Critique Forum? :cofused:

[Dracotype]

I am curious to know, has anyone ever suggested, or perhaps considered, having a dedicated forum for critiquing photos? Not just a galllery, but a forum where photos are posted as threads and people come and comment on them and offer costructive criticism.

I ask this because I have found that the learning curve steepens greatly when one has lots of critique. It helps refine one's sense of composition. I know it has helped me before, and I was wondering if we couldn't have something like that. Just a small suggestion.

Drew

[RayPA]

There seems to have always been little to no interest in a critique forum here at RFF. The topic has come up several times in the couple of years that I've been here, but I think the logistics and complications of a it scare most of us off. The gallery is obviously very limited in this respect. Some members have created "Critique Wanted" threads on photos, groups of photos, blogs, and web sites. Those seem to work fairly well, but it's not a "group critique" like you would get in a photo class, where everyone who critiques also offers work FOR critique.

I think online group critiques could be problematic--but possible, nonetheless. I think there's some potential in using a w/nw type format, but as I discovered recently that suggestion was unpopular and unappreciated. Apparently, w/nw threads are sacred ground ;) :angel: ;) :D

I see you're in El Cerrito. You might be interested in this thread. We're trying to another plan a local get-together. You're local, you're invited!

http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25655

:)

[Dracotype]

There seems to have always been little to no interest in a critique forum here at RFF. The topic has come up several times in the couple of years that I've been here, but I think the logistics and complications of a it scare most of us off. The gallery is obviously very limited in this respect. Some members have created "Critique Wanted" threads on photos, groups of photos, blogs, and web sites. Those seem to work fairly well, but it's not a "group critique" like you would get in a photo class, where everyone who critiques also offers work FOR critique.

I think online group critiques could be problematic--but possible, nonetheless. I think there's some potential in using a w/nw type format, but as I discovered recently that suggestion was unpopular and unappreciated. Apparently, w/nw threads are sacred ground ;) :angel: ;) :D

I see you're in El Cerrito. You might be interested in this thread. We're trying to another plan a local get-together. You're local, you're invited!

http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25655

:)
I probably won't be able to come to the get together. I am either out of town or am already doing something. But thanks for the invite. :)

I know a critique forum might be potentially hazardous. But I know that it can provide real motivation for improvement. I suppose until something occurs, the galleries are the best bet.

Drew

[back alley]

we created a section in the gallery called 'rate this photo' or something like that.
it was little used and i think jorge deleted it when we decided to simplify the site.

many things are sought after by the membership and theneither used or not used much. it's a trial & error sort of thing. we respond to requests and then see how it goes.

[RayPA]

I probably won't be able to come to the get together. I am either out of town or am already doing something. But thanks for the invite. :)

I know a critique forum might be potentially hazardous. But I know that it can provide real motivation for improvement. I suppose until something occurs, the galleries are the best bet.

Drew

I agree. Critiques are essential for improving your photography. You might want to look into a photo class at one of your local schools or community college, because in person critiques are great. You could also look into seeing if you have a group or club local to you--folks that share your interests and might be motivated along with you to put something together. Hey isn't there a good size group of RFFers in your area? ;)

.

[Todd.Hanz]

As an actual forum, like "general discussion", "darkroom", etc., I can see a "Critique" forum as a valuable asset.

The gallery has become a place to post images of anything, test rolls, classified pics, family snaps, etc. Using the "rate this photo" option, seldom garners the attention that a dedicated critique forum would offer. Of course one must be prepared for honest critiques, the good with the bad, but that is how we learn.
I often upload photos that I like for one reason or another and they seldom are commented on, it would be a learning experience to here from others as to why.
There would be a need for rules of course but I think a dedicated critique forum would be a benefit to us all.

BTW I have used this site off and on for a while (as well as a few other members here): http://www.photocritique.net/

Todd

[RayPA]

As an actual forum, like "general discussion", "darkroom", etc., I can see a "Critique" forum as a valuable asset.

The gallery has become a place to post images of anything, test rolls, classified pics, family snaps, etc. Using the "rate this photo" option, seldom garners the attention that a dedicated critique forum would offer. Of course one must be prepared for honest critiques, the good with the bad, but that is how we learn.
I often upload photos that I like for one reason or another and they seldom are commented on, it would be a learning experience to here from others as to why.
There would be a need for rules of course but I think a dedicated critique forum would be a benefit to us all.

