Critique Review

[RayPA]

It looks like Critique #1 is nearing the end (not that it has to). As promised, this is the review thread where participants and other members can sound off on what worked, what didn't, and what improvements (if any) we should make.

I have some questions:

To the participants:

Was the thread/critique worthwhile?
Did you feel it helped you at all?
What could improve the experience?
Would you like to have more participants or less participants, or was 5 participants about right?
Would more images work to make the critique better (the one image was a first-time limitation)?
Would you join/participate in another thread/critique?


To All (Participants included):

Are the guidelines appropriate?
Would you like to see the guidelines implemented as the standard for critique threads?
Do you want to see these threads managed/moderated, or would you prefer that any member be allowd to open a critique thread, using these guidelines?
Did the critique look like it might help you as a photographer?
The thought is to have several threads open for participants to join, would you be interested in joining a critique?
What number of participants would you like to see?
If we were to open threads for 3, 5 and 7 participants, which would you join?
If we were to open threads for 1, 3 and 5 images, which would you join?
Would you like to see critique threads with different variables opened simultaneously (e.g., 5-person/1-image, 5-person/3-images, 7-person/3-images, etc.)?

Also
Don't limit your responses/replies here to these questions only.


The plan is to get some more threads opened before the weekend (I know I want to get in on one!), so please let us know how you feel, ASAP.

TIA!





.

 

[ampguy]

My responses

My responses

inline--

I have some questions:

To the participants:

Was the thread/critique worthwhile? YES
Did you feel it helped you at all? YES
What could improve the experience? Allow higher res images
Would you like to have more participants or less participants, or was 5 participants about right? 5 was good, between 3-6 should work as well.
Would more images work to make the critique better (the one image was a first-time limitation)? Unless part of a theme, one image per submission, unless the goal is to find some specific global behaviors that one wants critiqued, like the quality of their lens or why their exposures are always the way they are...
Would you join/participate in another thread/critique? YES


To All (Participants included):

Are the guidelines appropriate? YES
Would you like to see the guidelines implemented as the standard for critique threads? YES
Do you want to see these threads managed/moderated, or would you prefer that any member be allowd to open a critique thread, using these guidelines? Moderated at first
Did the critique look like it might help you as a photographer? YES
The thought is to have several threads open for participants to join, would you be interested in joining a critique? YES
What number of participants would you like to see? < 7 per thread
If we were to open threads for 3, 5 and 7 participants, which would you join? any, but > 7 may be too many.
If we were to open threads for 1, 3 and 5 images, which would you join? 1, unless it were a theme.
Would you like to see critique threads with different variables opened simultaneously (e.g., 5-person/1-image, 5-person/3-images, 7-person/3-images, etc.)? Each image should stand on it's own. It's # of images, not # of images per person that matters to me, unless per above exceptions.

Also
Don't limit your responses/replies here to these questions only.

Great work Ray, I see a lot of potential here, and have been on a lot of audio and photo review forums.

I think those who feel only another musician can have a valid critique of someone's music, or that only a another pro photographer can critique a photograph, have their heads up their butts. But that's my opinion.

It looks like Critique #1 is nearing the end (not that it has to). As promised, this is the review thread where participants and other members can sound off on what worked, what didn't, and what improvements (if any) we should make.

I have some questions:

To the participants:

Was the thread/critique worthwhile?
Did you feel it helped you at all?
What could improve the experience?
Would you like to have more participants or less participants, or was 5 participants about right?
Would more images work to make the critique better (the one image was a first-time limitation)?
Would you join/participate in another thread/critique?


To All (Participants included):

Are the guidelines appropriate?
Would you like to see the guidelines implemented as the standard for critique threads?
Do you want to see these threads managed/moderated, or would you prefer that any member be allowd to open a critique thread, using these guidelines?
Did the critique look like it might help you as a photographer?
The thought is to have several threads open for participants to join, would you be interested in joining a critique?
What number of participants would you like to see?
If we were to open threads for 3, 5 and 7 participants, which would you join?
If we were to open threads for 1, 3 and 5 images, which would you join?
Would you like to see critique threads with different variables opened simultaneously (e.g., 5-person/1-image, 5-person/3-images, 7-person/3-images, etc.)?

Also
Don't limit your responses/replies here to these questions only.


The plan is to get some more threads opened before the weekend (I know I want to get in on one!), so please let us know how you feel, ASAP.

TIA!





.

 

[RayPA]

Thanks Ted! Both for your feedback and participaing! 🙂


.

 

[oscroft]

Just a few thoughts. I followed the first few critiques, and made an attempt to at least mentally formulate the kind of critique I would offer was I involved in it. And now I'm taking part in one, and am enjoying it.

As well as getting some very useful opinions from others about my photo, what I'm also finding it helps me do is think a lot more about what it is I like about other people's work and why. Normally I'll just instinctively like or dislike a photo, and often think little more than "Wow, that's brilliant" (or whatever). But having to make two comments about each pic really makes me think, especially if it's not a subject matter that I would normally spend much time on. And the more I learn to see in the work of others, the better I'll become myself, surely.

As for the format, 5 contributors and only 1 pic each seems just about right to me. If there were more pics (either more contributors or more pics per contributor), then critiquing them all might become too much like work instead of pleasure. I think the "put up or shut up" ratio of 1 to 4 is ideal.

Best,

 

[oscroft]

I think those who feel only another musician can have a valid critique of someone's music, or that only a another pro photographer can critique a photograph, have their heads up their butts. But that's my opinion.

