Critique reciprocity experiment

[tom t]

First of all, this is not a complaint, I'm just giving some numbers -

draw your own conclusions. My posting history is public (like anyone

else's) so anyone can verify correctness of what follows. I am not

bitter, and as my <a

href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=617763">Picture

This</a> friends know, I could not care less about the attention (or

lack thereof) I personally get on Photo.net. Others do seem to care

(judging by how often the subject comes up) so I figured I'd get you

all some facts, rather than opions and emotions. Here it goes.

<p>

There are tons of complaints on this site about lack of critiques.

Standard reply from many members is: critique others and they will

reciproke.

<p>

Here are some numbers about that. Since December 16, and till now (17

January - 1 month period) I have not posted any images and not asked

for critiques. In that 1 month period I have critiqued about 60

images. About 25 of which were <a

href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=617763">Picture

This</a> critiques for which I should perhaps not expect anything in

return. Still, I average more than 1 critique per day. This is about

my average on this site for the last 3 years. (if you take extended

time off for big travel projects into account). I have hardly rated

anything in that period, and my rating average is around 4/4 so mate

rating is certainly not my thing. Look at what I post on other's

shots - I am certainly not the type that just gives 'Great 7/7'

comments - I honestly try to point out flaws, offer alternatives as

well as indicate what I do like about shots. So my behavior on

Photo.net over this 1 month period period can be considered as my

typical behavior - haven't done anything I would not have done otherwise.

<p> Now ......in this 1 month period I have received 0 ( Z E R O )

critiques myself. I have plenty of images to comment on ....

<p> Critique others and the favor will be returned on this site? Draw

your own conclusions...

<p> I do admit that if I had posted a couple of RFCs I probably

would have gotten some critiques in the last month. But it would have

been hard to classify those as reciprocity (or figure out which ones

to consider as reciprocity) in this little experiment.

<p> Morale of the story? Have fun, shoot pictures, and don't bother

with (number of) rates and critiques. Critique others if you like,

but to expect others to return the favor should not be the reason for

critiqueing others. If it is, you're probably in for a disappointment

here.

<p> Thx for your time,

<p> Tom (picking up my camera and going to have fun shooting)

[lauriee]

I agree with you in theory.We should be out there enjoying our passion to the fullest and to heck with what others think or feel about our photos.

 

But even though I like to maintain that critiques and ratings don't matter to me and that it's just the love of photography that is the real joy. I will say that I am pleased when a rating or critique is good. Insulted when it's bad and disappointed when there aren't any. I guess it's human nature. A basic need for approval or maybe being potty trained to early! Who knows!

 

For you to spend a full month collecting data on this subject proves to me that it does matter to you. It mattered enough for you to run a test. You may say it was to prove a point but if that point didn't matter you wouldn't have taken the time or energy. So lets all be honest here...I'll start!

 

Hi my name is Laurie and I'm a "habitual critique and rating checker" I check my portfolio and workspace at least five times a day!

 

Have a great day everyone!

 

Laurie

[davidmccracken]

<i>"Critique others if you like, but to expect others to return the favor...."</i><br><br>Not a bad morale. Having said that, if I come across photographers that never bother to critique or rate others, I <i>tend </i>not to bother myself. I don't mean they have to rate or critique me but they should show intention to rate or critique others. The human animal, by nature, is one that needs to interact with others.<br><br>Another slant on this is that if I see 3 or 4 photographs by the same photographer in the same forum at the same time I tend not to bother with any of the photos. My theory for this is that there is far more talent on this site that I do not know about than I do. I want to keep discovering.

[tom t]

... this was not planned. I just happened not to post any shots for about a month (been too busy with other things and end of year celebrations)... and I noticed yesterday that I had not received any critiques in over a month. After the discussion in

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EtKs&tag=">this thread</a>

I just decided to count how many critiques I had given in that month and was sort of surprised. That's all.

<p>

Tom

[tom t]

... and I just saw I mis-counted. I had 1 ( O N E ) critique in that period. Does not change the observation, though...

 

Tom

[bennyboy]

It works for me, I'll try and explain why:

 

The thing I find is that leaving critiques via the rate recent feature is NOT likely to significantly increase the number of critiques you get, I do get reciprocal critiques this way but not a huge number. I don't expect any reciprocity this way, I'm simply enjoying other peoples work and keeping on the lookout for people who share similar interests with me.