BTW I have used this site off and on for a while (as well as a few other members here): http://www.photocritique.net/

Todd

What a great idea for a site! Not much happening by way of critiquing, at least in the photos I looked at. Todd if you're interested--and ownership allows it--I would be willing to work with you on setting up a critique forum here at RFF (or elsewhere for that matter).

.

[Todd.Hanz]

What a great idea for a site! Not much happening by way of critiquing, at least in the photos I looked at. Todd if you're interested--and ownership allows it--I would be willing to work with you on setting up a critique forum here at RFF (or elsewhere for that matter).

.

I think it's a great idea, would love to do it here (RF's only) mangmnt willing.

If bandwith is an issue a requirement could be to post an image on a free site like Flikr and post inline here for critique, anyone else wanna bite?

Todd

[jano]

I have found the internet is a poor place for critiques. Local photography clubs are FAR better for that, especially when you have to print and get those critiqued. My own photography, or at least my perception of it, has improved as a result, on various levels including quality, creativity, composition, and subject matter.

[robert blu]

for sure critique helps personal growing. It happens with me, in my photoclub, with my friends or when I take part in workshops (i'm just back from a K.Carter workshop: excellent!). When looking at gallery I always try to leave a comment on picture which capture my interest, but it is not easy. Sometimes afraid to irritate the autor, sometime do not find the appropriate words in english, or too difficult to explain, with the risk to be misunderstood. For this reason sometime my comment is of the type "great shot" or " I like it", which is not so helpfull. But at least indicates that the shot create interest for me !

[Todd.Hanz]

I have found the internet is a poor place for critiques. Local photography clubs are FAR better for that, especially when you have to print and get those critiqued. My own photography, or at least my perception of it, has improved as a result, on various levels including quality, creativity, composition, and subject matter.

True, it may not be the best choice for critiques, but it may be the only choice for some. Critiquing a photo also expands ones knowledge of photography. Leaving a comment as to why you like or dislike an image requires some thought and insight, the same way you would think before releasing your own shutter. Alot could be learned here...

Todd

[back alley]

not to be the wet rag but...

every time this comes up and we try something there is always that group that says they are not qualified to critique a photograph, and it seems to die at that point.

for this to be successful, i believe there needs to be a structure in place. perhaps even a panel of volunteers who do the critiquing. i think that would be the hard part.
doesn't have to be limited to the volunteers but maybe a few volunteers plus anyone else who would like to add something.

joe

[Dracotype]

As an actual forum, like "general discussion", "darkroom", etc., I can see a "Critique" forum as a valuable asset.

The gallery has become a place to post images of anything, test rolls, classified pics, family snaps, etc. Using the "rate this photo" option, seldom garners the attention that a dedicated critique forum would offer. Of course one must be prepared for honest critiques, the good with the bad, but that is how we learn.
I often upload photos that I like for one reason or another and they seldom are commented on, it would be a learning experience to here from others as to why.
There would be a need for rules of course but I think a dedicated critique forum would be a benefit to us all.

BTW I have used this site off and on for a while (as well as a few other members here): http://www.photocritique.net/

Todd
I would wholeheartedly endorse and use such a forum if it appeared on RFF. I would be happy to be a volunteer critiquer (is that spelled right? :confused: ). And yes, Joe is right, we need structure and a good panel of critiquers so that we don't just have people saying "Great picture", "I like it", or "Perfect" (I am not criticizing you Robert). I see too much of this kind of behavior on Flickr. The purpose of criticism/critique is to be constructive.

I'm with Todd and Ray on this one. Lets make this happen.

Drew

[robert blu]

yes, the purpose of criticism/critique is to be constructive. I full agree with you, Dracotype.
In this case it requires time and there are too many pictures in the gallery for this. Some are without any indication and seem just familiar memories (which of course are a valid use of photography) and crticizing those I feel I could offend (without desiring) the autor. What is just a normal picture for me can be important for anyone else. A selected area or forum could make it more interesting and usefull.

[Todd.Hanz]

not to be the wet rag but...

every time this comes up and we try something there is always that group that says they are not qualified to critique a photograph, and it seems to die at that point.

for this to be successful, i believe there needs to be a structure in place. perhaps even a panel of volunteers who do the critiquing. i think that would be the hard part.
doesn't have to be limited to the volunteers but maybe a few volunteers plus anyone else who would like to add something.

joe

Some stucture is a good idea, a limit to the amount of images posted (per week maybe), a panel might be a dicey way to go...what kind of qualifications would be acceptable to the group?

