# Saying you like something



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

It seems that we go through an inevitable cycle. The site accumulates a set of members new to the site and to photography.
They are confronted with lots of pictures that, to their admittedly inexperienced eye, look good from their own point of view, especially compared to what they have done personally in the past.
So, in an effort to be friendly and to be part of the group, when they see something that looks ok, they chime in with some general 'I like it', 'I love it', 'that's cute', etc.
Often the comment is directed, not so much at the picture, as at the subject, as in, 'What a beautiful/handsome/charming baby/child/pet etc.'
And this often encourages a series of similar posts.

That kind of general approbation doesn't help anyone, either the person getting the comment or the person giving it.
We are here for comraderie but also to learn from each other.
Learning why you like something, helps the person giving the comment to grow, as does understanding why a picture has less of an impact.

It is important to actually look at and see the picture that is posted, not the one that it stimulates in your mind. 
Don't love a picture because you love babies,pets whatever.
Don't like a picture because of what it could be some unknown time later, look at it now and understand its positives and its shortcomings; those are what will improve both the maker and your own critical sense.

I post this text below every year or so in an attempt to keep this site from being a mommy site where every baby picture is too cute for critique and every pet is toooo adorable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very few pictures presented for critique in the photo communities on the web are meant simply to convey detail or information, as does a driver&#8217;s license photo or a picture of how to assemble some mechanism.

Pictures presented for critique generally are intended to have visual impact but, more than that, to convey a feeling, an impression, an emotion or an intellectual concept. The photographer uses all the technical and compositional tools at her or his command to achieve that. A critique should explore what the photographer did and how well it was done.

A critique has two benefits; the intended one is to allow the photographer to see how his/her image is seen by others&#8217; eyes - eyes that are unclouded by any emotional attachment to the image. The second benefit is that every critique can be a learning experience for the critic who sharpens his/her own eye by disentangling the many components of a photograph and weighing each of these to understand the photograph&#8217;s strengths, weaknesses and ultimate success.

*How is this *_&#8216;critique&#8217;_* actually done?*

The feeling that the picture is great, good, mediocre or terrible is a visceral, emotional response; we need to be able to describe why we have that response. To understand that visceral response, the critic asks him/herself questions and the responses build the critique. The questions are meant to separate out the various components of a picture into manageable quantities so each of us can understand in some way why we feel as we do about the picture. (Think about the best chocolate chip cookies you&#8217;ve ever had and the recipe that made them.) The photographer&#8217;s ability and talent and the content do add an unquantifiable component but the critic needs to get as close as possible to picking out the qualities that make up the worth of each picture in his or her own eyes.

*Some potential questions:*



What     feelings or impressions come from the picture?  
Are     these feeling congruent with the content or subject?  
Are     there one or more centers of visual interest?  
Is(are)     the center(s) of interest - the main subject(s) - well placed within     the frame and does the placement relate well to the rest of the     content so that the viewer&#8217;s eye is drawn to, rather than away?  
Is     there excess space that pulls the eye away and drains any tension or     drama from the picture?  
Is     there enough space so that nothing feels cramped or cut off?  
Are     there geometric issues? e.g. are the horizontals and vertical     correct, and is that important? 
Is     the composition appropriate for the content?  
Is     the color or tonality appropriate for the content? Saturation or     lack of it? Correct hues, white balance?  
Does     the color make the point that the photographer wants?  
Is     the sharpness or lack of sharpness appropriate?  
Is     everything that should be in focus and sharp, actually so?  
In     the reverse, is there so much depth of field, that attention is     drawn away from the real object of interest?  
Are there individual     small defects - points of motion, dirt on the lens/sensor,     out-of-focus spots that hurt the image, unduly bright areas that     draw the eye?  
 
More questions may occur to you to add to your concept of each image; your summation should be - in your opinion, why is this picture good/bad/indifferent and could the photographer have done something differently or better to increase the impact of the picture? Respond to the picture as presented without suggestions for different angles, etc. If the environment is friendly and the photographer is willing to listen, then suggest possible technical or technique changes that, in your opinion, might improve the picture.

Remember that wonderful, successful pictures may have many small defects and still be great. Conversely, a technically perfect picture may be completely uninteresting. Photography, as all arts are, is clearly a realm where the whole may not be equal to the sum of the parts.


----------



## mmaria (Jun 3, 2014)

You posted this in a good time for me personally... When I saw the title of the thread I thought "No way!"  These past few days I was thinking to give up on critiquing here... for real... 

I'll say "nice" and "cute" and "good job" etc, but more frequently I'll point out on faults (imo).

There are certain sections/threads here I don't open anymore because I know that "saying what faults are" on those images is not that highly desirable. So I'm avoiding them now...

I hope this thread will make some changes... we'll see


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

I understand people might feel completely 'fish-out-of-water' but learning what makes photographs good is a difficult task that takes some actual thinking.

Saying 'I like it' for virtually anything without understanding is like giving social promotions to underachieving students - not help at all.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Jun 3, 2014)

Sadly, I totally understand the "I like it!" people. I was like that... Then someone told me to ask "Why do I like this?" Admittedly, I didn't get it at first, but after a while it dawned on me. Some people probably will think this post is harsh, but really, there is a lot to think about when critiquing a photo. Or anything, really. Dance is one I'll never get, but I'm sure it applies there too.


----------



## baturn (Jun 3, 2014)

Most of the time I just don't feel like analyzing or explaining why I like something  - Even to my self.


----------



## AR76 (Jun 3, 2014)

@OP: Great post, thank you for bringing this up.

I think users asking for C&C need to be specific about what they'd like others to comment on. Let's say you've got a series of images that are technically flawless - then you might be interested which of the pictures is the most popular. This is where comments as "I like this one best; etc..." are spot on. On the other hand, I'll comment on the technical apsects of an image, even if I dislike it. Maybe the picture is boring, has no emotion and fails to captivate my attention. If C&C is given in a critical and constructive manner, the user will be able to learn important things for the day he then does capture a 'magic moment'.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 3, 2014)

You gave a pretty good rundown of a method of evaluating pictures. One flaw I see is the point, "*Is the composition appropriate for the content?*" I see this flaw many times, with close-up portraits that should be what is called a bust, butchered by the shooter holding the camera in a horizontal orientation, only to lop off the top of the head, eliminate all of the shoulders, and then show large expanses of green lawn on left and right sides of a head that is shown basically, floating within the frame on one to two inches worth of human neck. No bust...just a floating head.

Many of us are using cameras that make images with a 3:2 aspect ratio, which makes a perfect 4x6 inch color print, or a custom-size 8x12 print or a 16x24 small poster print. That frame shape, that aspect ratio, those proportions of frame height to frame width make it sometimes tricky to put real people into rectangular areas; either the frame is too tall and skinny, or the frame is too wide and not tall enough.
*
When the subject is taller than it is wide*, as with say a standing child, on most shots [*not all*, but indeed, MOST!], the better framing choice for a close-up, bust, head-and shoulder, half body, 3/4 length, or full body shot is going to be a TALL frame...a vertical frame....a "portrait" orientation of the camera. Not a horizontal mess, with the kid in the center of the frame, or off to one side of the frame, looking small and insignificant, and then 80% of the total frame area devoted to uninteresting lawn, shrubbery, or otherwise meaningless, out of focus background junk.

Are there exceptions to the above general concept? Sure there are! But the above scenario is something that I see over and over again,everywhere, on an ongoing basis, as people who have not studied composition routinely botch wonderful opportunities to literally *SHOW PEOPLE*, their clothes, bodies, posture, and pose, by holding their cameras horizontally, and then firing away, as they look through the camera and see ONLY a small part of the frame, a part that they focus on mentally, and often literally, while ignoring the remaining 80% of the compositional space. Show me the people--not the lawn!

The fundamentals error of using the wrong framing, over and over, is a skill-set killer. It also relates to some of the other bullet points, which are: 


Are there one or more centers of visual interest? _[How much 'person' or 'people' and how much out of focus LAWN grass are you showing?_]
Is(are) the center(s) of interest - the main subject(s) - well placed within the frame and does the placement relate well to the rest of the content so that the viewer&#8217;s eye is drawn to, rather than away? [_Do those big, matching patches of out of focus lawn help your portraits look better? 'Cause they've become 80% of the frame you're showing us._]
Is there excess space that pulls the eye away and drains any tension or drama from the picture? [_I was noticing those big,matching, green patches of empty lawn in this portrait..._]
Is there enough space so that nothing feels cramped or cut off? [_Is that man missing his shoulders? Why does she have no top to the top of her head?_]

I would submit that many people would be better off if they shot cameras that natively, created square format images, rather than 3:2 aspect ratio images.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

minicoop1985 said:


> Sadly, I totally understand the "I like it!" people. I was like that... Then someone told me to ask "Why do I like this?" Admittedly, I didn't get it at first, but after a while it dawned on me. Some people probably will think this post is harsh, *but really, there is a lot to think about when critiquing a photo. *Or anything, really. Dance is one I'll never get, but I'm sure it applies there too.



I agree totally and it requires some actual knowledge added to that thought but getting that knowledge and exercising that thought is actually good and profitable.




baturn said:


> Most of the time I just don't feel like analyzing or explaining why I like something  - Even to my self.



This is a cooperative effort.
You 'don't feel' like doing your part.
Don't expect others to work for you.



AR76 said:


> @OP: Great post, thank you for bringing this up.
> 
> I think users asking for C&C need to be specific about what they'd like others to comment on. Let's say you've got a series of images that are technically flawless - then you might be interested which of the pictures is the most popular. This is where comments as "I like this one best; etc..." are spot on. On the other hand, I'll comment on the technical apsects of an image, even if I dislike it. Maybe the picture is boring, has no emotion and fails to captivate my attention. If C&C is given in a critical and constructive manner, the user will be able to learn important things for the day he then does capture a 'magic moment'.



Thanks



Derrel said:


> You gave a pretty good rundown of a method of evaluating pictures. One flaw I see is the point, "*Is the composition appropriate for the content?*" I see this flaw many times, with close-up portraits that should be what is called a bust, butchered by the shooter holding the camera in a horizontal orientation, only to lop off the top of the head, eliminate all of the shoulders, and then show large expanses of green lawn on left and right sides of a head that is shown basically, floating within the frame on one to two inches worth of human neck. No bust...just a floating head.
> 
> Many of us are using cameras that make images with a 3:2 aspect ratio, which makes a perfect 4x6 inch color print, or a custom-size 8x12 print or a 16x24 small poster print. That frame shape, that aspect ratio, those proportions of frame height to frame width make it sometimes tricky to put real people into rectangular areas; either the frame is too tall and skinny, or the frame is too wide and not tall enough.
> *
> ...



I would be quite happy if you would have the time and the inclination to edit/add to it and then we both can have a better piece.


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jun 3, 2014)

Good one Trav. Couldn't agree more. Genuine C&C can feel harsh to some people and trigger that "my work is art" response.

Btw I understand you perform judging for your local clubs. Are they PSA recognized types of salons? Just wondering


----------



## keyseddie (Jun 3, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> Saying 'I like it' for virtually anything without understanding is like giving social promotions to underachieving students - not help at all.



Exactly. You spent a lot of time and effort on your original post and your crux is well said. Imo the fact that one likes an image has little to do with the quality of that image.


