Mark Schretlen
mostly harmless
This is a little off topic. Before even starting the critique, consider the way things are presented on the interweb. Twenty years ago the viewer would first see a photograph in a publication or in a gallery as a "full sized" image rather than as a tiny thumbnail. The interweb viewer "edits" thumbnails by deciding which one to view at a larger size. Perhaps there is a critique penalty for the image when the viewer is disappointed and feels shortchanged with the larger image.
Twenty years ago galleries and publications chose to bring forward the best images from previously vetted photographers. A chosen photographer may edit 1000 images for every single photograph submitted. The publication would publish a single photograph for every 1000 images submitted. That means for every image published perhaps 1,000,000 were considered. Today with the interweb anyone can self-publish an image with perhaps as many as 10 to 100 images considered for every one "published". The consequence of this is an overwhelming glut of mediocre images on the web. I do not envy a viewer looking for photographic inspiration on the web. The task becomes more daunting when one realizes that many inspiring images look pathetic as thumbnails and many pathetic images look amazing as thumbnails.
Twenty years ago galleries and publications chose to bring forward the best images from previously vetted photographers. A chosen photographer may edit 1000 images for every single photograph submitted. The publication would publish a single photograph for every 1000 images submitted. That means for every image published perhaps 1,000,000 were considered. Today with the interweb anyone can self-publish an image with perhaps as many as 10 to 100 images considered for every one "published". The consequence of this is an overwhelming glut of mediocre images on the web. I do not envy a viewer looking for photographic inspiration on the web. The task becomes more daunting when one realizes that many inspiring images look pathetic as thumbnails and many pathetic images look amazing as thumbnails.
Mcary
Well-known
To me a grade of "C" can be either a bad thing or a good thing? Example if everyone gives you a "C" well that just means they don't really care, basically you're receiving an average grade for an average picture. Now on the other hand if you get a "C" average because some people really love the image and give it an A while others think it really sucks or even better hate it so they give it a D or an F well then you've done your job as a photographer.
Ming Rider
Film, the next evolution.
As a species it's in our nature to categorise 'everything'.
Sparrow
Veteran
... if one is on a hanging committee or marking exam work yep, one works to strict criteria. But those are nothing like the rules you posted ... and not really applicable to the interweb