I am of the opinion that most people can critique a photo given some idea of how to express their opinion, here are some tips I came across once from another site: http://www.photosig.com/go/main/help?name=faq/faq.011

I think it would be a good forum.

Todd

[Dougg]

Yes, criticism should be constructive, in that faults have possible solutions. I'd think it should be an "immersion" process, so that those critiquing are themselves subject to critique. For some, there may come too much enjoyment in demolishing another's work while witholding one's own.. :(

The "rate this photo" feature in the gallery was well-intentioned of course but I think fatally flawed in requiring a single number to be assigned. The advantage of this is avoiding the clash of personal discord... But ultimately so de-fanged as to be useless. :) I think a critique calls for explanation; of course this is more work and takes time. One may struggle to say ANYthing about a totally banal image, while someone else might find some faint redeeming value. :D Not all will be inclined to participate, or do so often.

While some feel unqualified to judge another's work, yet they should be free to express a constructive observation...

I agree a fresh attempt at a critique forum would be interesting, and I too am willing to help however I can.

[RayPA]

not to be the wet rag but...

every time this comes up and we try something there is always that group that says they are not qualified to critique a photograph, and it seems to die at that point.

for this to be successful, i believe there needs to be a structure in place. perhaps even a panel of volunteers who do the critiquing. i think that would be the hard part.
doesn't have to be limited to the volunteers but maybe a few volunteers plus anyone else who would like to add something.

joe

where is the 'wet rag' icon?! :)

there really isn't a qualification for critiquing an image, maybe a delivery method, a way of saying it, so that the person whose work is getting critiqued gets the most out of the experience. You look at an image say why it works or doesn't work for you and offer a suggestion for improvement. That's easy enough to learn; you learn by doing it.

IMO, using a critquing panel is no good, and is asking for trouble. Critiques are basically peer evaluations. Even the ones I participated in where an instructor was involved, he/she acted as a moderator to keep the dialog going. Besides, if you're going to be critiqued, you have to critique. It's a two-way street in which the benefits go both ways. You critique to be critiqued.

[back alley]

just to be clear, my post had suggestions only in it.

i am of the opinion that most people can critique a photo given some idea of how to express their opinion...

i think this is the fatal flaw as most people don't want to risk it. i'm not trying to be mean or anything, i just think there are too few people that would do the work and take the risk of offending someone.
i agree with a limit per week though.

i wish i had something more constructive to contribute.

[back alley]

out of curiosity, how did the "thumbs down" icon appear on my previous post? How do I remove it?

Todd

i have no idea. normally you have to click on the icon to have it appear.

[back alley]

where is the 'wet rag' icon?!

still looking...;)

[Todd.Hanz]

i think this is the fatal flaw as most people don't want to risk it. i'm not trying to be mean or anything, i just think there are too few people that would do the work and take the risk of offending someone.

We could always try it out, give it six weeks or so, if it becomes a "turd" we can flush it :)

Todd

[back alley]

ultimately, we need jorge to set up another section - so far he doesn't trust me with all the keys;) to the kingdom.

i'm up for it, just cautiously optomistic...

[Dracotype]

Yes, lets be optimistic.

I think that if a few lead, others will follow. If it really is only a matter of having a few "sacrificial lambs", then I can offer up a few photos for critique ;).

One other key will be that if people see that people are both giving and receiving criticism, actively trying to make the critique forum a constructive place, then I think their hearts will follow.

Maybe not a panel of critiquers, a potentially sinister proposition as some have said, but at least some key people actively involved in the forum. I think we have few people like that here :D.

Drew

[ray_g]

I think it is a great idea. I would avoid "rating" the photographs though - just stick to comments and constructive criticism.

[ray_g]

I think that if a few lead, others will follow. If it really is only a matter of having a few "sacrificial lambs", then I can offer up a few photos for critique ;).

One problem may be that people would be hesitant to post photos for critique, for one reason or another. Many times, it is for fear of appearing presumptuous about ones photography. One way to do this, and I am not sure if others would agree, would be to do something similar to photonet's "elves," and have a panel of members, possibly moderators and people who regularly frequent the gallery, select a photo of the week for the critique forum.