----------



## baturn (Jun 3, 2014)

Lew. Thank you for responding to my post. I am not in disagreement with you or your philosophy. I just reserve the right to conduct myself on this forum as I see fit. I do not expect others to work for me but appreciate it when I do get help. I would love to do my part and will as soon as I understand what my part is. thanks again.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

Vince.1551 said:


> Genuine C&C can feel harsh to some people and trigger that "my work is art" response.



People think that I am harsh; my guess is that is because I am just not interested in finding the softest way to say something or to praise someone for something that the camera did, like focus or bokeh.
I try to tell the unvarnished truth as I see it.



Vince.1551 said:


> Btw I understand you perform judging for your local clubs. Are they PSA recognized types of salons?


I am not either a PSA member or a PSA qualified judge. 
Also I am a one trick pony, I like what I like and am just not at all interested in spending an entire evening looking at landscapes or birds or insects.
That being said, I have judged and spoken at most of the local camera clubs - and one or two have even asked me back.
I would love to be asked to judge an evening of street shooting - but my guess is that will never happen.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

baturn said:


> Lew. Thank you for responding to my post. I am not in disagreement with you or your philosophy. I just reserve the right to conduct myself on this forum as I see fit. I do not expect others to work for me but appreciate it when I do get help. I would love to do my part and will as soon as I understand what my part is. thanks again.



Critiquing someone else's work is as beneficial or more than receiving critique on your own work.
You have no emotional attachment that blinds you to the faults of the image and you can exercise the same concepts of composition and framing as when you are shooting yourself - but without the time pressure.


----------



## photoguy99 (Jun 3, 2014)

While I agree with this pretty thoroughly, I do think there's value in a simple 'I like it' or not.

If I'm trying to make a photo people like and I can get twenty people to say whether or not they like it, that's good info. If two or three are willing to explain why, that really just completes the story.

I think people should be encouraged to do more analysis, although really good work can defy analysis, or makes sense only under the right sort of analysis, but I don't think people should be discouraged from simple reactions.

I don't make photos to be analyzed, ultimately. I make them to be reached to.


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jun 3, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> People think that I am harsh; my guess is that is because I am just not interested in finding the softest way to say something or to praise someone for something that the camera did, like focus or bokeh. I try to tell the unvarnished truth as I see it.  I am not either a PSA member or a PSA qualified judge. Also I am a one trick pony, I like what I like and am just not at all interested in spending an entire evening looking at landscapes or birds or insects. That being said, I have judged and spoken at most of the local camera clubs - and one or two have even asked me back. I would love to be asked to judge an evening of street shooting - but my guess is that will never happen.



I'm harsh as well lol that's is why I normally refrain from C&C unless personally requested.

Judging a night shoot sounds interesting. Looking at monochrome night shoots can be very exciting. You must have noticed by now there ain't much night shoots in mono


----------



## snerd (Jun 3, 2014)

Guilty. Perhaps just hitting the "Like" button would be more appropriate for us newbs that like an image but can't really offer a critique?


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jun 3, 2014)

snerd said:


> Guilty. Perhaps just hitting the "Like" button would be more appropriate for us newbs that like an image but can't really offer a critique?



To a certain extend probably comments are fine. Critiques can be very different. The challenge is whether the recipient can tell between the two ;-)


----------



## Derrel (Jun 3, 2014)

I think of TPF as a collection of people who have a number of different goals and reasons. I don't see this as "a" photo community, but rather as a big, huge, multi-segmented society, and I think we need to realize that C&C is not the be-all, end-all of this site. I think the picture-takers and the picture-makers each need to be respected. I myself am not as sure, not as certain, that "C&C" is the best way to photographic growth. I honestly think there are other and much better ways to improve one's picture-taking and picture-making than through web based C&C.


----------



## pixmedic (Jun 3, 2014)

people should bear in mind, that regardless of how some people _*feel*_ TPF should work, this site is not strictly designated as a "critique" site. It is not required to post _*looking*_ for critique, nor is it required to post _*giving*_ critique. 
That being said, I will agree that for people actually looking for critique as a means to improve their photography, getting solid technical reviews of their photo by those with experience and knowledge is extremely helpful, but I speak from experience when I say that there is no less a warm fuzzy feeling to simply hear that someone "likes" my photo. 

I understand the concept that comments like "nice shot" or "it just doesn't work for me" are not the most helpful sort of comment to someone looking for actual critique. However, I present the concept that if a person takes the time to look at your photo and comment, regardless of their level of ability to critique, it is beneficial to the forum in the sense of community interaction. I think to spurn those types of comments entirely is to spurn the camaraderie that makes this forum a community, and not just a distant panel of judges.


----------



## baturn (Jun 3, 2014)

Derrel and Pixmedic just said it better than I was able to. There is room for all types on a forum.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

The natural entropy in any forum makes it devolve if there isn't some effort by some part of the group to keep it at a certain level.
Because TPF gets a constant flood of people who are new to photography, if those who have do some skills and knowledge don't really make an effort to impart some of these to newer people, then what you have left is only people saying, 'I like that' to one another.
Without doing a real analysis my guess is that Derrel and I have done more critiquing in the last year or so than anyone else that is active.
Three or four years ago, there were a dozen people as active as we were in doing that kind of thing.

That can't be seen as progress.
There doesn't seen to be any mechanism to keep the mix TPF welcoming yet functioning as a reasonable level of skill except for work to keep bailing.

I'm clearly not saying that everyone should do C/C but only that people, no matter what their skill level, recognize that there is more to doing this well than patting each other on the behind and being part of a group.


----------



## pjaye (Jun 3, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> people should bear in mind, that regardless of how some people _*feel*_ TPF should work, this site is not strictly designated as a "critique" site. It is not required to post _*looking*_ for critique, nor is it required to post _*giving*_ critique.
> That being said, I will agree that for people actually looking for critique as a means to improve their photography, getting solid technical reviews of their photo by those with experience and knowledge is extremely helpful, but I speak from experience when I say that there is no less a warm fuzzy feeling to simply hear that someone "likes" my photo.
> 
> I understand the concept that comments like "nice shot" or "it just doesn't work for me" are not the most helpful sort of comment to someone looking for actual critique. However, I present the concept that if a person takes the time to look at your photo and comment, regardless of their level of ability to critique, it is beneficial to the forum in the sense of community interaction. I think to spurn those types of comments entirely is to spurn the camaraderie that makes this forum a community, and not just a distant panel of judges.



*This.

* To those that comment on my pictures, please know that Lew *does not* speak for me. I am thrilled when someone "likes" my pictures or simply gives kudo's to me for a good shot. 

And I think this post really makes those like me, who don't feel always qualified to give in depth critique an really unwelcome feeling to this forum. And that frankly, sucks. I've had enough of that lately and it make me seriously reconsider my participation in this forum. 

That being said, I will be sure to never simply "like" one of Lew's posts. I will simply ignore them.


----------



## pjaye (Jun 3, 2014)

snerd said:


> Guilty. Perhaps just hitting the "Like" button would be more appropriate for us newbs that like an image but can't really offer a critique?



Please don't. THis is the opinion of some, NOT all.


----------



## snerd (Jun 3, 2014)

I understand what Lew is saying. I tend to forget how long I've been on the internetz, and the thick skin that has grown because of it. I know it's hard to convince someone new to the web that nothing is meant personal. Thinking back now, I can remember when I took everything personally, and someone telling me my picture sucked would have hurt my feelers. But that was in 1995 for gawds sake. LOL!!!

I understand the need to approach different people in different ways, but to get any better at this, you're going to have to be able to take what someone offers when critiquing as valuable information. If you can't accept constructive criticism without crying about it, well, maybe you just don't want to get any better? It only stings for a minute, really! Then you realize what they mean upon a closer look. That's invaluable to me! 




Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk 2 Pro


----------



## Dagwood56 (Jun 3, 2014)

Adding my two cents - I don't think its as important to explain why you like someones photo as it is to explain why you don't. Myself, I often see a photo I really like, but can't always explain to someone the reasons why I like it....I just like it. Telling a person you like their image will at least boost their confidence levels a bit. However if someone doesn't like someones photo, posting something like "I don't like this" or "Toss it in the garbage" with no other explanation, is not only hurtful to the OP, but it serves no useful purpose in helping them improve, all they know from that, is that they did a bad job.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 3, 2014)

I agree with most of your thoughts in the above, Post #21, Lew. I think more people ought to feel entitled/free/able to/welcome to [etc.,etc.] give their own reactions/opinions/comments/observations about photos, topics,posts, ideas expressed and so on. A simple observation is worth typing out a few sentecnmes, and then posting. So--come on people, stop being lurkers, and become responders! Post! Post! Post!

A second thing: yes, we have lost some people, some voices. There's a certain amount of churn, and we have lost some of the people who used to post a lot and offer a lot of valuable insight, instruction, explanation, and commentary. But we have also reduced the really brutal, almost daily bashing that we had in the tumultuous 2009-2010 period. We have also lost some people who were very old-school, anti-newbie, anti-beginning professional, and so on. And at the same time, I see NEW people coming on board to. We also still have Photoguy99, Sparky480, WayneF (scantips site, flash guru), TCampbell, coastalconn, MikeW [and some others on the bird-shooting crew], lambertpix, JoeW, Ysarex, cgw, sleist, baturn, bo4key, usayit, jsecordphoto, PaigeW, frommrstomommy, snerd, runnah, jamesbjenkins, JohnnyWrench, Scraig, sm4him,Patriot, and about three dozen other people whose names I am forgetting [sorry!] ALL OF THOSE people have valuable experience,comments,points of view. Some of them used to be more active; I wish all of them were more active these days.

I think what really hurts is that TPF lacks what I call "*editorial guidance*". We are not being lead by guidance from above, ahead of time, but instead are being moderated after bad behavior happens. We are not being TOLD what is being expected by leaders, but instead, *the inmates are running the asylum. *We do not receive much guidance or hear about any long-term plans, or strategies to make TPF better, at least not from "editors". I am not blaming the moderators or admins, just stating: this place is not run like say the Popular Photography Magazine forum or some other forums.

It's like we have a sort of democracy, but without clearly-elected leaders. That's what I see; we have police, and jails, and prisons. We have enlisted men and a few NCO's, but no brass...no high-level generals, not even colonels. And, I am not sure that I "Like that".


----------



## terri (Jun 3, 2014)

> And I think this post really makes those like me, who don't feel always qualified to give in depth critique an really unwelcome feeling to this forum. And that frankly, sucks. I've had enough of that lately and it make me seriously reconsider my participation in this forum.



Don't do that - you'd be playing right into his hands.         My impression is that Lew regards TPF as some kind of  professional/teaching environment, first and foremost - and as a social  site, a distant second.   Out of that notion come these kinds of threads  which by turn result in unfortunate comments making people feel lazy or inadequate.   

  This is merely another thread in a long string from Lew espousing _his opinion_ on how members should post in the Gallery sections of TPF.   Granted, correct and expansive critique goes over many elements of an image, the technical ones mentioned here as well as ones personal reaction to it (the I like/dont like it viewer response).   

  But nowhere in the TPF guidelines is it suggested that if you dont have the time, knowledge, or inclination to respond to every image you view with this type of C&C means you are committing some kind of violation.   
  This is just Lew expressing an apparently dearly-held pet peeve.  It is shared by some, but not by everyone, and you neednt feel like you are somehow a lesser poster here for not adhering to his viewpoint.  Its not his job to guard against TPF becoming a mommy site - another comment that comes off somewhat poorly in tone.     

