating could replace that, because I want to learn and improve.<br /> Of course I'm willing to write critiques to other people's photographs, but sometimes I find myself reluctant to write a harsh critique, not knowing whether I'll end up hurting the photographer's feelings. Ironically, I think that photographs that qualify for harsh critiques are exactly the ones that could help their respective authors learn the most, but these are exactly the ones getting the least critiques if any. <br /> <br /> B. My solution<br /> I wish I could join a group of people willing to give and/or receive extensive critiques, *no matter how harsh* as long as they are honest, in good faith and constructive. A group of people who would also like to request critiques for their experimental photographs in order to learn and improve, not just seek recognition for their best pictures. <br /> <br /> I'm thinking of a mailing list for announcements of critique requests made on Photo.net, whose members would form an "alliance" of people willing to receive harsh critiques - within certain common sense limits. Would anybody be interested in joining such a group?</p>

 

<p>The "critique group" idea is something that existed in a rudimentary form once on photo.net and is something that I've got on the drawing board again for the future.</p>

<p>However, not all is perfect in these worlds. People often claim that they want to hear "no matter how harsh" critique, but then get all bent when they actually get it. People often think that they can create mutual back-patting societies and get bent when someone out of the group critiques the image in a way that goes against what the group said. People get bent that they got stuck in a group of people who don't look at images in the same way that they did, and want to be in the cool kid group instead. And the list goes on and on.</p>

<p>There are really no easy solutions for this sort of thing because ego is a hard thing to work around for 99% of the world. I'm all for listening to suggestions on how something like this could be structured. If I feel that they would work, I'll see about working them into my own existing plans.</p>

<p>I like the idea. I would be willing to participate.</p>

<p>As would I.......</p>

<p>I just wish I received anything. Seems like anymore, you submit a photo for critique and it gets a couple of anonymous ratings and then it sinks into the abyss. I'd love to get thorough, honest critiques, but how can you get them when the critique forum seems so over-saturated with images, it's difficult to get much exposure. It does get a little frustrating sometimes.</p>

<p>Tim,<br>

I have felt the same frustration with some pictures, but then I also received a great suggestion within a critique that helped me improve that picture a lot.<br>

My impression is that there are many photographers here willing - and competent! - to write usefull critiques, but they can be reluctant sometimes.<br>

Let's try forming a small hard-core no-ego group, and see how it works.</p>

<p>Val,</p>

<p>I would be willing to critique photographs where the main subject is people. I do that now and enjoy it because I get to choose which photographs I wish to critique. I'm not sure I like the idea of feeling obligated to critique all photographs or be told which photographs of the "group" to critique. I would give it a try to see how it works out. I am not convinced it would be much different than what now exists, but it's worth a try.</p>

<p>Mark</p>

<p >Val,</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Photo.Net is a very good place for learning photography through the interactions with other members. Josh is trying hard to find out a way to help the members for getting constructive critiques. It’s very difficult for the moderators to provide a system where you can get really helpful critiques from very good photographers. In my opinion, if you’re serious about getting helpful critiques on your photographs, you may try yourself in the following way: </p>

<p > Find out some good photographs, recently posted for critique, and put your honest comments on them. An honest critique is not always a harsh one. Don’t establish yourself as a ‘fault-finder’. A constructive critique is not only a fault-detector it also encourages the photographer by appreciating the good aspects of the photograph. Go on posting many such comments showing both the rights and wrongs of the compositions. Don’t expect initially good feedbacks. If you post 100 such comments you may get back 15/20 feedbacks. Don’t get frustrated with harsh comments on your photos. Go on doing this for three/four months continuously without counting what you’re getting back. After three/four months, you’ll definitely find 20/30 very good PN friends who will sincerely help you to develop yourself to be a really skillful photographer. Out of these 20/30 friends you’ll find 5/6 excellent photographers and learned critiques. But initially you have to try hard and to tolerate high amount of frustrations. As Josh has already mentioned, it’s very difficult to absorb really harsh and honest critique. “No-ego”- group is a utopia. If you’re serious to learn photography from PN, in my opinion, this is a straightforward way. </p>

<p > Through your comments, never express aggression to any photographer try to point out only the good and bad aspects of the photographs. </p>

<p > Read carefully the experts’ critiques on other members’ photographs and try to learn from those comments. </p>

<p > Remember that a viewer is an important person for a photographer and a viewer is a person with a different point of view and a different psychological make-up.</p>