[RayPA]

One problem may be that people would be hesitant to post photos for critique, for one reason or another. Many times, it is for fear of appearing presumptuous about ones photography. One way to do this, and I am not sure if others would agree, would be to do something similar to photonet's "elves," and have a panel of members, possibly moderators and people who regularly frequent the gallery, select a photo of the week for the critique forum.

that's not a bad idea. However, if people don't want their photos critqued, to the point where they don't participate, and someone does it anyway without their consent, they might resent it and never post another image again! :)

I think you've gotta have willing participants. What we'll probably find is a small group participating, initially. Which is fine. We already have that now--those that stated so in this thread. Once some ground rules are in place, that's really enough to start.

[Todd.Hanz]

So do we make an attempt at this and how do we go about it? Do we contact Jorge, what are the proper channels? Sorry...just excited :)

Todd

[back alley]

i would brainstorm some guidelines and then p.m. jorge with the request.

i would start simple and evolve as people become more comfortable.
jmho

joe

[Dracotype]

i would brainstorm some guidelines and then p.m. jorge with the request.

i would start simple and evolve as people become more comfortable.
jmho

joe
Great! I can hardly wait. I hope we can make this a great thing.

Drew

[BudGreen]

I think that a critique forum is a great idea. Receiving critiques is a great way to improve your photography, but giving them is also helpful in that it forces you to think critically and articulate what you like in a photo. At least that's been my experience.

Count me in.

[ray_g]

We could always try it out, give it six weeks or so, if it becomes a "turd" we can flush it :)

Todd

Logistically speaking, we can initially make it part of the W/NW Forum, as a trial. That way, if it does not take off, Jorge would not have wasted any time and effort in creating a new forum. Instead of "W/WN: Example" you could just title the new thread "Crit: Example."

Easy enough to move the old threads should a new forum be created.

I think the only major thing left to sort out is how to select photos to critique, vs voluntarily starting a thread with your photo. There should also be a limit, like one or two a week to start, so that each photo gets enough attention.

[ray_g]

that's not a bad idea. However, if people don't want their photos critqued, to the point where they don't participate, and someone does it anyway without their consent, they might resent it and never post another image again! :)

That is true, Ray. However, the gallery is just that, a gallery, where you hang something on the wall and people can look at it and comment, for good or bad. We are just highlighting a particular photo in the gallery. He can correct me if I am wrong, but I think that is how Jorge envisioned it too, the way the gallery is set up with comments enabled. We have just been "demure" in our comments there. ;)

Otherwise, it just becomes a free online photo storage service. Of course, that's just my 2c.

[Todd.Hanz]

A limit of 1 or 2 images a week is a good idea, maybe 3.

I like the idea of the poster not just posting an image and asking for a critique but also lending an explanation as to what they like about the image themselves or what they were trying to acheive.

A set of guidelines or rules should be established, I would hate for this to become something similar to the "Street and Documentary" forum over at Pnet where a few people can ruin the show.

Todd

[back alley]

I would hate for this to become something similar to the "Street and Documentary" forum over at Pnet where a few people can ruin the show.


how so todd?

[ray_g]

I like the idea of the poster not just posting an image and asking for a critique but also lending an explanation as to what they like about the image themselves or what they were trying to acheive.


Good idea Todd.

To modify my suggestion, perhaps the people that select the photo can PM or email the owner, ask if ok for critique, and ask him/her to do what todd said?

[RayPA]

Logistically speaking, we can initially make it part of the W/NW Forum, as a trial. That way, if it does not take off, Jorge would not have wasted any time and effort in creating a new forum. Instead of "W/WN: Example" you could just title the new thread "Crit: Example."

Easy enough to move the old threads should a new forum be created.

I think the only major thing left to sort out is how to select photos to critique, vs voluntarily starting a thread with your photo. There should also be a limit, like one or two a week to start, so that each photo gets enough attention.

Sorry Ray THIS is the wrong approach. There shouldn't be any "selecting" of photos. The point of a critique is to improve your photography, to improve your analysis and reading of a photograph, and to learn how to critique a photograph. The only people who should be receiving a critique are those that buy-in to (willingly) the process—those that want a critique.

The process here should be:

1. a group discusses and sets the ground rules for all critique threads
2. open a couple of threads—limiting the number of participants/thread (stated in the ground rules)
3. post the rules in the thread
4. photographers join the thread up to the limit
5. the group posts photos and critiques each other's work

There could be several "critique threads" open and waiting for participants to join.