  People come to TPF with a wide range of experience, interests - and even the desire to learn.  The camaraderie that Lew mentions in a dismissive way is actually extremely important to an international forum  and friendliness _is_ actually among the behavioral guidelines listed in the FAQs here, so offering someone a simple, friendly comment is something we will continue to encourage.   

Have at it!   :sun:


----------



## pixmedic (Jun 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> I agree with most of your thoughts in the above, Post #21, Lew. I think more people ought to feel entitled/free/able to/welcome to [etc.,etc.] give their own reactions/opinions/comments/observations about photos, topics,posts, ideas expressed and so on. A simple observation is worth typing out a few sentecnmes, and then posting. So--come on people, stop being lurkers, and become responders! Post! Post! Post!
> 
> A second thing: yes, we have lost some people, some voices. There's a certain amount of churn, and we have lost some of the people who used to post a lot and offer a lot of valuable insight, instruction, explanation, and commentary. But we have also reduced the really brutal, almost daily bashing that we had in the tumultuous 2009-2010 period. We have also lost some people who were very old-school, anti-newbie, anti-beginning professional, and so on. And at the same time, I see NEW people coming on board to. We also still have Photoguy99, Sparky480, WayneF (scantips site, flash guru), TCampbell, coastalconn, MikeW [and some others on the bird-shooting crew], lambertpix, JoeW, Ysarex, cgw, sleist, baturn, bo4key, usayit, jsecordphoto, PaigeW, frommrstomommy, snerd, runnah, jamesbjenkins, JohnnyWrench, Scraig, sm4him,Patriot, and about three dozen other people whose names I am forgetting [sorry!] ALL OF THOSE people have valuable experience,comments,points of view. Some of them used to be more active; I wish all of them were more active these days.
> 
> ...



I really wish i understood exactly what you are getting at here Derrel. we have the forums FAQ that states all the rules (that "tells you what is expected")
im not really sure what sort of announcements of "long term plans" you are expecting. not much changes here on a regular basis. when rules ARE being changed, we do announce it and even discuss it with the masses before putting it into effect. IE: the gun photo rule, and reinstatement of the photo challenge. 
you are stating that there is a problem, but you did not offer up any solutions. can you describe exactly what sort of input you are looking for? 
im really not sure what sort of pre-moderation you are alluding to that we are missing. As far as I can tell, no moderation is needed if there is no bad behavior to "moderate". 

Its not like the mod team isnt open to suggestions on changes that could make this a better forum, but saying the forum isnt running right and leaving it at that isnt much more helpful than "that shot isnt working for me". 
Can you offer a little more insightful critique? 

I hope this doesnt come off as condescending Derrel, I am only writing this because you are one of the people i respect most around here and I am genuinely interested in a follow up to  your post. you can PM it if you want to keep it private, or report my post and all the mods can see it.


----------



## terri (Jun 3, 2014)

> I think what really hurts is that TPF lacks what I call "*editorial guidance*".  We are not being lead by guidance from above, ahead of time, but  instead are being moderated after bad behavior happens. We are not being  TOLD what is being expected by leaders, but instead, *the inmates are running the asylum. *We  do not receive much guidance or hear about any long-term plans, or  strategies to make TPF better, at least not from "editors". I am not  blaming the moderators or admins, just stating: this place is not run  like say the Popular Photography Magazine forum or some other forums.
> 
> It's like we have a sort of democracy, but without clearly-elected  leaders. That's what I see; we have police, and jails, and prisons. We  have enlisted men and a few NCO's, but no brass...no high-level  generals, not even colonels. And, I am not sure that I "Like that".



You'd have to expand on that for me, Derrel.       You must appreciate after your lengthy membership here that TPF is not a school, and it is certainly not trying to be Popular Photography, BetterPhoto or anything of the sort.   It was started as forum for photography enthusiasts.    This is from our Home Page:     _Welcome to ThePhotoForum.com - The premier *Photography forum* and *Digital Photography forum*  on the web! The site was launched back in March of  2003 as a place for  enthusiasts  to learn and share information. We cover all makes and  models of film, digital point and shoot, DSLR cameras including Canon,  Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax, Samsung, and more! There are  many areas of discussions ranging from *Digital Photography*, *Photography Tips*, Photography Equipment, Camera Reviews and News, HDR Images, Film Photography, *Weddings Photography*, How to guides, RAW, Post Procesing, Printing, Critiques and much more!_

The site has a Feedback & Suggestions forum open to anyone for ideas.   I'm not certain what you think "leaders" here should be, especially from the moderator team.   We're here to enforce the guidelines (generally behavioral in nature, thus the periodic slaps that you call jail)  and take member suggestions or comments to the owners.   But if you are looking for a principal leading teachers, no, that is not this platform.    We have been, and will remain, a _member-driven site_ - that is, our members are encouraged to take charge and start projects, become mentors or work with one, etc., etc.    So please, if you have an idea for something different we're always ready to hear them!


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

terri said:


> Don't do that - you'd be playing right into his hands.         My impression is that Lew regards TPF as some kind of  professional/teaching environment, first and foremost - and as a social  site, a distant second.   Out of that notion come these kinds of threads  which by turn result in unfortunate comments making people feel lazy or inadequate.
> 
> This is merely another thread in a long string from Lew espousing _his opinion_ on how members should post in the Gallery sections of TPF.   Granted, correct and expansive critique goes over many elements of an image, the technical ones mentioned here as well as one&#8217;s personal reaction to it (the &#8220;I like/don&#8217;t like it&#8221; viewer response).
> 
> ...



Have you considered how damn disrespectful and dismissive of me your post is.
After all that the mods have said about not attacking someone personally?

You ought to read your own rules.


----------



## pjaye (Jun 3, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> Have you considered how damn disrespectful and dismissive of me your post is.
> After all that the mods have said about not attacking someone personally?
> 
> You ought to read your own rules.




Have you considered how dismissive and disrespectful YOUR original post was to those of us that don't post critique?


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

symplybarb said:


> Have you considered how dismissive and disrespectful YOUR original post was to those of us that don't post critique?




Why don't you pick out the sentences that make you feel disrespected?
That might help me understand why you are upset.


----------



## terri (Jun 3, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> terri said:
> 
> 
> > Don't do that - you'd be playing right into his hands.         My impression is that Lew regards TPF as some kind of  professional/teaching environment, first and foremost - and as a social  site, a distant second.   Out of that notion come these kinds of threads  which by turn result in unfortunate comments making people feel lazy or inadequate.
> ...



I don't have to read them; I wrote them.   Have you considered how disrespectful and dismissive of the entire membership your many posts are on this subject?  Do you believe you can continue to toss out bits of napalm like this and act like your fellow members should _not_ become, by turns, upset, hurt, angry or insulted?    If not, then please consider that going forward.    It would be greatly appreciated. 

Anything further you'd like to say, please take it to PM.   Thanks.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 3, 2014)

Pixmedic, I'm not saying the forum "isn't running right". Terri JUST stepped in with clear, pointed, *editorial guidance.
*
As to the FAQ's...those are largely dusty, outmoded ways of avoiding doing daily or weekly or semi-monthly editorial guidance posts. The FAQ's are in the special collections room at the library--not out where the real people are. I think that the FAQ's, as good as they are, just do not really play much part in the day-to-day running of the posts and the sub-forums. What I mean is that, like in this post topic, we have one member who calls this *a* Photo Community, and advocates with a well-written post, a lengthy thesis about the value and import of C&C as a way to grow...so this doesn't become "a mommy site". Ouch!

I agree about C&C being helpful to some people, but I am not talking about moderating, or FAQ's...I am talking about what large media organizations call "editorial guidance", so that we, the writers [many of us write rather than illustrate out points], know what we're supposed to do. Moderating is different from editorial guidance. FAQ's, as good as they are, are NOT editorial guidance. *Terri's post above **is** editorial guidance [post #29]*. Not from a rank and file guy like me or Lew, but from "above".

I'm not upset about the moderating work; it's been pretty good I think. Hey, I've been warned, I've been banned, I've been reigned in...I've also posted my butt off, and so on. I love TPF. I put a LOT of effort into it. I just think we need a balanced, wholistic POV here, coming from the higher-ups. More communication. In advance. More street-level editorial guidance, and less of a "it's dealt with in the FAQ," type of approach.

I dunno. I try and offer C&C based on the user/poster/shooter and their goals. I praise cute grandbabies even if the shots are weak. I think that learning more about the nuts and bolts of photography before going out and shooting pictures is the better approach, rather than C&C after the fact. I think maybe for example, editorially, we could be encouraged to TRY SOMETHING for a week; like, say, shoot indoor flash pics; or, work with out LONGEST LENS for a weekend, stuff like that, or to shoot and convert to B&W, or to try "something", as a group, as a community, by the editors, the taste-makers, the rule-deciders. And see what happens. The FAQ's are the by-laws; the mods are the police; the prisons and jails are banning, temp and permanent.

What I am saying is C&C is that The_Traveler has held the opinion that C&C is a crucial element to improve. I really do not agree on how valuable it is. I think it's good, but NOT really the key to the success of TPF. I think a more editorial guidance approach to forum issues might help things run better, might make people feel more like participating.

***Please note--I had not seen any of the subsequent posts after post #29 and #30 when I wrote the above in direct reply to Pixmedic's post. Anyway...I love TPF, and will continue to TRY and behave as best as I can, and to contribute as best as I know how to. Now...I have some 27- year old film to develop...*


----------



## AmberAtLoveAndInk (Jun 3, 2014)

I have learned to love the hard comments and use it as fuel to better my work. Though lately I really haven't been given any hard critique.... it's almost unnerving now lol because I'm sure that for as long as I live I will be working towards the "perfect photographic form" and I could really use a big jerk to shake me up and get the creativity flowing again!!!


----------



## terri (Jun 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> I'm not saying the forum "isn't running right". Terri JUST stepped in with clear, pointed, *editorial guidance.
> *
> As to the FAQ's...those are largely dusty, outmoded ways of avoiding doing daily or weekly or semi-monthly editorial guidance posts. The FAQ's are in the special collections room at the library--not out where the real people are. I think that the FAQ's, as good as they are, just do not really play much part in the day-to-day running of the posts and the sub-forums. What I mean is that, like in this post topic, we have one member who calls this *a* Photo Community, and advocates with a well-written post, a lengthy thesis about the value and import of C&C as a way to grow...so this doesn't become "a mommy site". Ouch!
> 
> ...



I agree with the majority of what you have said, and I *think* I follow your train of thought.   We must disagree about the value of the FAQ's, however.   In a site this size, you must have them, refer to them, and use them as a way to guide people along in their interactions with one another.    

Your comment about being encouraged to try something for a week...well, we _do_ have the Photo Assignments and Technical Challenges sub-forum where this very notion is put to use.      Again, it is member-driven, and probably came about from a member's idea.   Stuff like this is what make TPF work, in my opinion - not on how well or how expansive member comments are on one another's images.   I guess we agree on that point as well.


----------



## runnah (Jun 3, 2014)

I think TPF is great up until a point. Learning and honing your technical skills is what the TPF community excels at. Finding your voice or style is where you need to branch out.


----------



## pixmedic (Jun 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Pixmedic, I'm not saying the forum "isn't running right". Terri JUST stepped in with clear, pointed, *editorial guidance.
> *
> As to the FAQ's...those are largely dusty, outmoded ways of avoiding doing daily or weekly or semi-monthly editorial guidance posts. The FAQ's are in the special collections room at the library--not out where the real people are. I think that the FAQ's, as good as they are, just do not really play much part in the day-to-day running of the posts and the sub-forums. What I mean is that, like in this post topic, we have one member who calls this *a* Photo Community, and advocates with a well-written post, a lengthy thesis about the value and import of C&C as a way to grow...so this doesn't become "a mommy site". Ouch!
> 
> ...