<p > Try to put some thoughtful critiques on expert photographers’ photographs.</p>

<p > Request experts personally to comment on your photographs. Specify the points you want to be explained. </p>

<p > </p>

<p > Try to post regularly some attractive photographs. </p>

<p > <br>

Best regards….Sumon</p>

<p >Hi Val</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I’m also very interested in this idea. I have just had a look at your bio and portfolio on PN. I noticed immediately that you were very receptive to critiques (based on your feedback to comments on your photos). I also saw that you have rated 356 photos, yet received 75 on your photos. Also, you have made 43 comments on others photos and asked for critiques on 7 of yours. But I’ll get back to that. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Personally, although I have seen plenty of posts that suggest a lot of people do say they want honest critiques, they have thick skin etc., but then change their mind with they get it; I have no experience with that sort of reaction. Either people respond positively to my comments, or leave no comments/feedback after my comment, so I have no idea whether they’ve even seen my comments and didn’t appreciate it, so just didn’t worry about saying ‘thanks’. Either way, I’m not concerned (although it is nice to know that someone has seen and appreciated the time and thought that went into the critique). </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Happily for me though, through that process I found some people here on PN who will often comment honestly on my photos, as I do on theirs. Out of those, I also now have a PN critique ‘buddy’. We exchange emails and ask for critiques that way, not through the forum, although sometimes my buddy will ask me to look at some new technique he’s trying and give my thoughts and impressions as a ‘heads up’ before he posts the image. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Ok, so back to my first point, the suggestion that you give critiques is of course a valid one – I am a bit amazed that you haven’t found someone/s as I have, to be critique buddies, because you have been giving plenty of really useful comments (I also peeked at some of your comments on other’s photos) and you also acknowledge comments you receive. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I didn’t see any thing objectionable in your comments; indeed, your comments are very similar to how I comment. So I’m really puzzled as to why you haven’t come across anyone who could be a critique buddy.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I do have one concern though – basically, it’s about genre. I don’t critique sports/fashion/street/landscapes usually, because although I can give comments on composition, or how the image makes me feel (the mood it evokes) and other things, I can’t give really constructive suggestions because I have no experience with those genres. From your bio, sports and landscapes are your main interests.</p>

<p >My interest is mainly in macro images (although not all nature/bugs either) and abstracts. I am happiest in those areas, although I am starting to expand into other areas such as architecture and urban landscapes. Where I am going is that I’m not sure how valuable my comments would be, but I’m happy to join in!</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Apologies for the long post, cheers, Anthea </p>

<p > </p>

<p>And Val has rated 356 photographs and commented on 43. Perhaps practising what you preach would be a good starting point!</p>