[rbiemer]

I like the discussion that's been going on about this. And have a couple of thoughts(hopefully helpful).
This interests me primarily because I know my photography can use some critique and there is no one local who can or will critique my work. I don't have the face to face option.
As for who and how this might happen here, one basic rule might be that you(or I) can't critique a photo unless we also submit a photo to be critiqued. I am happy to read critical comments on my gallery photos--in fact, I changed how I cropped one shot because of an insightful comment--but I think that to just pick a photo from some one's gallery and put it in a thread un-asked is a bit presumptuous.
These kind of discussions are likely to become heated at times but I think the folks around here are capeable of expressing strong opinions about the work while not expressing strong opinions about the photographer.
And, brothers and sisters, I have several photos that I would be happy to start us off with...
Rob

[RayPA]

The process here should be:

1. a group discusses and sets the ground rules for all critique threads
2. open a couple of threads—limiting the number of participants/thread (stated in the ground rules)
3. post the rules in the thread
4. photographers join the thread up to the limit
5. the group posts photos and critiques each other's work

There could be several "critique threads" open and waiting for participants to join.

To follow-up, here are some proposed ground rules:

Proposed ground rules
• Participants limited to 5/thread
• Participants join the thread by posting their intention (simply stating something like: I'm joining, I'm in, or just their name)
• Once the thread is full of participants all photographers upload their images
• Photos/participant limited to a maximum of three
• Photographers post their images without any commentary they cannot offer any initial explanation of the image
• Photographers can only comment on their own images when everyone else in the thread has posted their comments
• Every participant must comment on every photo (except their own—initially)
• Every participant must make at least one positive comment, and one constructive criticism (which is actually two positive comments)
• Once every photographer has commented then a free flowing discussion, in which every photographer can comment on their own work, can occur

I think it’s important to limit the number of photographers because these participants will then “own” the critique (they’ll be subscribed to the thread, as well).

Number of participants and photographs can vary, but groups should be smaller rather than larger.

:)

[RayPA]

I like the discussion that's been going on about this. And have a couple of thoughts(hopefully helpful).
This interests me primarily because I know my photography can use some critique and there is no one local who can or will critique my work. I don't have the face to face option.
As for who and how this might happen here, one basic rule might be that you(or I) can't critique a photo unless we also submit a photo to be critiqued. I am happy to read critical comments on my gallery photos--in fact, I changed how I cropped one shot because of an insightful comment--but I think that to just pick a photo from some one's gallery and put it in a thread un-asked is a bit presumptuous.
These kind of discussions are likely to become heated at times but I think the folks around here are capeable of expressing strong opinions about the work while not expressing strong opinions about the photographer.
And, brothers and sisters, I have several photos that I would be happy to start us off with...
Rob

Exactly, Rob! Absolutely essential—rule number 1!

[rbiemer]

• Participants limited to 5/thread
• Photos/participant limited to a maximum of three
Five people and 15 photos sounds like a good number.

• Photographers post their images without any commentary they cannot offer any initial explanation of the image

I've always thought that if I had to explain what I "meant" by any of my photos, then I didn't accomplish what I intended.

What about some reasonable time limit? In other words, the thread has a self imposed close date? Not quite sure about this but if we all know there is a specific time frame, that may help us(well me, anyway) focus[no pun here-I just can't think of another, better word] on the photos and the community?

I hate to bring it up, but what about specific image sizes?
Rob

[Dracotype]

To follow-up, here are some proposed ground rules:

Proposed ground rules
• Participants limited to 5/thread

I think it’s important to limit the number of photographers because these participants will then “own” the critique (they’ll be subscribed to the thread, as well).

Number of participants and photographs can vary, but groups should be smaller rather than larger.

:)
I hadn't thought about it that way, but that's a really good idea. In that way, people will be obligated (I don't mean in a bad way) to comment and recieve criticism. No one will be able to randomly spout off something and then run away. It will also concentrate attention on the photos to be critiqued. Hopefully, more attention=more artistic/compositional growth. We will have incentive to be constructive.