I guess its just the definition of editorial guidance that is eluding me. 
you have a much broader scope of forum experience here having been a member since '09, and probably have seen many different "leadership" styles come and go along with the usual membership turnover. 
I just wish I had a better understanding of what I could do in a preemptive moderating sense, as apposed to moderating after the fact.


----------



## Civchic (Jun 3, 2014)

At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy.  Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules.  I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group.  Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will.  Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.

Although I do really like this place.  What I took away from Lew's original post (what I chose to take away) is that "good pic" posts are nice, but I *do* wish I got more truly critical analysis on my photos.  A lot of the time I post things to show off what I've learned, or accomplished, and the pats on the back are awesome (keep em comin!).  A posting that gets nothing but crickets tells me just as much as a solid critique - it's a boring photo.  But a true, solid critique (such as when I posted my first soccer photos) is really a leap forward in knowledge for me and I love it.


----------



## pixmedic (Jun 3, 2014)

Civchic said:


> At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy.  Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules.  I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group.  Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will.  Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.
> 
> Although I do really like this place.  What I took away from Lew's original post (what I chose to take away) is that "good pic" posts are nice, but I *do* wish I got more truly critical analysis on my photos.  A lot of the time I post things to show off what I've learned, or accomplished, and the pats on the back are awesome (keep em comin!).  A posting that gets nothing but crickets tells me just as much as a solid critique - it's a boring photo.  But a true, solid critique (such as when I posted my first soccer photos) is really a leap forward in knowledge for me and I love it.



I think one of the best ways to get the kind of critique you want, is to be specific about it when you post a picture. 
post a picture, and try to express as best as possible what you want to get out of posting it. 
technical critique, processing options, ways to improve, artistic critique, just sharing...whatever it is you are looking for. 
I think the trap most of us fall into is that we post a picture without really having a good idea on what we expect to get out of posting.


----------



## snerd (Jun 3, 2014)

Civchic said:


> At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy.  Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules.  I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group.  Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will.  Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.
> 
> Although I do really like this place.  What I took away from Lew's original post (what I chose to take away) is that "good pic" posts are nice, but I *do* wish I got more truly critical analysis on my photos.  A lot of the time I post things to show off what I've learned, or accomplished, and the pats on the back are awesome (keep em comin!).  A posting that gets nothing but crickets tells me just as much as a solid critique - it's a boring photo.  But a true, solid critique (such as when I posted my first soccer photos) is really a leap forward in knowledge for me and I love it.



I think that's the underlying principle at work here......................... who can take constructive criticism and who can't. Until one can figure out who is who, one doesn't offer C&C because they might come off as a mean person. Can't say as I blame them.


----------



## Civchic (Jun 3, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> Civchic said:
> 
> 
> > At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy. Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules. I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group. Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will. Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.
> ...



You're probably very correct.  When I posted the soccer photos it was clearly aimed at "The noise in these photos is terrible, how can I fix it?" and got clear, informative answers back.  Which may have included what some would interpret as meanness (ie, "Yes, it IS terrible, you've underexposed them all and the noise is coming from the attempt to repair your mistake").  But that's not mean, it's helpful!

Snerd, I suppose you're correct as well - but anyone who cannot take a little bit of "This is wrong...but here is what I would do" probably shouldn't be showing people their pictures (or writing, or poetry, or woodworking...)


----------



## Derrel (Jun 3, 2014)

This whole thread has grown pretty long, and difficult to follow. 

I understand that the site is member-driven, but of course, any organization can be improved. I suspect Lew's intention in his OP was to put out there what he thinks would make TPF a better site. I agreed with some of his points, and offered a contribution on photo C&C, and in another post I stated my fundamental disagreement with Lew's position on 1) the singular nature of TPF as "*a* photo community" and 2) on the idea that we need to respect picture-takers and picture-makers alike, and that we need a sort of multi-cultural outlook. Annnnnd, a little while later, I saw some very good *editorial guidance* provided.

I think we can improve things here. Maybe we can all work on it.


----------



## Overread (Jun 3, 2014)

I'm just going to point to the bit in my signature advising people that if you want certain input on your photos say so when you post them. Much of the time detailed critique takes time to write, people want to feel that their time spent writing it is WORTH their time writing it out. If you just post a photo then those responding have no idea if you'll respond to the critique or just ignore it or heck say nothing at all (not even thanks). 

If you take the effort to detail and outline with your photo your own thoughts when you post it up then its much more likely that others will chip in - set the tone in the first post and others will respond. If you just post a photo chance are you'll get likes and "nice photo" comments.


----------



## pixmedic (Jun 3, 2014)

snerd said:


> Civchic said:
> 
> 
> > At the risk of sounding like one of "those people" I have been on the internet a looong time, and a member of many an online forum, ranging from stable to rancorous to crazy.  Each community has it's own structure and ethos and "unwritten" rules.  I'm new to TPF but it always strikes me that this is a very insecure group.  Always self-editing, self-policing, navel-gazing a bit if you will.  Perhaps it is the mentality of the artist to always be his/her own biggest critic, and put them into an anonymous group and it's a giant black hole of self-awareness and worry.
> ...



and theres another trap...
properly _*giving*_ C&C -vs- properly (IE graciously) _*receiving*_ C&C. 
you could probably fill a dozen pages debating that one, but the main point is....when just _*one*_ of those things fail, it can bring down the whole thread. 
of course, one persons definition of "constructive criticism" might be wildly different than anothers...or the person receiving it. 

I think, if you post in the spirit of helping someone, and tailor your post as such, then the OP should be able to do the same.


----------



## mmaria (Jun 3, 2014)

So... when a thread takes a different direction than I (as a member) originally thought it would take...  and becomes a bit too complicated for me (as a member) to follow and participate... and right now I don't feel like I'm willing to give critique on posted pictures... and numerous threads about technical stuff doesn't hold my interest.... but... I do have some free time that I would gladly spend here on TPF.... but... but what else can I do here?
help

(and yes, I've already checked what's in "just for fun" and "off topic")


----------



## pixmedic (Jun 3, 2014)

mmaria said:


> So... when a thread takes a different direction than I (as a member) originally thought it would take...  and becomes a bit too complicated for me (as a member) to follow and participate... and right now I don't feel like I'm willing to give critique on posted pictures... and numerous threads about technical stuff doesn't hold my interest.... but... I do have some free time that I would gladly spend here on TPF.... but... but what else can I do here?
> help



theres nothing in the forum guidelines that says you cant just hang out here and enjoy pictures. 
comment when, where and how you feel _*you want*_ _*to*_, not when and how someone else says you should.


----------



## mmaria (Jun 3, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> theres nothing in the forum guidelines that says you cant just hang out here and enjoy pictures.
> comment when, where and how you feel _*you want*_ _*to*_, not when and how someone else says you should.


Got to say that I enjoyed pictures yesterday... today not so much...

I comment a lot, at least I think...My comments are short mostly but maybe sometimes I help someone a bit, maybe.... and just the other day I had a disagreement about my way of giving critique (apparently I didn't say anything nice to OP). OP was great and everything went well  http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ach-just-passing-through-critque-welcome.html... but it did make me think about how and should I even give critique...

Someone really expect to hear just "nice picture" and someone will just say "nice". sometimes is really difficult to say who wants "tell me what I did wrong" and "tell me how nice my picture is"

I say lots of "nice" "I like it" and sometimes I'll explain why sometimes I won't.

Yesterday I said "I really really like this picture" but I didn't explained why. OP certainly wouldn't find my explanation helpful. He already did everything ok, technically speaking, and my opinion was highly subjective, but still, it would be nice if I explained why I like the picture that much.

When it's clear that OP is not a beginner I probably won't explain much why I like something. When OP is a beginner I'll try to explain at least something about why "I like".


----------



## Overread (Jun 3, 2014)

If people just want "nice photo" comments and no critique we have the Just for FUN gallery. If its posted anywhere else in any of the other galleries then respectful critique IS allowed by the forum rules.


----------



## TCampbell (Jun 3, 2014)

Lew, this is a great thread.  On another photo-related site I was frequently in the various image gallery forums providing C&C.  It probably should be added that the motivation to post in an image gallery forum is not always to get C&C (some people just want to share and don't want detailed critiques).  As such, I always remind people that if they WANT C&C then should (a) specifically add a comment to their post to ask for it and (b) promise not to melt if the C&C seems overly critical.

I try to avoid overwhelming someone with too much advice.  It's sort of like learning a golf swing... if I give you 27 things to keep in mind while you do that swing... there's just no way you'll remember all of that.  So I try to look at the top 3 things that would have improved the image (even if there many more comments that could be made) -- and typically if the person posts more than one image, I'll look for the commonality of what needs improvement.

In addition to limiting myself to just 3 things that they may need to improve, I try to find at least 1 thing that they did right in order to reinforce the good elements of their work (otherwise they don't necessarily realize they did anything right.)

I do see an abundance of images that are what I think of as "a basic snapshot" -- which appear to have been captured without much thought.  I try to encourage new shooters to try read, digest, and post an image that LOOKS like they are actually at least attempting to create a good photograph (it's unfair to ask for a well-written critique which may take some time to write... when it does not look like the shooter even invested as much effort to create the image.)  WHEN I ignore an image (yes... we do look, you get "views" and yet no comments... and sometimes that's deliberate) it's often because I felt the photographer did not make enough of an investment in the image to merit a comment.  The point here... for those who actually do WANT good feedback... you need to WORK on your image as though you are actually making a real effort to improve.

For those photographer's who have read the foundational instructions on basic exposure concepts (e.g. Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure" for example), then I'd recommend moving on to understanding composition next... e.g. Michael Freeman's book "The Photographer's Eye -- Composition and Design for Better Digital Photos" is a good book for this.)  

You mentioned critique about whether the image is able to convey a feeling or mood.  And for this, I think lighting (which gets far too little attention in photography... which is ALL ABOUT LIGHT) is high on the list of things a photographer needs to learn.  I see all too many "I just want to use natural light" (frankly some of the best "natural" light imagery you may have seen... probably involved supplemental lighting and lighting modifiers by the photographer and was not a happy coincidence of _finding_ the right light... it was about _making_ the right light.)  Then they want a new lens and nobody ever asks about lighting (well... a few do).  Lighting will do far more to improve imagery than a new lens.

Use of lighting, contrast, high-key vs low-key, etc. can all be excellent tools to convey a feeling of solitude, or joy, or despair, or calm, or... whatever.  Name the emotion and we can probably name a way to configure lighting that would help convey that.  You've mentioned the use of color and saturation (or de-saturation as the case may be).  I like to use moderately subdued color or softened images to convey a sense of beauty.  But if I want to convey excitement or high-energy I might go for more saturation and harsher contrast to give an edgy-feel.  These are not "rules" so much... I think the more important concept is to consider the situation, what you want to convey and evaluate what sort of adjustment would fit the situation better.  I do see photographers who want to develop a "style" and apply it everywhere.  I prefer to apply adjustments based on what I want to convey and not blanket the same "style" onto every image as if it were my own personal brand.