 

To significantly increase the number of critiques you receive you have to consistently leave multiple critiques for a number of photogrpahers - typically those people on your interesting people list. This way you build a rapport with them and they, by and large, start to return the favor - never expect it though, some do not, and it should be done out of a genuine interest for their work, not for purely selfish reasons.

 

I also find that e-mailing people who have a similar interest as you and asking them directly and nicely if they will critique your work is a good strategy for making friends, there are a few people who I converse with very regularly as a result of this. Another way is to actually meet up in person with other photographers in your area, I've also done this.

 

So, in short, its not as simple as just critiqueing photos, it's about building up a rapport, giving honest opinion, sticking at it through thick and thin, having no expectations of people, and above all else, enjoying your own and other peoples photos.

 

It works a charm.

[laurie_m]

Ben's comment is right on target!

[stephen hazelton]

Tom, I would like to point out another factor that you may be overlooking.

 

I just pulled up your portfolio and clicked on a half dozen images at random. Every one of those had at least one, and most had a number of critiques already on there. I suspect you will get much fewer critiques if the pros and cons of each picture are already discussed there. If you had that same portfolio, with none of them having any critiques, I think you'd have more critiquing coming back. And as the people who generally complain about this are relatively new, it seems, that advice may work a lot better for them than it does for you.

[jnicholson]

Interesting feedback, Tom. I too think Ben's comment is right on the money.

 

I also think your not posting images at all probably skewed your results somewhat. The "You've got to give comments to get comments" concept is a good way to establish relationships with people on the site. Those people will look at your bio page whenever they see your name pop up on their interesting people recent contribution list. If, however, when they get to your bio page they see no new images they will not go digging for something new to comment on.

 

One other point: I don't think the concept should be interpreted as "you should expect one comment for every one you leave". Rather, giving comments to get comments means you are contributing to the site and thus are more likely to run into the people who will participate in continued interaction.

[bens]

Look, the site is what you make of it if you want something deeper than ratings. So leaving this kind of post about an "experiment" that wasn't really an experiment -- what's the point?

 

Your disappointment is understandable -- besides providing the access (a significant achievement) the site's managers don't appear interested in incentivizing quality comments on the images posted. Having tried, I doubt you will change that attitude.

 

But so what? The fact remains, if you figure out how to dialogue with people you will get returns on your "investment." Leaving a comment a day or so on random images -- a sample group of 26 sporadically contacted individuals? That's completely meaningless. Commit to the process of developing writing relationships with people willing to reciprocate, be thoughtful and responsive, and you will get results.

 

Given the site's apparent rapture with numbers rather than more meaningful critiques, you may always be vaguely disappointed, but you will get results. Beats the alternative of showing your shots to friends and family until they start beating a hasty retreat whenever you approach . . .

[knicki____]

Funny, I could have sworn I commented on your abstract stucco wall w/triangle (I just went back and I'm not there). Does it mean anything if one had a look, thought about, went to type and then did not?

 

In this I dont think the PT comments should count in general, although, PT participants are supposed to comment on each other's personal photos.

[seven]

I haven't uploaded anything in my own name for critique in about 3 years, during which period I've made at least 2000 comments/ critiques. I've probably received 100 - 150 comments on uploaded images during that same period.

[tom t]

Ben S - I am not at all disappointed! As Stephen pointed out I

correctly I do have critiques (and quite interesting ones in general I might add) on most of the images I have posted so personally I am quite happy.

 

Jamies comment that "one should not expect a critique back for every critique given" nailed it for me, personally. When the advice "critique and you will get critiques" is given to members that complain about lack of critiques, that nuance should be made in my humble opinion. Seven's numbers confirm what I saw during my month of posting (not critiqueing!) inactivity!

 

I also agree with Ben A's idea of emailing members. I have had quite a few interesting email exchanges with members here after a critique exchange!

 

Also to Ben A: To each their own style of critiqueing. Personally I could not care less whether I would expect someone to return a critique when I write one. If others base themselves on hat expectation (or lack thereof) that's for them to decide. Personally I leave a critique to am image if I have something to say. I don't care how many images that person posted that day. I don't care whether the poster is a PN celebrity or a total newby. And I don't care whether that person reprocicates or not. Point stays: it's not as simple as simply stating: critique and you will get critiques. What some of you are saying is "critique 'wisely' and you will get critiques" - whatever 'wisely' works for you. I will agree that's correct. But IMHO that's playing a game not unsimilar to the ratings game (be it less for cheap instant praise than the rating game - but a game - or a tactic if you will - nonetheless).