<p>Mark Chartrand: "I would be willing to critique photographs where the main subject is people. I do that now and enjoy it because I get to choose which photographs I wish to critique."<br /> I don't see any problem here. I fact, I think it would be nice to have some people "specializing" in one area or another.<br /> <br /> Mark Chartrand: "I'm not sure I like the idea of feeling obligated to critique all photographs or be told which photographs of the "group" to critique."<br /> Any obligation would defeat the purpose. Not "all photographs", of course, but the more the better. No one would be told wich photograph to critique, but *all* photographs announced to the group would - by the very definition of such a group - be *open to any critique*.<br /> <br /> Sumon Mukherjee: "Photo.Net is a very good place for learning photography through the interactions with other members."<br /> I couldn't agree more. We have a common ground here.<br /> <br /> Sumon Mukherjee: "Find out some good photographs, recently posted for critique, and put your honest comments on them."<br /> My point exactly :) It's relatively easy to do that - and I've been doing it. "Find out some good photographs..." - and all the rest will get no critiques. My problem is that I wouldn't like to be *at the receiving end* of such a "policy". <br /> <br /> Sumon Mukherjee: "As Josh has already mentioned, it’s very difficult to absorb really harsh and honest critique. “No-ego”- group is a utopia."<br /> Really harsh and honest critiques seem to be avoided just because they're difficult to absorb. And that is likely to - among others - discourage experiments.<br /> I was part of a "no-ego" group of sci-fi translators back in the 80's, and harsh (and honest) critiques helped me grow tremendously. Nobody told me "you're stupid", they just pointed out ALL my errors/inaccuracies and provided suggestions. I remember my rookie period: I used to blush every couple of minutes - but man, what a huge help!<br /> Now, back to our pictures and critiques: I feel I can take just about any critique, no matter how harsh, for the sake of improving my photography. Anybody else interested in joining such a "club"? That's what I'm talking about. It doesn't have to be like 80% of the Photo.net members. I would be happy with 20 or so honest people.<br /> <br /> Sumon Mukherjee: "Read carefully the experts’ critiques on other members’ photographs and try to learn from those comments."<br /> Good point - and I've been doing that. But that's being rather selfish. <br /> <br /> Sumon Mukherjee: "Try to put some thoughtful critiques on expert photographers’ photographs."<br /> Tough one. Some pictures seem to be way beyond my league and I could only express my admiration. Not just any physicist can aptly comment on Niels Bohr's work :)<br /> <br /> Anthea Scotte: "Happily for me though, through that process I found some people here on PN who will often comment honestly on my photos, as I do on theirs. Out of those, I also now have a PN critique ‘buddy’. We exchange emails and ask for critiques that way, not through the forum, although sometimes my buddy will ask me to look at some new technique he’s trying and give my thoughts and impressions as a ‘heads up’ before he posts the image."<br /> And what about having *a couple dozens* of critique 'buddies'? But with pictures posted to Photo.net and only *announced* to the 'buddies' via, e.g., a Yahoo Group.<br /> <br /> Anthea Scotte: "So I’m really puzzled as to why you haven’t come across anyone who could be a critique buddy."<br /> Got me here :) I must admit that patience is not my strongest virtue. I understand it's a matter of time, but why not give it a push?<br /> <br /> Anthea Scotte: "I don’t critique sports/fashion/street/landscapes usually..." and "My interest is mainly in macro images (although not all nature/bugs either) and abstracts."<br /> That's perfect. Your could write two kinds of critique: for macro/abstracts as an adept and for sports/fashion/street/landscapes as a simple (yet knowledgeable) viewer. You just promise to be honest :)<br /> <br /> David McCracken: "And Val has rated 356 photographs and commented on 43. Perhaps practising what you preach would be a good starting point!"<br /> I just don't dare writing critiques for pictures I would rate below 5/5. Simply rating is the least I can do (safely i.e. annonymously) when I'm not in the mood (or too tired) to write critiques, yet stil willing to give something back to the community. Not much, I know.</p>

<p>Val,<br>

I relate to what you're saying. It's frustrating to not receive helpful comments from people out there. I'm relatively new to photography with no formal training. I too sometimes feel that I have to reciprocate when someone rates or comments, but that is<br>

the courteous thing to do. Besides its a good way to see other peoples work and they did take the time to look at mine. So round and round we go. Whats the answer? I'm not sure, but I think what your proposing is not a bad idea. Josh (The Moderator) has probably seen and heard it all, so his guidance should be most welcome. Sincerely,<br>

Holger </p>

<p>Holger Stelljes: "I too sometimes feel that I have to reciprocate when someone rates or comments, but that is the courteous thing to do."<br>

Reciprocating with a comment/critique is something I do often. But I have a problem with rates. I wish I could comment on my own behalf, but rate (the same picture) annonymously. If I rate an honest 6/6, would the author feel somehow obligated to reciprocate a 6/6 to one of my pictures (which may not be that good)? I really wouldn't like that. This is why sometimes I just comment without rating.</p>

<p>Val,<br>

I try to be honest with my rate and my comment. Yes, perhaps when someone rates my image high I will be slightly more generous than I normally would, I see your point, but I try to find a photo in their portfolio that is worthy of a high rating and do not automatically run to the first photo that pops up and comment and rate arbitrarily... Yeah, I understand. By the way, don't we all submit what we think are our better photos and are we not slightly hurt every time we see a low rating. I suppose you get use to it. But I frequently hear myself say, they don't see the same image I did. I guess thats why it's considered an art form and very subjective. Take care.<br>

Sincerely,<br>

Holger</p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=693056">David McCracken</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub7.gif" alt="" title="Subscriber" /> <img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" title="Frequent poster" /> </a> , Nov 12, 2009; 09:46 a.m.<br>

And Val has rated 356 photographs and commented on 43. Perhaps practising what you preach would be a good starting point!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What's the point of that comment, and what correlation are you attempting to make?</p>

<p>Val's history clearly shows a record of giving back to the community more than he has asked. As of this writing, he has given 362 photos and received 74. He has written 50 comments and requested only 7 critiques. He has clearly practiced what he preached. And unlike some members who prefer biased or inflated ratings, Val's record shows a realistic distribution of ratings from 1-7.</p>