I learned photography by being an apprentice to a professional photographer when I was 15.  One of the best pieces of advice he ever gave me (and really helped me learn) is that whenever you're exposed to imagery... reading magazines, or wherever you find them.  As you skim through the images, you will occasionally find an image that has "stopping value".  This is the term we use to describe when an image has something about it that makes you pause and look at it for a longer amount of time than you looked at any of the other images.  When you find that "stopping value" image... study it.  Understand WHY it made you pause... why did you pause on this one, but not pause on the image just before it?  Break down everything you can ... it's composition and balance, modeling and posing, lighting, mood, and energy energy, rhythm, patterns, and flow, you name it... study it.  Imagine you would have to re-create that image ... what lighting and light modifiers might you need?  Where would they need to be?  How would you ask your models to pose?  Etc.  

BTW, on the other photo-site (the one where I was posting daily constructive comments in the galleries)... what I think became a drain was taking the time to describe how to improve the image... only to have the photographer go out and just shoot more of the same.  It made me wonder why I ever bothered to offer constructive criticism beyond "that's nice".


----------



## Derrel (Jun 3, 2014)

TCampbell, you give some of the best explanations and technical/practical advice of anybody here. My hat is off to you and your sane, calm, well-measured, intelligent posting style. Many of your longer,more-detailed posts and explanatory post on TPF have been very much admired by me. Your bicycle panning example post from like a year ago was a great example of a fabulous post that both explained and showed in photos, how to pan well, and how to get good focus, and make a nice picture or three. It was not a C&C post, but it was a sterling example of *the type of thing that you do exceptionally well.*


----------



## pgriz (Jun 3, 2014)

Agreed.  Tim, you always give very good, well reasoned, well explained responses, and I look forward to learning from your posts (yes, there's usually something there that's of interest and value).  Derrel, you are both very good at critique, and you can be abrasive at times, but I read your comments quite carefully, and am rewarded by the effort.  I have enjoyed seeing Lew's work - it not a genre that I do well, but I certainly can admire it.  I also think that Lew is trying quite hard to elevate the level of discourse above a relatively superficial level, and I applaud his efforts.  On the other hand, my wife tells me that in a social setting (as some see TPF being), one should stay more superficial than one would perhaps get into with someone one-on-one with a pint of beer or a glass of wine. 

Personally, I enjoy giving critiques - partly because by forcing myself to put into words my feelings, I get a better sense of WHY I find something interesting or appealing.  Same goes with giving a good book review, or doing a tasting - putting some effort into explaining one's visceral reaction helps distill the essence of the experience.  I don't do it very much because it does take effort and often I'm in TPF as a form of relaxation.


----------



## 71M (Jun 3, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> giving social promotions to underachieving students


An interesting analogy; IIRC?, in past threads, you've admitted that you neither understand _art_ nor seem comfortable/conversant with penetrating technical appraisal of images that you yourself have posted; why are you now it seems, an _ex officio_ 'judge' of how the forum runs? Is the cronysism of your 4.6k likes better deserved than an amateur snap regarded by others as a 'nice shot'? _Pot calling kettle black._


----------



## table1349 (Jun 3, 2014)

Perhaps something for the OP to consider:
How to Start an Online Forum | ProBoards
Welcome to Forums
How to Start a Forum, part A - Vanilla Community


----------



## table1349 (Jun 3, 2014)




----------



## mishele (Jun 3, 2014)

Alright, this thread has had some nice discussion. I would like it to continue. If you don't have anything positive to add...please move along!


----------



## pjaye (Jun 3, 2014)

To be clear, my issue is not with critiques. It's with the condescending attitude that was in the OP about people who don't give critiques. Apparently, I'm part of the "mommy board crowd" since I don't give in depth critiques. And being told by someone to not give likes, or not like something because it's a subject I like, is rude and disrespectful.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 3, 2014)

how come there is always some problem here? I see no problem. why cant everyone just kick back and be happy for once. Geez. It's a nice forum and someone always has to make it like it has some "problem" where there is no problem. Do what you want, damn.

someone liked a cute puppy photo?

so what?  And this is a major problem? 

in the next thread you have a near work of art with in depth critiques. . It balances. Leave the puppy alone...


----------



## rexbobcat (Jun 3, 2014)

There's so much sass on TPF today.


----------



## snerd (Jun 3, 2014)

Group therapy is wonderful.


----------



## paigew (Jun 3, 2014)

I am guilty of commenting with "I like it". The main reason would be that I am on my phone, and I hate typing on my phone . Or possibly I just don't have the time to type out a long critique...would it be better not to respond at all to a thread? Other times I feel like the photo doesn't really need critique. The poster posted a good shot and wanted to share. I can appreciate good photography without nit picking it. Who cares if I would have done something different...it isn't my photo/choice. Yes I could just "like" if I can post a comment and bump the thread to the top I will


----------



## snerd (Jun 3, 2014)

It's your thing, do what you wanna do. Probably way before most of you all's time.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Perhaps something for the OP to consider:
> How to Start an Online Forum | ProBoards
> Welcome to Forums
> How to Start a Forum, part A - Vanilla Community



and for Gryphonslair
beginners-forum/76568-how-post-pictures


----------



## snerd (Jun 3, 2014)

I don't know about anyone else, but I still love ya, Lew!!!!


----------



## PixelRabbit (Jun 3, 2014)

I'm with Paige, biggest reason is I'm most often on the ipod and typing on that thing is a pain.

I'd say that the OP and a lot of the great replies are very valuable for those starting out, it is a great way to give yourself a structure to start learning and a good way of training yourself to actually SEE the photograph and be able to deconstruct it but there comes a time that we grow beyond that because it is ingrained, there are many stages from beginner to pro represented here on the forum and we all have different "needs".

Sometimes the simple "I like it" or "it doesn't work" posts are exactly what we are looking for because that is where we are at in our progression.  Once you get past learning the technical aspects you delve into conscious choices on things like composition and style and enter into the "subjective" area.  

Once you are there it's up to you to figure out how to make your choices work effectively for your own work in your own way and those simple answers are a great way to gauge how effective you are being.  If I can get an "I like it" from someone who freely admits X is not a style they normally like it is PERFECT feedback, it tells me the image transcends those boundaries and simply works. 

 I think once we get to this point we have enough under our belt to be able to guide our own learning, we know where we want to improve and where we want to go, if we rely on in depth C&C from a specific group of people that group will forum us into a generic photographer made up of the majority of likes and dislikes of the most verbal members.


----------



## MSnowy (Jun 3, 2014)

Nice thread. Like all the post.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

Pixelrabbit,

You're talking from the viewpoint of the person who isn't really wanting C/C. 

My point from the very beginning that there are many people here who post and specifically ask for c/c and what they get is a very vague response that doesn't give any guidance or help.  
This is a lost opportunity for two people, obviously the person asking for critique needs and wants more and doesn't get it, while the person who is viewing the picture has their own learning opportunity - to look at and try to understand what they see and what they like or dislike and why.

Learning to give critique isn't specifically easy but it is approachable and can be done in stages.
I gave what I thought was a reasonable schematic for approaching critique in the first post.

(What baffles me is what offended people and what caused the uproar. This seemed to me to be rather straightforward encouragement that those who want to get help should be prepared to give it.)


----------



## table1349 (Jun 3, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps something for the OP to consider:
> ...



Why Lew, I don't have an ingrained need to seek your approval or the approval of anyone else for my photography.  I just don't have either that narcissistic nature requiring the approval of others nor do I feel that the whole world is obligated to follow in my goose steps.  Posting pictures to some forum does not a photographer make.  I toss things out to people, and they are free to take them and run with it or leave it as they see fit.  No skin off my nose and effects my life not one little bit.  

You have a well documented history, as evidenced by an administrator and several moderators, of starting threads of this nature with preconceived notions of the way things ought to be, and then getting all bent out of shape when the whole world doesn't agree with you.  All under the guise of a "discussion."   Personally, I find this whole pseudo intellectual crap, a little boring after a while.  

As for my original post in this thread, frankly Lew I was dead serious, if you aren't happy here with the way this site is run and or operates, you are completely free to start your own forum with your own rules and guidelines.  I have no real complaints, because this isn't my site.  Who am I to come into their house and ***** about the way it is run.  Frankly If you aren't happy here you should start your own forum.  That way, when things don't go the way you like them you can take your ball and go home.


----------



## pgriz (Jun 3, 2014)

Lew, some people watch movies or sports and experience it in the present.  Some like to talk about the character development, or the plot sidetracks or the special effects, or the role of the defense in the attacking play.  My wife loves movies and can give me an incredible analysis of the playwriting, the significance of the various characters, and the success (or failure) of the director in bringing out the best in the actors.  In fact, listening to her describe a movie we just saw together makes me see so many aspects that I missed just watching it.  But I can't do it the way she does.  So I enjoy the movies my way, and get educated when she gives me her take.  Some people just see things differently.  I think I understood your OP intent, and I am quite comfortable with your suggestions.  Some days, I'm tired and am looking for light entertainment and casual banter.  Other days, I'm up for a detailed tear-down and analysis.  Both work.


----------



## PixelRabbit (Jun 3, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> Pixelrabbit,
> 
> You're talking from the viewpoint of the person who isn't really wanting C/C.
> 
> ...



Like I said I agree that your OP and many of the great responses are perfect for the specific group of newer shooters and while it would be ideal for a thread to be started with a specific thought directed at a specific group and stay specific to the thoughts in the OP they don't, they meander around and wider points of view are contributed like what happened here and brought me to write my response.  

I replied from my own point of view, which isn't that I don't WANT C&C but rather was directed at the type of response you targeted, the short and sweet I like it or don't (which are the most prevalent comments for those who are at that next stage and right up to our Pro shooters), they DO have a place for the non beginners who are reading the thread so some fodder that is related to them should be welcome imho


----------



## SCraig (Jun 3, 2014)

There is no rule that only one response in a topic is allowed; if one person posts a simple "I Like It" response then others can still post in the same thread.    There really is room for both and there really is no limit to how many people can respond to a topic.  If one person posts a simple "I Like It" then all is not lost, someone is still able to post a comprehensive critique if they are so inclined.  Feel free to post all the comprehensive, exhaustive critiques that you desire, and others can post their "I Like It" posts.  It works quite well that way.


----------



## photoguy99 (Jun 3, 2014)

Lew, people get bent out of shape because you come across as prescriptivist and bossy. Not because you are, but because it's impossible to couch these sorts of things in a sufficient coating of weasel words to make it read any other way.

When one has specific and clear ideas that don't agree with other people's ideas, the other people are going to feel, at best, lectured to. Part of the gig.

You do start these threads a lot. And someone always bitches about the fact that you do. And they're always among the most interesting threads TPF has. Make of that what you will.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 3, 2014)

Thanks.
Clearly, weasel words are not my strength; that comes from a life of having dealt mainly with goal oriented people.

I do find it interesting that people talk so much about being independent and thinking for themselves and having their own opinions but so many of exactly these same people cannot stand anyone else even expressing different opinions. 
They mistake discussion for argument and really want to take offense. (I'm still cannot find what I say that was 'demeaning' or what was 'napalm'.)

No one has actually to do anything they don't want.
No one has to actually try to get better or think about critique or work on photography or even post pictures - but they get incredibly incensed if anyone, in this case me, expresses his opinion that the way things are going is not the optimal way.