 

Knicky: no worries - I've had comments from you and you've had them from me. I do think I remember you commenting on the stucco wall - ah well if PN swallowed a couple of critiques (heck I got plenty more :).

 

And to several of you - please re-read my first sentence - this was not a complaint - it was merely a summary of numbers and facts to those of you who give sentiment/game based advice to those who complain here.

 

Tom - a reasonably happy PN member. Really.

[peter_daalder]

I owe you a number of comments, Tom. Thanks for your many views and comments on my portfolio. I should return the favour... Really.

[bens]

Your word, Tom T

 

"Morale of the story? Have fun, shoot pictures, and don't bother with (number of) rates and critiques. Critique others if you like, but to expect others to return the favor should not be the reason for critiqueing others. If it is, you're probably in for a disappointment here."

 

 

I find your post very strange. You seem to pose as some objective PN social scientist. Its okay to complain Tom T, and its okay to be disappointed. Its what you do next that matters the most.

[bennyboy]

<i>Also to Ben A: To each their own style of critiqueing.</i><p>

 

Absolutely<p>

 

<i>Personally I could not care less whether I would expect someone to return a critique when I write one.</i><p>

 

Neither could I, which is precisely what I said above.<p>

 

<i>If others base themselves on hat expectation (or lack thereof) that's for them to decide.</i><p>

 

Of course it is.<p>

 

<i>Personally I leave a critique to am image if I have something to say. I don't care how many images that person posted that day.</i><p>

 

Me too, which is what I said. Regarding your second point here, I never mentioned how many posts someone leaves, what I said was that by consistently critiquing the work of an individual whose work you are interested in (that doesn't mean that you think it's all great, just that you are interested), you will build up a rapport with them, and chances are you will see them start to critique your work, if you dont like their response, e-mail them and say, hey thanks for the praise, but how about some objectivity too. It's not hard. We don't all have to be self flagellating, sometimes some praise may indicate that we actually took a good photo too.<p>

 

<i>I don't care whether the poster is a PN celebrity or a total newby.</i><p>

 

That sounds like an insinuation that if you are popular you are not a good photographer, pure bollocks. However, I'll give the benefit of the doubt and agree, it doesn't matter who you critique.<p>

 

<i>And I don't care whether that person reprocicates or not.</i><p>

 

I do, it's always nice to start a new friendship, what I don't have is any expectation.<p>

 

<i>Point stays: it's not as simple as simply stating: critique and you will get critiques.</i><p>

 

Yes, agreed in general you wont get an avalanche this way but it will have some effect. To get higher volumes you have to work at it with a strategy, preferably one that isn't hell bent on self aggrandisement.<p>

 

<i>What some of you are saying is "critique 'wisely' and you will get critiques" - whatever 'wisely' works for you. I will agree that's correct.</i><p>

 

It works well, try it, you won't be in league with lucifer, you'll just imrpove your time here on PN and hopefully learn something.<p>

 

<i>But IMHO that's playing a game not unsimilar to the ratings game (be it less for cheap instant praise than the rating game - but a game - or a tactic if you will - nonetheless).</i><p>

 

Poppycock. I'm not playing a game, and I'm not here on some honour mission to be the most untainted saint on the site, I'm here to meet other photographers and exchange views, opinion, techniques, and my thoughts on their work. I'll go about finding those people in the most efficient manner I can, I specifically target people who will say what they think, and whose work I find interesting, you accuse this of being some ego stroking exercise by equating it to mate rating (sic the rating game) - totally absurd, look at the comments I get, by and large they are strong critiques. Granted some are simplistic and offer priase, but are they any less valid?<p>

 

So, your point may be correct, but if I were to say to you 'you have to speculate to accumulate', you wouldnt just expect to be able to throw your money around, with no strategy or tactics, and get a good return on it, would you? You'd be broke fast. The same is true of critiqueing.

[tom t]

Some replies:

<p>

To Ben S. I am not a social scientist and neither do I want to pose as one. I merely posted some numbers - is all. If the choice of words 'experiment' was a poor one (as it was not really planned) then I apologise. I still wonder why you want to put the words 'disappointment' and 'complain' in my mouth but let's leave it at that.