Drew

[Todd.Hanz]

To follow-up, here are some proposed ground rules:

Proposed ground rules
• Participants limited to 5/thread
• Participants join the thread by posting their intention (simply stating something like: I'm joining, I'm in, or just their name)
• Once the thread is full of participants all photographers upload their images
• Photos/participant limited to a maximum of three
• Photographers post their images without any commentary they cannot offer any initial explanation of the image
• Photographers can only comment on their own images when everyone else in the thread has posted their comments
• Every participant must comment on every photo (except their own—initially)
• Every participant must make at least one positive comment, and one constructive criticism (which is actually two positive comments)
• Once every photographer has commented then a free flowing discussion, in which every photographer can comment on their own work, can occur

I think it’s important to limit the number of photographers because these participants will then “own” the critique (they’ll be subscribed to the thread, as well).

Number of participants and photographs can vary, but groups should be smaller rather than larger.

:)


just out of curiosity, what happens if someone doesn't fulfill his obligation to comment on every photo, does the "free flowing discussion" never take place? I like all the guidelines but we need to make sure everyone who wants to play gets to.

Are we still talking about a specific forum or are we wanting to post in W/NW and call it "Crit" like was proposed in an earlier post?

Sorry, I'm playing catch up...I had to sleep :)

Todd

[RayPA]

just out of curiosity, what happens if someone doesn't fulfill his obligation to comment on every photo, does the "free flowing discussion" never take place? I like all the guidelines but we need to make sure everyone who wants to play gets to.Todd

If not everyone fulfills their obligation then it's not a really a successful critique. That's why we need full commitment, and willing participants. Eventually, most of us want to discuss our own photographs and comments they received. To get to point B, you have to go through point A

Maybe we could compile some suggestions from the members here (in a separate thread) on how they look at, critique, and comment on a photograph. People wanting to participate, but who don't know how to critique can use that thread as a reference.

Are we still talking about a specific forum or are we wanting to post in W/NW and call it "Crit" like was proposed in an earlier post?

Sorry, I'm playing catch up...I had to sleep :)

Todd

It would be nice to have a forum to place the threads into , but initially the threads could float around in the general discussion, with a unique/consistent title (like Crit).

I'm by no means an expert at this. I've been in a lot of critiques and peer reviews. I proposed these guidelines trying to simulate critiques that I've been in. They are certainly open to modification. I know we have photo and art students here who can help us make them better.

We could also set up one thread with the participants here as a trial to see how it goes.

[back alley]

i like the idea of using a thread for now, work out some of the basic kinks and then move into a seperate section.

i like some of the ideas posted also, like calling it a peer review - we all go in as equals.

i think some of the ideas would be hard to implement, like time limits and everyone having to critique before we move on.

what happens if someone posts a comment but they are not officially part of that thread, do we delete the comment?

in the name of keeping it simple, i would suggest (as a start anyway) one pic per person per thread. much less complicated than 5.

i would like the poster to say what they like/don't like about the pic they have posted.

i wonder if we can expect full committment on everyone's part?
this would be hard to enforce and we don't want to drive people away if they cannot commit.

just some thoughts

[RayPA]

Five people and 15 photos sounds like a good number.



I've always thought that if I had to explain what I "meant" by any of my photos, then I didn't accomplish what I intended.

What about some reasonable time limit? In other words, the thread has a self imposed close date? Not quite sure about this but if we all know there is a specific time frame, that may help us(well me, anyway) focus[no pun here-I just can't think of another, better word] on the photos and the community?

I hate to bring it up, but what about specific image sizes?
Rob

Well it needs to be brought up. :) I like thumbnails as opposed to inline, but I know that there are some strong and rich ;) opinions on that.

[RayPA]

i like the idea of using a thread for now, work out some of the basic kinks and then move into a seperate section.

i like some of the ideas posted also, like calling it a peer review - we all go in as equals.

i think some of the ideas would be hard to implement, like time limits and everyone having to critique before we move on.

what happens if someone posts a comment but they are not officially part of that thread, do we delete the comment?

in the name of keeping it simple, i would suggest (as a start anyway) one pic per person per thread. much less complicated than 5.

i would like the poster to say what they like/don't like about the pic they have posted.

i wonder if we can expect full committment on everyone's part?
this would be hard to enforce and we don't want to drive people away if they cannot commit.

just some thoughts

One image as opposed to 3 is fine. The 3 was suggested as a maximum (5 is the participant number).

I think non-participant comments would have to be deleted. If they want to be part of a critique they have to join a thread and post images.