----------



## Warhorse (Jun 3, 2014)

I really like this thread! :mrgreen:


----------



## Derrel (Jun 3, 2014)

Just a minor revisiting of one premise, out of the multiple ones, found in the OP: do we really want to recreate the TPF we had "a year ago", or the "TPF we used to have two years ago?" I mean...why do we want to strive for something we used to have? Is it really necessary to replicate the same,exact type of poster/C&C giver ratio this site used to have? Because, a year ago, and two years ago, and five years ago, I recall a LOT of harsh words, hurt feelings, and bossy, passive-aggressive C&C that was basically...bashing.

I recall that, of the "dozen or so" frequent C&C givers that Lew mentioned that we used to have, there were some people who fairly predictably expressed what I would call "prejudice" toward certain techniques, or certain types of photography, and certain types of photographers, and certain types of image hosting sites; a lot of really, well, passive-aggressive put-downs of "Facebook Photographers" and so on.

My feeling about TPF and the "recruitment" that Lew mentioned in his OP is that photography as a business, as a pasttime, as a passion, is slowing down. Camera sales have reallllly slowed wayyyyyy down. I've seen some of the graphs; camera sales, both P&S, and digital SLR, and mirrorless, have dropped by the tens of millions of units per year, consistently, since about 2009. I think the whole photography craze is slowing down, both for new arrivals to the game, AND also, for long-time people who have...just gotten bored of taking pictures. And I think that might by why TPF is changing.


----------



## pgriz (Jun 3, 2014)

What's changing is how we "consume" images.  At one point, they were the equivalent of bringing out the fine china and silverware.  Now it's a quick grab with a plastic spoon.  And how much precision and care are you (or anyone) going to put on the latter?


----------



## Rosy (Jun 3, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> Pixelrabbit,
> 
> You're talking from the viewpoint of the person who isn't really wanting C/C.
> 
> ...



Lew I agree with you whole heartedly but there have been many times when an OP including myself will ask for CC and all I/we get is nice or like.  I personally appreciate the likes but yearn for the strengths and weaknesses my images have.  What then, do I PM the experts?
I will make it a point to give my point of view going forward
Thoughts?


----------



## pgriz (Jun 3, 2014)

Rosy, ask what you want people to give/tell you.  Trust me, it really works.  What helps is when we know what the person's vision was, what they did to realize that vision, and what they're not happy with.  Then it's quite simple to comment in a meaningful (and useful to you) way.


----------



## pixmedic (Jun 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Just a minor revisiting of one premise, out of the multiple ones, found in the OP: do we really want to recreate the TPF we had "a year ago", or the "TPF we used to have two years ago?" I mean...why do we want to strive for something we used to have? Is it really necessary to replicate the same,exact type of poster/C&C giver ratio this site used to have? Because, a year ago, and two years ago, and five years ago, I recall a LOT of harsh words, hurt feelings, and bossy, passive-aggressive C&C that was basically...bashing.
> 
> I recall that, of the "dozen or so" frequent C&C givers that Lew mentioned that we used to have, there were some people who fairly predictably expressed what I would call "prejudice" toward certain techniques, or certain types of photography, and certain types of photographers, and certain types of image hosting sites; a lot of really, well, passive-aggressive put-downs of "Facebook Photographers" and so on.
> 
> My feeling about TPF and the "recruitment" that Lew mentioned in his OP is that photography as a business, as a pasttime, as a passion, is slowing down. Camera sales have reallllly slowed wayyyyyy down. I've seen some of the graphs; camera sales, both P&S, and digital SLR, and mirrorless, have dropped by the tens of millions of units per year, consistently, since about 2009. I think the whole photography craze is slowing down, both for new arrivals to the game, AND also, for long-time people who have...just gotten bored of taking pictures. And I think that might by why TPF is changing.



As we strive for things long past, 
we forget why those things did not last. 
We think them better, days gone by, 
although we cant remember why. 
We crave, we yearn, for yesteryear,
for simpler times, full of cheer. 
While dark and bleary the future seems, 
the past still shines, like a diamonds gleam.


----------



## Rosy (Jun 3, 2014)

pgriz said:


> Rosy, ask what you want people to give/tell you.  Trust me, it really works.  What helps is when we know what the person's vision was, what they did to realize that vision, and what they're not happy with.  Then it's quite simple to comment in a meaningful (and useful to you) way.



P....I have and  I've gotten tremendous help.  I do not want to come across as unappreciative.   John; Derrel,  Charlie, Lew have been incredible, but I do notice that some post just go without any comments,  I personally have PMd john and Charlie (before he left)
Just playing the devil's advocate


----------



## Derrel (Jun 3, 2014)

pgriz said:


> What's changing is how we "consume" images.  At one point, they were the equivalent of bringing out the fine china and silverware.  Now it's a quick grab with a plastic spoon.  And how much precision and care are you (or anyone) going to put on the latter?



YES, it has taken me a good, long while to come to what I think is a solid understanding of the changing ways we consume/use/share/show images now, as we head toward the middle of the second decade of the 21str century. There have been some VERY important, really HUGELY fundamental shifts in how images are shot; processed;displayed;archived;shown;shared;thrown away or "filed".

The Online Photographer on Tuesday, May 27, 2014 published a piece entitled *Is This 'A Great Time For Photography"?
*
I think people here should read it. The Online Photographer: Is This 'A Great Time for Photography'?

And, vis a vis the change in how we "consume" images; I think it's important to note that the "voices giving C&C" that we used to have here in TPF, well, a LOT of those voices had some pretty serious prejudice against Hipstamatic, Instagram, Facebook, and smart phone pictures. Not to name names, but there are people in this very thread that have shown a consistent dismissal of cell phone images, Instagram-type filtering, and so on. Really, pretty much bashing the whole new way, the whole new tools and mobile end of photographic consuming, because it's apparently deemed not worthy...it's not "what THEY like", and other spurious justifications to dismiss the new way of consuming images.

Again, you know, I don't want to make this into a big pi&& and moan session. I'll return to something I wrote in my first post in this thread: I think many people would do well to shoot cameras that shoot in a native square format. And short of an old Mamiya like gsgary and limr have, or minicoop's old Hassy 1600F, the cheapest and most readily available square-format camera is the one in the Instagram application. I dunno...I started with a 6x6 cm camera, then went to 135,then got a series of old TLR's, then went to Instamatic 126 square. I really think a LOT of people would honestly benefit by shooting SQUARES. I've recently gotten my old square-format Bronica and my Yashica 635 TLR out, and am starting to think about square composition more so than I have since the early 1990's when I retired the Bronica.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Just a minor revisiting of one premise, out of the multiple ones, found in the OP: do we really want to recreate the TPF we had "a year ago", or the "TPF we used to have two years ago?" I mean...why do we want to strive for something we used to have? Is it really necessary to replicate the same,exact type of poster/C&C giver ratio this site used to have? Because, a year ago, and two years ago, and five years ago, I recall a LOT of harsh words, hurt feelings, and bossy, passive-aggressive C&C that was basically...bashing.
> 
> I recall that, of the "dozen or so" frequent C&C givers that Lew mentioned that we used to have, there were some people who fairly predictably expressed what I would call "prejudice" toward certain techniques, or certain types of photography, and certain types of photographers, and certain types of image hosting sites; a lot of really, well, passive-aggressive put-downs of "Facebook Photographers" and so on.
> 
> My feeling about TPF and the "recruitment" that Lew mentioned in his OP is that *photography as a business, as a pasttime, as a passion, is slowing down. Camera sales have reallllly slowed wayyyyyy down. I've seen some of the graphs; camera sales, both P&S, and digital SLR, and mirrorless, have dropped by the tens of millions of units per year, consistently, since about 2009. I think the whole photography craze is slowing down, both for new arrivals to the game, AND also, for long-time people who have...just gotten bored of taking pictures*. And I think that might by why TPF is changing.


B. B. King - The Thrill Is Gone (Live at Montreux 1993) - YouTube


----------



## manaheim (Jun 3, 2014)

I have a very strong desire to post pictures of monkeys and bananas.


----------



## Rosy (Jun 3, 2014)

manaheim said:


> I have a very strong desire to post pictures of monkeys and bananas.



Go for it...I'll CC it!


----------



## manaheim (Jun 3, 2014)

Rosy said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > I have a very strong desire to post pictures of monkeys and bananas.
> ...



I wish I could but it's against forum rules... and being a moderator REALLY cramps my style in that respect.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jun 3, 2014)

Somebody should start some kind of "Pact" to get everybody to respond the way you want.


----------



## pgriz (Jun 3, 2014)

The other day, my wife was invited by a work acquaintance for a coffee.  It turned out she wanted my wife's perspective on a family situation that she was having difficulty with.  It seems the lady has a teen-age daughter, very cute and attractive, who has a relationship with a web-based clothing marketer.  The daughter gets weekly shipments of various clothing articles which she models and shoots (selfies) with an Apple camera phone and then posts these images on instagram, with an identifier code for the articles of clothes.  Her "followers" (she's got at least 20,000) then order the article of clothing they like from the manufacturer/distributor, and get the item(s) delivered the next day.  The mother's concern was the exposure of her daughter to unknown people, and the concern that some of these people may want much more than clothes.  The daughter is resisting any parental control (she apparently loves the free clothes and the attention), so there's some significant friction happening.  I bring this forward as an example of how things we used to do (shop for clothes in stores) is being dramatically changed.  When iPhone photos are enough to drive sales to over 20,000 customers, with no overhead to be paid other than free clothes for the model and the shipping costs, we're in a new universe.  Our consuming habits are truly changing everything.  And no, I'm not posting a link to this teenager's instagram selfies.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 3, 2014)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Somebody should start some kind of "Pact" to get everybody to respond the way you want.



*Old-timer alert! Old-timer alert!*

lol...


----------



## snerd (Jun 3, 2014)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Somebody should start some kind of "Pact" to get everybody to respond the way you want.



I first saw that as "Pict". I have NO idea, and we probably don't want to go there. But it reminded me of a line from a song, I'll try to do it without Google............

"Several species of small furry animals gathered together in a cave and grooving with a pict."

I should go to bed.


----------



## manaheim (Jun 3, 2014)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Somebody should start some kind of "Pact" to get everybody to respond the way you want.



Don't start with me, you... you... person!



Derrel said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Somebody should start some kind of "Pact" to get everybody to respond the way you want.
> ...



No joke, right?


----------



## pgriz (Jun 3, 2014)

In the beginning,
there was chaos, noise and confusion.
People were getting angry.
No-one was understanding what the others were trying to say.
There were threats, accusations and banning.
Eventually some in the population tired of this.
They got together, and under the light of a full moon,
made a PACT.
Those who follow the Pact, will have
enlightment.
Those who do not, will be doomed to hear a cacophony.
The Pact was going to be the way.
Unfortunately,
people being people,
the Pact was mis-understood,
then ignored,
then forgotten.

Alas.

And yet, the sun still rises in the east.
and the moon makes the tides move.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> pgriz said:
> 
> 
> > What's changing is how we "consume" images. At one point, they were the equivalent of bringing out the fine china and silverware. Now it's a quick grab with a plastic spoon. And how much precision and care are you (or anyone) going to put on the latter?
> ...


you know what it is.
it's all crap. Not the image quality per se, that is improved. But the entire element of photography itself and the images now.
Think about it, some chick goes to the store and buys a dslr. goes online here, gets critiqued on her images, like it is serious or something. Then she notices the other billions of images online, and realizes they are a dime a dozen. comes back on tpf, looks back at all the photos, processing, whatever. It it suddenly clicks to her. May take two years, maybe three, five? It is all crap.
Many images are purely consumer driven , driven by the economy. CRAP. Doesn't matter how good the images are. CRAP. Critique to you hearts content. They are the byproduct of our system hardly art most of it. So this woman (sorry I called her a chick) starts catching on to this. Look in the gallerys, look at the contests. Mostly CRAP. Copies, of copies of processed copies. It's like a sick joke. how is my photo? Looks great, like all the other billions. That's the critique. which basically means, IT ISNT WORTH A DAMN THING. what are we trying to teach everyone? To make another billion processed images that looks like the other fifteen billion ones? And some take this crap WAY to serious on this site. Like they think they are ansel adams or something themselves. And what is scary is most of the billions of images are probably better than theirs. Yet they give advice, on giving advice, on how things work... 
now lets think about this.......
yep, don't mean a damn thing.

