Finally Frustrated with "Random Exposure" in Critique Forum

[aldrich]

<p>Hello everyone,</p>

<p>OK...I read a few posts about this and I held my opinion back because I thought it was just me being self-centered. After the last submissions though, it's time to speak. :-)</p>

<p>YES, I have noticed a decline in views and even comments in my recent critiques. Two submissions ago, my 24 hours of "fame" wound up with ZERO comments, one (yes, one) rating and 22 views. My most recent submission? ZERO comments, ZERO ratings and a whopping 19 views! It was better when one hour got you 75 views, 6 or 7 ratings and a comment or two! Prior submissions to these two (in the random exposure system) have decent "stats," around 30-40 views, 5 or 6 ratings, and two or three comments, but in defense, those comments are mostly my own follow-ups and those from the few loyal folks who check my stuff regularly. I appreciate them very much, but the more the merrier, right? Also, prior submissions don't hit that 30-40 views until at least a week later. Basically, I don't feel like my shots are seen enough at all. I comment on others when I can, I post...what else can I do to increase views and honest critiques?</p>

<p>I've said it before and I'll say it again. Ratings are mainly fun for me. I like ratings, but they are taken with a grain of salt as a general consensus. You may notice I am upset about these two shots, even though that one rating was a 7/7. I'm a comment kinda guy. :-)</p>

<p>Just needed to get that out there...two images, 48 hours, 41 views, ZERO comments, ONE rating. Do these numbers sound like actual critiques took place? Who else has been encountering this recently?</p>

<p>I'm very hopeful that this incoming change I've heard so much about comes quickly and effectively. I know Josh and everyone else are working super hard to get this new system online, and it's great the hard work that you guys put forth for us, I certainly can't complain in the slightest about that. I'm just frustrated because I've lost two shots that I can't get critiqued, since images cannot be resubmitted for critique.</p>

<p>Thanks for "listening." :-)</p>

<p>--Ryan</p>

[Ian Rance]

<p>Ryan, I write as someone who has never put a photo up for critique, but like yourself, I enjoy and welcome comments.</p>

<p>Why not use the No Words forum or enter a weekly photo in the Wednesday Pic thread, that way you can show your skills and just mix in with everyone else? I have not entered a critique photo as it seems that there is a lot of upset on that section with ratings with no real basis, and being of a sensitive nature, I don't think I could take it!</p>

<p>Ian</p>

[mark_chartrand]

Ryan,

 

I went to your portfolio and found some very good images. I critique those images that are in the Portrait Critique category

(sometimes Nudes) that I find interesting or I think the photographer may benefit from my comments. Because there are so

many images to choose from and more being added each day, I can only critique a very small percentage of those I would

like to. Of course, many images posted do not fit into that category and I usually don't consider commenting unless I am in a

particularly frivolous mood.

 

I tried rating a few pictures quite some time ago. I stopped because I couldn’t figure out any purpose for the rating system. It

doesn’t help the photographer become better or clue him/her into why someone likes are dislikes an image.

 

What bothers me mostly is that most photographers do not take the time to let people know the purpose of the photographs

they put on display – how it is suppose to be used – what idea they are trying to convey to the viewer – if it was taken just

for fun – if the photographer was trying out a new effect that they wanted evaluated or help with – etc. It is hard to critique a

photograph beyond the technical aspects when you don’t know the photographer’s purpose.

 

Why don’t you try asking the viewer to critique something about your photograph that you really want to know. It helps when

you know what the photographer wants you to look for – they now have a reason to critique (other than saying, “pretty

picture” or “I love her eyes!”).

 

Photographers are setting themselves up for disappointment when they do not help people who want to make comments or

critique a photograph, but don’t know what to look for or why the photograph is on display.