<p>

To Ben A - I think we are basically on the same page here. Except that I am not trying to accuse you (or anyone) of anything. I did not say that popular photogs are bad ones. No need to twist my words. The way you go about critiqueing is wih a clear (valid!) strategy (just like the mate raters have a strategy) and it certainly works for your. Well I never said that this was bad (like mate-rating is bad); all I'm saying is that it's a 'strategy' (your word), 'tactic', 'game' (the latter are my words). Apologies if the use of the word 'game' has a bad connotation - in my mothertongue it does not. The way you go about critiques seems reasonable, positive and constructive and I never wanted to imply otherwise.

<p>

All I was trying to say is that blindly putting in a volume of critiques is not going to make anyone receive critiques. So <b>that</b> advice to the ones complaining about lack of critiques, as I'v seen in many a thread here, is imho a bit naieve.

<p>

Which in turn is exactly what you are saying: <em> "It's not as simple as simply stating: critique and you will get critiques." Yes, agreed in general you wont get an avalanche this way but it will have some effect. To get higher volumes you have to work at it with a strategy, preferably one that isn't hell bent on self aggrandisement.</em> And I fully agree with that.

<p>

Thanks or yor reactions, always appreciated!

<p>

Tom

[bennyboy]

No worries :)

[bens]

Again -- you used the word disappointment. You posted this "feedback" (though you did deny that you were complaining).

 

What is the point of your post? I don't understand it and I regret jumping in at all, as this feels like a waste of time to me.

[bens]

. . . because you obviously have some axe to grind that you are denying. Here again are YOUR words:

 

"All I was trying to say is that blindly putting in a volume of critiques is not going to make anyone receive critiques. So that advice to the ones complaining about lack of critiques, as I'v seen in many a thread here, is imho a bit naieve"

 

Where have you read anyone saying that you should "BLINDLY" put in a volume of critiques in order to get feedback?

 

You have set up a fake opponent in order to declare them "naive" -- a strong word, and based on what? Incomplete, wholly incompetent "data" from a month's experience where you barely posted anything of consequence, which you called an "experiment" only to then deny that it was.

 

As someone who has constantly encouraged and adviced people to critique if they want critiques in return, I hold myself out as an example that it works -- feel free to look at my critiques and responses.

 

If you do not want to pay attention to how to develop meaningful dialogues here that could help you and others improve their works and enjoy photo pen pals, well, at least know yourself well enough to claim your motivations and sentiments when you leave a discouraging like this.

[louis1]

I notice you have only made 1 comment/critique on another's portfolio.

 

When I get a "nice" comment I look up the person's portfolio page, I find it a bit amusing

when I find a lot of comments along the lines of "thank you for your lovely

comments......... etc. etc............".

 

That is an indication of human nature and I think it may highlight that commenting on an

overall portfolio gets more response?! Maybe you want to try it!

 

Regarding your 60 critiqued images, did you notice how many of these critiques were

acknowledged or commented on? Have you any thoughts on this aspect of critiquing here

on PN.

 

FYI in the last 2 weeks I have posted 13 images and these have had 51 comments plus 6

of my older images have been commented on as well (I think because of the newer posts).

I have commented on about 12-15 images in this period (thru the rate recent photos

queue). I also have 2 presentations and they have had 1 comment in total during the last

13 months.

 

I have always felt that the BIG way to get more visibility/comments is to be in the Default

TRPs and I reckon your experience maybe points to this being true.

 

However a comment which offers no real critique other than a straight well done etc. is

not so helpful. Also the current ratings system which ignores any rates of your image, NOT

made in the rate recent queue, is very poor. The reason for it is to keep out nudes and to

handicap mate raters.

 

You must judge yourself what percentage of members here are mate raters and should the

whole site revolve around them. Likewise should all the rates made outside the rate recent

queue be ignored just to keep bums and breasts out of the TRP? There are other ways to

do this without scrapping these ratings.

 

An answer you will get here is that if you look outside the Default TRPs then the ratings

count. Going back to my thought that being in the default TRPs increases visibility, I can

offer no stats on how often people use the other sort criteria in comparision to the default

Trp criteria. I would guess there is a big gap in favour of the Default.

 

I hope this is of some interest and help.

Regards

Louis

[louis1]

In sales there is a saying that when a customer comes to you and complains there are

maybe another 13 who just won't bother they just don't return.

 

You could also consider that just because people don't comment doesn't mean they don't

enjoy your images. Likewise you must have seen lots of images here you enjoyed but

didn't comment on.