All that matters, is it is worth something to YOU WHO TOOK IT. 

Plastic silverware run off a assembly line fits perfectly well for plastic images run off a assembly line. 

"hey, lets critique and try to make the perfect photo"

hell I dunno, why not just start with trying to make a photo worth something at all...

cheap plastic cellphone cameras are perfect for taking cheap plastic photos. Maybe most people should just do that.

so this woman starts off thinking "hey I want to learn photography!"  
until she realizes, wow, it is all processed crap.
And if you are going to move up from that level, you got to go to animation, video, somewhere else. Really. Even that being overdone to a extent. 
Hardly a thing original anymore. And more you look at others work, more you copy it. crap copying crap.  Not that the work isn't good, but you get to a certain extent, where there is a SO MUCH OF IT, it all become crap. Dime store images, except worth less than a dime.


There is extremely little appreciation for modern photography or the digital processed images that go with it, to put it mildly, it is more on the level of entertainment value or consumer sales than anything. i was just discussing this with another photgrapher a few hours ago, movie to video productions he is. Discussing walking taking photos, i told him it is all a freakn cliche, a cheap processed one. He suggested i look at his website (so there ya go). Ain't none of it real.  i want something new. To get that it has to be old and reborn. He suggested i build on what is already there. Make what is there, even better.
build on what, i couldnt tell ya. Can you build on a pile of crap?

Digital image that never makes it to print, is like critiquing the color texture of a turd right before you flush it. sure, might be a good looking turd, But looks like most of the rest. now pull the handle and send it on it's way.
people caught on to this, "everyone does photography" thinking only a few years back. Now it is closer to "it ain't fukn worth nothn!"

People dont even look at it as real now. you get maybe "that cool" or "neat". i can't even knock facebook anymore i've seen some better photos on facebook recently than on here.

if people stop doing this, it wouldnt shock me at all how many thousand copycat images do you want to make?  Me, this is something else for me. 

sad to say, but you know what it really is? society grew out of it. The difference between having the bottle of milk brought to your door or going to the supermarket and picking one out of the thousand jugs. Promoting the value of photography is like promoting corporate supermarkets and those gallons of milk.  It just wont ever be the same. so you want almond, one percent two percent, chocolate,  skim, dry ....?


----------



## AlanO (Jun 3, 2014)

*Saying Thank you

Some potential questions:

Did someone take the time to "critique" your photo? 
*
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/black-white-gallery/352420-onlookers.html

OP coming from the same guy that doesn't acknowledge C&C on his own photos. 

Good Luck!


----------



## snerd (Jun 3, 2014)

Bribrius.......... I refuse to give in to your pessimism. So there. You, you............ that's what you are!!


----------



## bribrius (Jun 3, 2014)

snerd said:


> Bribrius.......... I refuse to give in to your pessimism. So there. You, you............ that's what you are!!


yeah yeah, sorry. I had that little convo with him. walking with my camera, read this thread.  That is what came out.


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 3, 2014)

If I like something, I say that. I may or may not point out a few things which make me like it but, if I say "I like it", that means, as a whole, I dig it; don't change anything. 

I think long, drawn out explanations as to why someone likes something are more an ego stroke for the person making the comments. If someone says "Wow, I like how there are no flaming puppies in this picture", that comment may very well have some merit, but is it helpful at all? Beyond "don't put flaming puppies in your photos" it doesn't really amount to much.

What is important to like, and what is important to dislike?

If I don't like something, I really do try to point out why. If I like it? Saying I like it is enough...


----------



## limr (Jun 3, 2014)

bribrius said:


> snerd said:
> 
> 
> > Bribrius.......... I refuse to give in to your pessimism. So there. You, you............ that's what you are!!
> ...



Well, I for one thought it was a fantastic rant! I love a good rant. 

The funny thing I thought about while reading your last paragraph about milk is how at least around here, milk and grocery delivery is THE THING to do now. 

Film sales are up. Vinyl and turntable sales are way up. Grocery and milk delivery services are expanding. People are mail ordering everything (just from a computer now instead of a Sears Roebuck catalog.)

Everything old is new again.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Jun 4, 2014)

limr said:


> The funny thing I thought about while reading your last paragraph about milk is how at least around here, milk and grocery delivery is THE THING to do now.
> 
> Film sales are up. Vinyl and turntable sales are way up. Grocery and milk delivery services are expanding. People are mail ordering everything (just from a computer now instead of a Sears Roebuck catalog.)
> 
> Everything old is new again.



Huh, I hadn't thought about this. Interesting.


----------



## nzmacro (Jun 4, 2014)

Well I'm new here and let me just check up on something. 

Just going through a few photography books here, ahhhhhh who exactly are you, I can't find ya. Do you judge for National Geo by any chance. Sure sounds like it. I know what I like, I have opinions and am aloud to express those opinions, just like you are doing here as long as they fall within the rules. Maybe I'm just not as famous as you I guess.

There is one thing I know, I'm just ecstatic that you are not a bird photographer (we could have real fun with you), because some of those I call elitist as well. I avoid them like a plague and should have avoided this post as well ......... when will I learn. 

Danny.


----------



## snerd (Jun 4, 2014)

nzmacro said:


> ................ should have avoided this post as well ......... when will I learn.
> 
> Danny.



Oh, group therapy is mandatory. For everyone. Pass it on!


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jun 4, 2014)

Guys guys enough already. This is going no where. 

Admin if you could and would I suggest adding another sub-forum for 'in-depth' critiquing. Something like a 'photo clinic'.

This should resolve most of the issue here and everyone can continue to post and like...and for those who wants some in-depth critique for whatever reasons like going for competitions, advise on commercial applications, going for photography distinctions or whatsoever can post in that sub-forum so that those who are familiar in that area can advise. 

I sincerely wish everyone can continue to built a conducive environment here by mutually respecting the differences in each other's view and refrain from personal attacks or passing any derogatory remarks.


----------



## manaheim (Jun 4, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> If I like something, I say that. I may or may not point out a few things which make me like it but, if I say "I like it", that means, as a whole, I dig it; don't change anything.
> 
> I think long, drawn out explanations as to why someone likes something are more an ego stroke for the person making the comments. If someone says "Wow, I like how there are no flaming puppies in this picture, that comment may very well have some merit, but is it helpful at all? Beyond "don't put flaming puppies in your photos" it doesn't really amount to much.
> 
> ...



Oddly, I mostly agree with this.

I know where Lew was coming from, but... as I have been watching this thread, I've been realizing that most of the people who post pictures that "I think are good", are people who know EXACTLY what they are trying to do and are putting out a quality image. binga, mishele and erose come to mind. 

When they post an image, it's always going to be GOOD. Depending on the person, I may like them more or less depending on the subject, but in the end I feel like these are people I cannot contribute much to other than to say "I really like this" or "I really don't [like this]".

For people a little less skilled, I find myself usually feeling like I can help tell them how to better execute my interpretation of their intended vision... and then I could say if I liked or didn't like what they have so far... but I often feel like I can't be SURE what they're trying to accomplish and who am I to make such assumptions? Who is anyone, really?

So yeah... the more I do this... the more I fall into the category of "I can identify what is good. I can identify what I like. I can articulate those things effectively, and I feel like it isn't really my place to do so."


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 4, 2014)

manaheim said:


> Oddly, I mostly agree with this.



I knew you'd come to your senses...

:mrgreen:


----------



## AlanKlein (Jun 4, 2014)

Half the issues with C&C is the photographer who posts the picture. The photographer can't ask for a critique and then argue back to the person when they give you their opinion. Usually it's responses like: "Well, I couldn't get closer to the subject." or "My lens wasn't long enough" or "Well, the lighting was bad." No one really cares what problems you have as a photographer. The photo must stand on it's own. Trying to explain away a critique gets you no where. You learn nothing if you do that.

Also, what happens when you're defensive, no one wants to give you an honest critique. Who wants to be told your critique doesn't matter or is wrong. So you post simple platitudes like, "Nice work."


----------



## limr (Jun 4, 2014)

AlanKlein said:


> Half the issues with C&C is the photographer who posts the picture. The photographer can't ask for a critique and then argue back to the person when they give you their opinion. Usually it's responses like: "Well, I couldn't get closer to the subject." or "My lens wasn't long enough" or "Well, the lighting was bad." No one really cares what problems you have as a photographer. The photo must stand on it's own. Trying to explain away a critique gets you no where. You learn nothing if you do that.
> 
> Also, what happens when you're defensive, no one wants to give you an honest critique. Who wants to be told your critique doesn't matter or is wrong. So you post simple platitudes like, "Nice work."



Fair enough - sometimes people get defensive. BUT, sometimes they are also just trying to explain why something happened, which is a different thing than making excuses for it. 

Just as some people get defensive about critique, some critiquers also get defensive if the OP says "Thanks, but I prefer my own crop" or processing or whatever. Does the poster have to agree with every critique? But if they don't, they sometimes get treated as ungrateful wretches instead of someone who has a right to have an opinion about their own photo. 

It's a two-way street. The burden for effective C&C doesn't lie solely on one side or the other. People should be clear about what kind of feedback they are looking for when they post a picture. But when critiquing, people should also think about how they express themselves. It is possible, after all, to be direct and clear without being insulting. Being respectful even with harsh criticism is not the same as sugar-coating.


----------



## Overread (Jun 4, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> If I don't like something, I really do try to point out why. If I like it? Saying I like it is enough...




Yes and no - depends on the experience of the person you're talking to. Just saying you like something to a new photographer doesn't teach them anything; the same as saying you dislike something. The explanation of what elements you do like  - of what works in the photo is just as valuable (as a form of critique) as what you dislike and why. 