Every critique that I've been involved in, the person showing the work puts it up without comments (titles are allowed).The work stands alone, but that's not to say it couldn't work by allowing it. We could try it that way.

it shouldn't really need to be enforced, other than keeping out non-participant comments. The group is small enough that the pressure to follow through should be enough. The group size could be even smaller, like 3, but I think 5 gives a good range of opinions. If it needs to be enforced then it fails, really, and hopefully the other threads have better participation. That's just one of the uncontrollable variables. We just have to hope that the people that join are serious. I wouldn't want to be in a critique thread with someone who has a history of non-participation.

[rbiemer]

Well it needs to be brought up. :) I like thumbnails as opposed to inline, but I know that there are some strong and rich ;) opinions on that.
I don't have a preference about this and so would be happy to do it however works.
I think non-participant comments would have to be deleted. If they want to be part of a critique they have to join a thread and post images.
Not sure about deleting non-participants comments but the "official" participants could certainly pay those no heed--maybe the particular thread starter could respond with something like: "Thanks for your remarks, would you like to join the next critique?"
I noticed the other day when loking at my User CP there is something about "public groups"--is that something we could use for this? ie, make a Critique Group? Dunno if that would be useful, just a thought.
Rob

[Todd.Hanz]

Unless we are going to wield the power to delete comments and open or close threads it's going to be hard to control what others do.

I think we should start by simply posting an image and asking for a critique, see how it goes from there.

Todd

[ray_g]

Sorry Ray THIS is the wrong approach.



Hmmm... I guess you did not like my idea. ;)

Brainstorming is good. It looks like we are making good progress, and I for one am looking forward to this.

[RayPA]

Unless we are going to wield the power to delete comments and open or close threads it's going to be hard to control what others do.

I think we should start by simply posting an image and asking for a critique, see how it goes from there.
Todd

That's already being done, Todd: when someone asks for a critique of their photo (website, blog) in a thread.

I guess this goes back to my very first post in this thread. :angel: :)

If deleting non-participant input bothers you then Rob's suggestion would be the way to do it.:

Not sure about deleting non-participants comments but the "official" participants could certainly pay those no heed--maybe the particular thread starter could respond with something like: "Thanks for your remarks, would you like to join the next critique?"
I noticed the other day when loking at my User CP there is something about "public groups"--is that something we could use for this? ie, make a Critique Group? Dunno if that would be useful, just a thought.

Hmmm... I guess you did not like my idea.

Brainstorming is good. It looks like we are making good progress, and I for one am looking forward to this.

:) Ray, no offense intended (but I think you know that) and yes brainstorming is good! We'll get this together somehow!! :)

[Todd.Hanz]

That's already being done, Todd: when someone asks for a critique of their photo (website, blog) in a thread.

I guess this goes back to my very first post in this thread. :angel: :)

If deleting non-participant input bothers you then Rob's suggestion would be the way to do it.:


Deleting non-participants doesn't bother me, I just don't see Jorge giving us the power to do so. Asking a moderator to monitor for non-participants and then delete those, seems like a full time job :)

Keep the ideas coming, I'd like to see this thing happen.

Todd

[robert blu]

I support the idea of a place where to critic photos. Honestly not many ideas how it should be realized. But I like this site, but sometimes feel it a little too related to gear, cameras, tech etc and not so much about images etc.
I' m leaving for summer holidays in a few days and back end of august. Hope you all find a good solution, where I would like to tkae part.
ciao, robert

[RayPA]

Deleting non-participants doesn't bother me, I just don't see Jorge giving us the power to do so. Asking a moderator to monitor for non-participants and then delete those, seems like a full time job :)

Keep the ideas coming, I'd like to see this thing happen.

Todd

I can't imagine that initially we will have more than a couple of threads going, so managing non-participaing member comments wouldn't be that difficult, IF we wanted a moderator to delete them. If a non-participating member posts a comment then there are 5 participating members who can remind the non-participating member of the rules. I don't see where this is a sticking point, really.

Is there anything else that is unappealing about the approach I proposed?

:)

.

[Todd.Hanz]

Is there anything else that is unappealing about the approach I proposed?

:)

.

I'm good with your ideas, I am sure this will be a "feeling out" process as we go. Now, now how do we get started?

Todd

[nomade]

I may have not read all the posts here, but i need that in a bad way :D