 

Mark

[aldrich]

<p>Thank you for the responses.</p>

<p>Mark - I see where you are coming from. I do try to convey what the point was of posting image...particularly recently. Examples: In my most recent two requests, I stated that I was trying to see things more abstractly, and that image was an attempt at abstract photography. That's the image that only got the one 7/7 and 22 views (though it does have more views now, but comment-free it remains). The shot of the wedding rings, I stated that I enjoy that particular picture in most weddings I shoot, but I want them to "stand out" more among similar images. I was looking for feedback as to if something in the image "popped" to give it appeal. In the past, I've stated that it was my first try at something, like studio flash in the first version of my self-portrait, or, in a very early image, that I "went out on a limb" and tried some funky photoshop filter. To sum it all up...I feel I do what you are suggesting a good portion of the time. Perhaps I need to change the way I put it, and of course, do it 100% of the time from now on. Recently, and probably from now on, I use my "plea" When posting a request. "Ratings are always fun, but comments help us all improve."</p>

<p>Like you, I have nearly completely stopped rating images. I used to anonymously rate all the time. I haven't done that in 6 months. I would say I comment-only on about 90% of what I critique. I rarely, if ever, rate-only, and if I do, it's with my name stamped on it. I'm very glad that people like you and Rajat and Kelly Burbidge and others take time to give insightful feedback, and I try to do the same. I just wish more people would do it!</p>

<p>--Ryan</p>

[aldrich]

<p>And thank you, Mark, for your comment on my general portfolio :-).</p>

[Leonard-just-Leonard]

<p>Yes this lower views, comments and ratings trend is noticeable. Therefore I am posting far fewer shots and trying to make the ones I do post stand out, or something I really enjoyed taking.</p>

[nathan_tia]

<p>As photo.net grows perhaps you are getting a larger user base but not necessarily a larger community. It happens, too many darned photo's to critique - not enough people to look at them and actually spend time admiring a photo.</p>

[mark_chartrand]

I have given this a little more thought...

 

I have noticed, at least in the Portrait Critique category that I am most familiar with, that I am finding many photographs of a

similar nature by the same photographer. They appear to be taken during the same shooting session. I would think that you

would pick only your best of similar shots for your portfolio and only one or two (not similar) from a shooting session to be

critiqued to see what others thought you were doing correctly or how you might improve a photograph. I sometimes see the

same shots or others from that same sitting showing up a week or two later? I also notice photographs that are obviously not

portraits put into the portrait category. I see high fashion – nudes – boats – art pictures, etc., in this category. All I can figure

is that these people are afraid that their photographs will not be given a good rating or critique in its proper category by those

who shoot similar subjects, that not enough people look at that category or care about that subject, or that people who

critique portraits are so inept that they will be overwhelmed by anything that is not a portrait and provide glowing comments

and 7’s (because there is nothing higher they can give).

 

I don’t usually look at the other critiques before I make a critique of a portrait. Maybe I should look at them, just to see if

similar comments have already been made about the photograph that I am about to make, but I guess I don’t really care –

maybe if the same thing is said by more than one person the comments will have more credence? Yesterday, I saw a

portrait that I really questioned whether it should have even been put on display asking for a critique. To me it looked like a

throwaway from a portrait sitting – just a mistake that would be corrected in the next shot, but was on display. The

photographer provided no information as to why she wanted that photograph critiqued. For some reason I looked at other

critiques of the photograph. The critique I read went on and on (sort of like what I am doing here) about the wonderful

psychological wonderments and deep inner feelings that the photograph brought out. And here I thought (silly old me) that

the picture was taken just when the girl blinked. Just to make matters more interesting, the photographer came right back

saying that was what she was trying to achieve.

 

This really humbled me. All those years of study – all those thousands of shots looked at, studied, critiqued, shot over -

trying for improvement, all those hundreds of students mislead by an old man with no insight into life itself – all because I

didn’t go the same sorority as those two. Is there no justice in this world? Will H1N1 hit its peak in 2012? Well poop, I think I

will just go out and shoot a picture.