It's something we oft forget; the beginners need just as much guidance on what is wrong as what is right.



limr - to add to that often the back and forth debate/discussion that forms around critique can be even more valuable; sometimes getting the person giving to elaborate in more detail or simply the person being critiqued starts to appreciate what is said. Or heck the original critique comes to actually agree that their impression and comment might have been wrong within the context of the photo. 
Sadly all to many react in a hostile nature on both sides and once its a fight that's it all value is lost.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 4, 2014)

AlanKlein said:


> Half the issues with C&C is the photographer who posts the picture. The photographer can't ask for a critique and then argue back to the person when they give you their opinion. Usually it's responses like: "Well, I couldn't get closer to the subject." or "My lens wasn't long enough" or "Well, the lighting was bad." No one really cares what problems you have as a photographer. The photo must stand on it's own. Trying to explain away a critique gets you no where. You learn nothing if you do that.
> 
> Also, what happens when you're defensive, no one wants to give you an honest critique. Who wants to be told your critique doesn't matter or is wrong. So you post simple platitudes like, "Nice work."



part of this Is situational with me. I posted a photo the other day of a wasp. Now if someone told me ten things involved with that which leads to needing a macro lens, well I don't have a macro lens. I actually do what you speak of a lot, as to shut down the direction the critique is going. There is no point in critiquing something of mine on things I already know are wrong, or that are out of my control. It is a waste of both parties time. I have said wrong lens before as well. Reasonably. No problem with the critique bring up a problem with the photo, but it should be clear what the options are that was available. Saying it is wrong, when no other option was available does no good as I cant make that photograph correct by that standard.  while there is a technical problem it is one I literally could do nothing about. Critiquing is I thought for improvement. If it is something you cant do anything about at the time, there is no way for that line of critique to aid in improvement.
For instance you tell someone to shoot something at a different time of day, negative effects in the photo from light or something. But the moment being captured is at THAT TIME it was shot. Well how is that even beneficial? If you say bri I see this, this , this wrong with lighting. Well, the shot was at 12 noon. It is what it is. if you can explain a way to do it different at 12 noon instead of saying it is wrong and it should have been at 3 oclock that would make sense. They aren't excuses, they are realizations of situations. The final image is the one taken at the time, with what is available. using the resources the best you can for the situation presented.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 4, 2014)

just a quick add, I've also posted before critiquing photos along the lines of "for what you had to work with you did well". Because I try to take this into account what the photographer had for a situation at the time. To me, that matters. I have also liked photos, with problems, knowing the photographer made the best out of the situation despite flaws in the photo and still came out with a presentable photo. To me, it all factors in.


----------



## Overread (Jun 4, 2014)

bribrius - sometimes you've got to clearly outline what settings, situation, conditions, camera, lens you used all at the start. If you provide little to no information up-front and if you provide no understanding in words of what you do and don't already know as weaknesses in the photo then people will bring up the obvious. If you want to avoid that check the link in my signature - the first one. Read through it - the more information you put up front about a shot the more relevant critique will be to your specific situation. If you go further and give your thoughts on the faults and on what you wanted and what you think is wrong you can again get even better critique. 

Put nothing up and you're risking it all on luck as to what you get back.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 4, 2014)

Overread said:


> bribrius - sometimes you've got to clearly outline what settings, situation, conditions, camera, lens you used all at the start. If you provide little to no information up-front and if you provide no understanding in words of what you do and don't already know as weaknesses in the photo then people will bring up the obvious. If you want to avoid that check the link in my signature - the first one. Read through it - the more information you put up front about a shot the more relevant critique will be to your specific situation. If you go further and give your thoughts on the faults and on what you wanted and what you think is wrong you can again get even better critique.
> 
> Put nothing up and you're risking it all on luck as to what you get back.



true. I also speak of methodology. I don't normally ask for critique now anyway.
If you concentrate on just having great photos here, you will have a lot of crappy photographers only posting their best photos. People will post to appease. I was told recently to only post my "best" work. why? i couldn't tell you my best work doesn't really explain my problems I have in my photography. But if you concentrate on just final image you aren't making photographers in my opinion. You are making people only post their best images and most of them could be more luck than skill.  If you concentrate on photography, you will have a lot of improving photographers that end up turning out more great photos. Final image as first priority being a methodology, is better left to contests and commercial applications and is not conducive to learning environment.

your teacher when you were in school learned more from what you got wrong on your test about you, than what you got right. And your progress wasn't just considered on the one test you decided to turn in, but on your entire scope of work including the ones you didn't do so well at.


----------



## Overread (Jun 4, 2014)

When you're learning and they say post your best they mean if you took 50 shots of a wasp on a flow you show the best ones of that set - not every one - not the last or first, but the one that came out the best. And then you work upon those to improve your best, because as you improve your best your worst also improves as well. 

That said if you're learning and after input then sure post your weaker shots for critique and feedback. 

Posting yourbest and only your best is really only for if you're going professional and want a good clear well presented portfolio


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2014)

In a group discussion or lesson, oftentimes the poorer efforts reveal as much as the better efforts. Same when it comes to privately reviewing your contact sheets/proof sheets/digital downloads/entire takes from whole shoots. On second- and third-visit shoots, it really pays to go back and review what you shot on earlier trips to the same location, to see what you did BADLY, so you can figure out a way to get better shots at places you didn't have success earlier. Same thing with C&C where a person posts 4,5,6 frames and asks, "What can I improve on?" Those types of posts will often have some weak, some better images, and the weaker ones will often be the ones that will give the most VALUE as sources of feedback and C&C comments.

I think this is a case where the poorer examples have much more value, and the entire group can see the "wrong way" to do something, and a lot can be learned by the mistakes. Famous inventor Thomas Edison has a couple famous quotes about how mistakes are learning opportunities. One issue that exists today with digital shooting is that many people immediately discard and forever delete mistakes/not-so-goods/half-baked results, and never really LOOK AT their mistakes, never use their less-than-best efforts as guides, as tools, to address weak areas. With film and contact sheets, we always had a record, the good mixed in with the bad.

I think the weaker shots, which tend to be the majority of shots we all make, are probably the ones that provide the most fodder for C&C and for learning what hurts shots the most. And because of that, that's one reason I think the advice, "post one or two frames at most" is often wrong for the beginning level shooters who actually come here looking for suggestions to improve. For those people, I like to see 10,15,20 shots (admittedly on another hosting site or their web pages) so I can see enough shots to get a feel for what they are doing, how they shoot, if they make the same mistakes over and over, and so on.


----------



## Overread (Jun 4, 2014)

Derrel you raise a good point on teaching, but sadly many people don't want to critique 10 or 20 shots - one has to socially be accepted by the group before the group is willing to invest that might time and effort into such an undertaking. Or you've got to make it very clear in the opening post that you're showing the shots collectively and are after a collective assessment. 


On the subject of poor shots I often find that shots I thought were bad right after I Take them are often not all that bad after a day or two. It's not that they magically got better, but that often you can more easily realise the good when you've not got the 10001 things you did  wrong (or think you did wrong) in your mind.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 4, 2014)

Overread said:


> Derrel you raise a good point on teaching, but sadly many people don't want to critique 10 or 20 shots - one has to socially be accepted by the group before the group is willing to invest that might time and effort into such an undertaking. Or you've got to make it very clear in the opening post that you're showing the shots collectively and are after a collective assessment.
> 
> 
> On the subject of poor shots I often find that shots I thought were bad right after I Take them are often not all that bad after a day or two. It's not that they magically got better, but that often you can more easily realise the good when you've not got the 10001 things you did  wrong (or think you did wrong) in your mind.



Yes. My numbers are actually representing two, distinct, actual TPF C&C seekers; regular posters offering 3,4,5 or 6 frames, which is VERY common on "people" sets like wedding sets, or maternity sets, senior portraits, and so on, and people are free to offer C&C on as many or as few frames as they feel like doing. 

And then we get the the first-time, or beginning posters who often show up, and provide 10 frames or so, or link us to a page where they have 10 to 20 shots, something like that, and ask for a "What do I need to work on? How am I doing". For those people, the ones showing in bulk, I think the C&C they deserve/need is typically more generalist, like, "You need to frame more tightly," or, "Watch out for really bright backgrounds, and take close-up meter readings," and other basic tips & tricks kind of commentary. Those types of people might, or might not become TPF regulars. I expect that whether we "recruit" them, as Lew mentioned, depends on how much value they perceive they can get here.


----------



## table1349 (Jun 4, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > Oddly, I mostly agree with this.
> ...


Oh great, he will be hard to put up with for at least a week now.


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 4, 2014)

AlanKlein said:


> Half the issues with C&C is the photographer who posts the picture. The photographer can't ask for a critique and then argue back to the person when they give you their opinion. Usually it's responses like: "Well, I couldn't get closer to the subject." or "My lens wasn't long enough" or "Well, the lighting was bad." No one really cares what problems you have as a photographer. The photo must stand on it's own. Trying to explain away a critique gets you no where. You learn nothing if you do that.
> 
> Also, what happens when you're defensive, no one wants to give you an honest critique. Who wants to be told your critique doesn't matter or is wrong. So you post simple platitudes like, "Nice work."



The flip-side to that is when someone is so brutally frank that is sends people to the door.

There used to be a guy on the HDR forum; long since banned. He had difficulty explaining what might be wrong with a photo, so he would impart wisdom-filled little nuggests like "You should stop posting until you learn what you're doing. This is horrible".

An "honest critique" is meaningless if it's not also "constructive"...


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 4, 2014)

Overread said:


> Yes and no - depends on the experience of the person you're talking to. Just saying you like something to a new photographer doesn't teach them anything; the same as saying you dislike something. The explanation of what elements you do like  - of what works in the photo is just as valuable (as a form of critique) as what you dislike and why.



Well, this brings me back to the point I made about flaming puppies. If I like that there are no flaming puppies is a photo, does it really help the photographer to mention that? I think not.

So, we'll just go ahead and disagree on this point...



> It's something we oft forget; the beginners need just as much guidance on what is wrong as what is right.



I think I was clear when I stated that I will always try to point out the reasons I think a photo needs work. But if it's good, it's good.

No drawn out manifesto about why it's good will have much impact...


----------



## otherprof (Jun 4, 2014)

I like this post. Oh, wait, forget it.


----------



## table1349 (Jun 4, 2014)

I was going to say I like bunnies..........



But then I would have to give some long winded explanation about bunnies, what makes them likeable, their good traits, their bad traits, what makes a good bunny, what makes a bad bunny and what makes an outstanding bunny.  It ain't worth it.  So I am just going to not say anything about bunnies and just look at the pretty picture.


----------



## JacaRanda (Jun 5, 2014)

SCraig said:


> There is no rule that only one response in a topic is allowed; if one person posts a simple "I Like It" response then others can still post in the same thread. There really is room for both and there really is no limit to how many people can respond to a topic. If one person posts a simple "I Like It" then all is not lost, someone is still able to post a comprehensive critique if they are so inclined. Feel free to post all the comprehensive, exhaustive critiques that you desire, and others can post their "I Like It" posts. It works quite well that way.



BINGO on 10 cards!


----------



## Designer (Jun 5, 2014)

As for me, there are still other factors that influence my critique.

Sometimes the photograph is just not that good.  So if I perceive the photographer is rather inexperienced, I'm more likely to give a one-word comment.  Furthermore, if the photographer has already admitted that the photograph is one of his/her favorites, then any negativity would be seen as generally disparaging toward the photographer.

Another type of post is a photograph that is superb, and IMO the photographer needs no further help.  Additionally, if the specific question is about editing, I probably won't write anything because my own editing skills are quite low.  

Yet another factor is my own mood/current state.  If I have the time and energy, I can usually come up with something, but if I am rushed, or it's late, or whatever is happening at my house, I might not take the time to offer much in the way of critique.  Along that line; I might view a photograph on one day, but then offer some comments a day or so later.


----------



## Designer (Jun 5, 2014)

Derrel said:


> I think of TPF as a collection of people ..



Hmm...  Derrel's typing in Times New Roman font.  I wonder what he MEANS by that?


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 5, 2014)

I think Vince made a good suggestion, that there be somewhere on the board for more in-depth critique. That might be a good option for those who would like that as an alternative to the Photo Galleries, where as stated what's posted are "Photos submitted by members for general display or critique" ('general' maybe being a key word). 

The reality of it is that everyone has jobs and kids and whatever and might only post a quick 'like' or a brief comment. And this is a busy site where a lot is posted every day so only so much in the way of comments might get posted on any given photo.


----------