<p>David routinely implies some connection between the ratings and the comments despite repeated explanations that the two are totally unrelated aspects of photo.net's feedback system. And in this case, drawing some connection between the number of ratings Val has given and comments or critiques is illogical.</p>

<p>If you would read carefully and in context more of the many discussions about this issue you would know that more ratings are exactly what many photo.netters request. They are not necessarily asking for more critiques, or higher ratings, just *more* ratings. In what possible way could someone be taking more from the system than he gives when he has rated photos, as people have requested, far more often than he has requested and received ratings?</p>

<p>great idea. i dont mind getting rated 3s but at least tell me why i would rather get a 3 with a good explanation than a 6 and no comments at all . and why annonomous raters i would like to know who gives these low rating without any reinforcements</p>

<p>Talking about critiques: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Excelente+imagen+de+gran+belleza,+magn%C3%ADfica+luz%22+site:photo.net&start=0&sa=N&filter=0<br>

I don't get it. Over 7,000 <em>template generated</em> critiques - for what? Is there a prize that I should know about?<br>

Puzzled.</p>

<p>I have been on this forum for about a month now and, being new, I have requested several critiques to get reactions to my images. What bothers and discourages me the most is getting a below average rating with no comment or explanation to justify that rating. The fact that it is <strong>anonymous</strong> protects those giving low ratings so that I can't contact them to see what they are seeing in my images that I can't see. To me there is something wrong with the process and I am losing my initial enthusiasm for this forum.</p>

<p>Don't lose hope Bob. We've all been through this initially (I know I have). You have to grow a thick skin to the ratings and the more you post your displeasure for them, the more they seem to appear. You've only been here a year, so comments will grow as you meet more people and unfortunately the critique forum doesn't really do what it intends to. Most of the comments you receive are reciprocal and will only equate to the number of friends you have and comments you give. It makes it difficult for new people, but it does get better, just keep networking. It's not a bad system, but it definitely could get better.</p>

<p>@ Bob Kothenbeutel: Since you specialize in birds, I think it will be both tougher and easier for you to get critiques and (good) ratings on Photo.net.<br>

<em>Tougher</em> because some people might not have developped a taste for bird photography (and might not really appreciate its difficulty and the passion and patience it requires). This could explain any below average ratings you might have got.<br>

But also <em>easier</em> because there are quite a number of photographers on Photo.net who share your passion for birds. Just commenting on their pictures as an adept of birds photography could help form a group etc. Or is this just wishfull thinking on my part?<br>

@ Tim Zeipekis: Your "Curves" is among my favorite pictures on Photo.net. Yet I haven't commented on it. Go figure :)</p>

<p>I appreciate that Val!</p>

<p>Lex, If there are so many people who like ratings ONLY, the site should provide a medium for them to submit for rating only. As I have said many times before, we are submitting our photos for critique. Should someone wish to rate it, then a critique should be mandatory. All my humble opinion you understand.</p>

<p>Look at my portfolio. I give out a wide range of ratings. I have my style and biases just like anyone else. If you or anyone is interested in a critique, email me. I'll be happy to give you my opinion and thoughts.</p>

<p>My policy until now was: bad photo=no comment/rating. 6/6 rating along with a comment on the positive aspects though the receiver should understand that, since he didn't get 7/7, I found a flaw in his work which is his/her responsabillity to recognise.<br />Would a bad photographer who hardly knows what he's talking about be allowed in this elite group of honest critics if his opinions are sincere?<br />I'm following this discussion with the utmost interest.</p>

<p>In my opinion (I'm the one who came up with this idea), this wouldn't be an <em>elite</em> group (how could one define "elite" in this context?), but just a group of photographers wanting to give and receive honest critiques on their less-than-brilliant pictures (or experiments) for the sake of learning and improving. Because this kind of pictures is exactly the one getting no (or very few) critiques.<br>

Therefore, "a bad photographer who hardly knows what he's talking about" would be wellcome. A "bad photographer" is at least a viewer of those pictures (i.e. part of the target audience) and could have pertinent comments/critiques, for pictures are meant to be seen not just by <em>elites</em> . Also, "a bad photographer" would hopefully have many opportunities to learn from other critiques within such a group.<br>

So there's only one condition: honesty. (And civility, of course, but this goes without saying.)<br>

Re "a bad photographer who hardly knows what he's talking about": I honestly believe this includes most of us. We live and learn. When we stop learning, the end is near.</p>