 

Mark

[bobatkins]

<p>Well, if the same number of people are giving ratings/critiques and you are getting less then you have in the past, then other people must be getting more. So while one person is unhappy, someone else is happy.</p>

<p>Of course if more and more people are requesting ratings but not giving them, then each person will get fewer ratings. I don't have that stats, but Josh can probbaly get them.</p>

<p>It's the old "not being able to please all of the people all of the time" thing.</p>

<p>Of course anyone who doesn't give at least as many ratings/critques as they get is contributing to the problem, not the solution...</p>

<p>Also remember that the ratings are just a beauty contest, pretty much an analog of a "Miss USA" type event. As for critiques, well, you can pretty much assume that 99% of those giving critiques have no formal training either in photography or art criticism so their opinions, while valid, may not have much deeper meaning.</p>

<p> </p>

[joshroot]

<p>We have a fairly steady 'taking but not giving' problem as far as the critique and ratings systems go. People want to get critique but not make any effort themselves. Too many fishermen, not enough fish.</p>

<p>Sadly, it is looking mroe and more like I will have to set up some sort of "pay to play" system where you have to give X amount of something before you get to submit anything.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>Josh says "sadly" and that's because it may not be an ideal solution for a couple of reasons:</p>

<p>(1) It's sort of like saying that to get a lecture on quantum physics, you first have to give one. Fine, but the average lecture quality will suffer. If you know so little that you need to learn, then you're not in a great position to teach.</p>

<p>(2) "Insta-ratings/critiques" where ratings/critiques are given in a fast drive-by fashion simply to collect enough points to request a rating/critique.</p>

 

[aldrich]

<p>Bob & Josh,</p>

<p>Thanks for your responses.</p>

<p>We already have "Insta-Ratings." It's the Rate Photos Link. IMHO, It needs to go away forever. Yes, I used to use it, but as stated above, I smartened up and learned that it's much more wholesome and honest to stamp what you say, even if it's just two numbers. The fact that comments cannot be anonymous is a VERY good thing.</p>

<p>This is normally where I would offer some kind of program or method as to how to correct the system. I'm sure you have hundreds, if not thousands of those stashed in your inboxes. The only thing I'm going to suggest (which I have in the past) is a Critique Tutorial. I can think of a handful of folks to write it. Two that come to mind immediately are Mark Chartrand and Lex Jenkins. I like to say that I offer insightful comments (I'll have to have a look back at my own comments in the past), but I don't have any kind of training, and I'm sure it's just a biased opinion :-). Whatever you need to do to a) get the phonies and bots out of here, b) Get image views way up, and c) get insightful critiques way up, do it. I never took a photography class. I've learned everything I know from two books, my own exploration, and PN. I'd like PN to continue to help everyone, and this is a necessary fix to do it, IMHO.</p>

<p>--Ryan</p>

[think27]

<p>Mark - there will be some changes soon and one change proposed that may increase "useful" critiques. Hang in there.... I see you mention a ring shot.. Come visit the Wedding Forum - We have lots of helpful threads there. We also have a weekly thread where you upload a wedding image and if it is picked for critique - you have a whole week of pros and other photographers giving you some super helpful critiques...</p>

[t37traveler]

<p>Josh -Wouldn't it be better (and easier?) to establish a relatively simple control such as the system not accepting ratings for a photo without a critique being posted first? You could set up criteria to require a minimum of number of characters so that more than "nice work" or "I don't like it" won't be accepted. What you may wind up with if you require "x" number of comments before a member is allowed to submit his own photos for comment are sets of meaningless, canned pre-written critiques that could be cut and pasted forever. I agree with Ryan that some kind of written guidelines for comments/critiques/rating would be helpful to many and should be required reading before rating. I've only been a member for 5 months and have noticed a decrease in rating and viewing activity... wondering if it's just that everyone has spring fever and has been outdoors for the past two months.?</p>

[gordonjb]

I've made this suggestion on numerous occasions so please excuse the redundancy. Set aside a little bit of space somewhere on PN for people who actually know what a critique is and would like to receive one in order for these people to have a place to post their photos. Have this portion of the site far away from the " Great shot my friend - maximus ! 7/7 anon. " crowd and see if a like minded group of people can manage to exchange useful opinions without the whole thing degenerating into a pointless popularity contest.. You can't force people who are here for the sole purpose of having 65 people tell them that their crappy photo is genius and rate it 7/7, into giving useful critiques. They seem happy doing their thing so let um. However it may be possible to get some people with other motivations such as learning and improving their craft to both give and receive critique, provided a format friendly to such a concept existed.

 

Before Josh jumps down my throat... yes I know such a thing is in the works or so I've been told. Until such time as it arrives I will continue to repeat myself , on occasions such as this when I have nothing better to do with my time.

[gordonjb]

Mary;

 

You posted while I was typing... yeah I'm a slow typist. The wedding forum sounds wonderful. Almost makes me wish I shot weddings. Has anyone put a time frame on the concept of soon... seems I've been hearing about soon for awhile.

[joshroot]

<p>We're not going to force critiques. That will just end up with a bunch of meaningless "nice photo" repeat comments. What we are going to do is to seperate the ratings and critique systems completely. Users will know what they are getting into with one vs the other.</p>

[mark_chartrand]

Sandra,

 

Would you really want someone critiquing your photograph who doesn't want to? I critique because I enjoy it and because I

hope I can be of help to someone. I feel like I am giving back a little to something that has enriched my life for many years. I

would not be very motivated to do a good job if I was forced to do it.

 

Mark

[joshroot]

<p>Gordon,</p>

<p>I fully understand your frustration, but we're not going to address that from within the critique system. The problem with making a place that is for "real critique" is that there are too many self delusional people who THINK they want real critique, and so would show up. But when it comes down to someone saying "your photo of a duck is boring and uninspired" they flip out and attack the person making the comment.</p>

<p>After we get through imagepro and ratings/critique crap, I'm going to look into coming up with a plan for a new version of the old "critique groups" that would allow that sort of issue to be addressed in a better fashion.</p>

[aldrich]

<p>Thank you for that info, Mary. I have been to the forum before now and again, and I'll make it a point to visit a bit more often. :-)</p>

<p>--Ryan</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>What we need is a "critique of the week" contest. We publish an image and say "write a critique". At the end of the week we publish the critiques. No "discussion". No responses to other critiques. Maybe even no author attribution.<br>

Then we might see if anyone here can actually critique an image in a meaningful manner. If we had a qualification, it might be having read "Criticizing Photographs" by Terrt Barett, at least twice, all the way through.<br>

Of course people don't actually want critiques. They either really want "How can I make this better" comments (which are not critique) or simply praise (which aren't critiques either). I think many people want instruction, not criticism which is "the art of evaluating or analyzing works of art or literature". I suspect that someone told that their images is a classic post-modern interpretation of the portrait, might not regard that as useful, while a suggestion to use a flash would be welcome. Again, that's not critique, it's instruction. Being told "your picture of a duck is boring" is neither a critique nor an instruction. It's just words on a page.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>What else can I do to increase views and critiques?</p>

<p>Well, I haven't tried this, but have you considered inviting someone whose opinion you want to have a look at the photo? Isn't that what you would do in person? Thought about dropping them an email; "Hey, Bill, can you look at frame 42546? What do you think about the contrast on that one?" There's an email link on most bio pages.</p>

<p>Just because you go to a place where socializing is supposed to happen doesn't mean it's going to work out great just because you're there. I have discovered this by striking out in bars repeatedly! Perhaps things will go better if you say hello to someone, or bring it up.</p>

<p>Why not? It doesn't appear to be against any rules, and even if they showered shameless praise upon you and 7/7'd a girl sitting on a photocopier, what would it gain? You would need thousands of brownie points to make it into top rated point heaven.</p>

<p>I had a look at your critique history and your bio page; you've done a couple of hundred of these. Would there really be no one to invite to have a look at your work?</p>

<p>Maybe instead of being 100% passive, and just waiting for great critique to come along, perhaps you should encourage it some. That's what you would do if you were asking for a critique from someone face to face.</p>

<p>And as far as those "Portrait" and "Fashion" photos go, muse on this: scroll through that queue can ask yourself, how many of these photos feature dead-center subjects; of those that remain, how many put the subject on one third left or one third right? The "Portrait" lineup is not as bad about that; but, if those subjects were anything other than pretty women, on composition alone, they'd barely be out of snapshot range. There'd be no way anyone would jump up en masse and say, What a great composition that was, if it was in any other category.</p>

<p>The whole group needs work on the basics; it seems to me. Who's being expected to improve there? The viewer? Are they supposed to come around to the genre's standards? The whole lot looks like it has abandoned the basics of what we should expect from any photograph.</p>

<p>I dare you and everyone of those others to make a fashion photo that doesn't put the subject dead center.</p>

<p>"3/3"</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Just ask someone whose opinion you respect and who writes genuine critiques (as Bob explained above). I did this recently for a documentary project and was overwhelmed by the generosity of people who expended a lot of time and effort to offer useful critiques in terms of helping me decide whether the project is coherent, as well as suggestions for improvement.</p>

<p>I've been asked several times to offer critiques and I'm always happy to do so when time permits (which is once or twice a month for me). But you'll have to be willing to settle for only a handful of critiques a year because it is very time consuming. Even if everyone on photo.net who is capable of offering a true critique pitched in and gave one critique per person for either a single photo or entire portfolio, there would still be people who wouldn't get any comments at all.</p>

<p>There aren't enough people available to write much more than "Wow! Bravo, my dear friend! Yet another example from you!" But some folks would rather have a dozen or more "Great capture! Congratulations" compliments for everything that falls out of their cameras, than a single thorough critique.</p>

<p>If you want more, more, more you gotta give more, more, more. More ratings, more critiques, more networking. The cliques are successful in drawing gratuitous comments because they network and never say anything negative. They recognized a problem and came up with a solution that satisfies them.</p>

<p>This is not a Borg Collective hivemind and there's no single community. We're a bunch of different communities under one big roof, with some crossover between distinctly different types of groups. You just need to find people whose philosophy of photography and criticism is compatible with your own.</p>

[gordonjb]

" This is not a Borg Collective hivemind "

 

Lex, are you absolutely sure about that, I'm starting to have suspicions myself. On a few occasions lately were I have offered a balanced comment addressing both the photos strengths and weaknesses the collective closed ranks pretty fast and did their best to heal the wound with a volley of gratuitous praise and reassurances that the image was in fact perfect - a real MAX 7/7 my friend, photo.

 

Last week as a reaction to another thread on critique, a member decided to email several participants on that thread and ask them to critique a specific photo of his. Most people graciously complied. The result was an interesting read. I cannot recall the last time I saw that many considered and honest comments in one place at PN. The critiques were quite good or at least I thought so from my limited perspective. They addressed the strengths and the weaknesses of the image in a concise manner. It was interesting to note the level of consensus from the comments.

 

I thought at the time; now how could we set up a situation at PN were this kind of exchange could take place on a regular basis. A new version of the old ' critique groups ' sounds promising.

[think27]

<p><br /> "On a few occasions lately were I have offered a balanced comment addressing both the photos strengths and weaknesses the collective closed ranks pretty fast and did their best to heal the wound with a volley of gratuitous praise and reassurances that the image was in fact perfect - a real MAX 7/7 my friend, photo."</p>

<p>That's true. It happened to me.. I just chuckled... Oh boy - these people (certain ones) don't really want the truth at all... funny.</p>

<p>Many of the ideas on here are worth looking into - give it a try...</p>

<p>Meanwhile I just want to mention that at one time there was a system where if you rated high or low - you had to comment... It didn't work... There have been many many attempts over the years to try and fix the system... We'll keep trying. </p>

<p>I believe there are truly more people here that want honest feedback than the ones that manupulate the system in various was to get to the top pages... Hopefully some of the changes will give that marjority a chance.</p>