I agree 100%. Even my mum can offer me helpful opinions of my photos, even though a successful one for her is one that hasn't got her thumb in it 😉

 

[nomade]

To the participants:

Was the thread/critique worthwhile?
Yeah

Did you feel it helped you at all?
Yes...

What could improve the experience?
Not sure, but it's simple, let's keeep it so

Would you like to have more participants or less participants, or was 5 participants about right?

that's a good number, allows the variety of opinions, and in the same time everyone gets to really participate.

Would more images work to make the critique better (the one image was a first-time limitation)?
I don't think so, Because there can always be more threads...You see everyone gets to concentrate on 4 photos for 4 different people, less is best for sure, let's not make it chaotic

Would you join/participate in another thread/critique?
Absolutely.

To All (Participants included):

Are the guidelines appropriate?
Yes

Would you like to see the guidelines implemented as the standard for critique threads?
Yeah i've no objections.

Do you want to see these threads managed/moderated, or would you prefer that any member be allowd to open a critique thread, using these guidelines?
Moderated works fine for now.

Did the critique look like it might help you as a photographer?
Yeah in a couple of ways, you concentrate well on a specific number of photgraphs, which allows you dig in deep, share the experience of the other photographers, and then re-look at your work with other people's eyes...So there's an effort made from both sides, that certainly can provoke an improvement.

The thought is to have several threads open for participants to join, would you be interested in joining a critique?
Well yes.

What number of participants would you like to see?
4-5

If we were to open threads for 3, 5 and 7 participants, which would you join?
5, 3 if there shoudl be more than one image/participant

If we were to open threads for 1, 3 and 5 images, which would you join?
5

Would you like to see critique threads with different variables opened simultaneously (e.g., 5-person/1-image, 5-person/3-images, 7-person/3-images, etc.)?
That would be good, variety is good for a large community. Depends also on what the members think they like best.

---------------------------

It's brilliant, it works for me, i enjoy browzing the threads even if i'm not a participant...

4 different, well though views on one photograph helps indeed, more than that you'll get lost, you see nothing better than small groups, if you relaly want to grow, or to improve, whatever your goal is...It's exemplary, let's keep it up this way.

I'm still learning, and you knwo this is what i was just missing, i've a gallery here, people comment sometimes, sometimes not, and people don't have to compose some critique there, but this makes one commited to do so...And there's no opportunity for that where i live, at least i didn't notice it.

 

[Rich Silfver]

Since you asked... 🙂

Do you want to see these threads managed/moderated, or would you prefer that any member be allowd to open a critique thread, using these guidelines?

Frequency
Right now it seems very random when new critique threads open up.
That in itself is not a problem if these threads are opened by anyone - but if they are opened only by a moderator then there is obviously a schedule that he/she sticks to (as opposed to opened by anyone who suddenly feels a need for some critique).

Therefore, either;
a) A schedule and only the crit moderator can create them, or
b) No schedule and anyone can create them

(My vote would be for 'b')

What happens if the person moderating/opening them a) gets bored, b) goes on vacation, etc, etc?

Theme
I think it would be nice to have themed critique threads. That way photographers who are 'into' either landscape, street, portraits, colour, b&w, etc, etc can expect to receive critique from people taking similar photos.


Moderation
See above.

In a perfect world (well, my version of it.. 🙂 ), this would happen:
1) Beg Jorge to create a Critique Forum,
2) Place a sticky in that forum with the 'rules text' and any naming conventions,
3) Anyone creating a new critique thread copies and pastes that rule text into their critique thread when they start it.

'Critique Moderation' would then be simply to make sure people obey by the rules, that threads are correctly named, etc, etc.

Naming Convention
Maybe a sequential number is not the best for threads where you manually assign the number. Down the road people are bound to create duplicates, skip numbers, etc.

How about: "CRIT:" + [Day's date "YYMMDD"] + ["Theme Name"]
Ex: CRIT: 060804 Sunsets

 

[RayPA]

Since you asked... 🙂

Do you want to see these threads managed/moderated, or would you prefer that any member be allowd to open a critique thread, using these guidelines?

Frequency
Right now it seems very random when new critique threads open up.
That in itself is not a problem if these threads are opened by anyone - but if they are opened only by a moderator then there is obviously a schedule that he/she sticks to (as opposed to opened by anyone who suddenly feels a need for some critique).

Therefore, either;
a) A schedule and only the crit moderator can create them, or
b) No schedule and anyone can create them

(My vote would be for 'b')

What happens if the person moderating/opening them a) gets bored, b) goes on vacation, etc, etc?

Theme
I think it would be nice to have themed critique threads. That way photographers who are 'into' either landscape, street, portraits, colour, b&w, etc, etc can expect to receive critique from people taking similar photos.


Moderation
See above.

In a perfect world (well, my version of it.. 🙂 ), this would happen:
1) Beg Jorge to create a Critique Forum,
2) Place a sticky in that forum with the 'rules text' and any naming conventions,
3) Anyone creating a new critique thread copies and pastes that rule text into their critique thread when they start it.

'Critique Moderation' would then be simply to make sure people obey by the rules, that threads are correctly named, etc, etc.

Naming Convention
Maybe a sequential number is not the best for threads where you manually assign the number. Down the road people are bound to create duplicates, skip numbers, etc.

How about: "CRIT:" + [Day's date "YYMMDD"] + ["Theme Name"]
Ex: CRIT: 060804 Sunsets

Good suggestions, Rich. I particularly like the naming convention idea. I like the thematic idea too. We'll have to try one of those. Regarding the moderation, right now I've been creating them. Todd and I have been PM'ing and he's welcome to start them too. It would be great to get this to the point where the rules/guidelines are universally accepted/assumed and the critique threads can move on their own.

🙂

 

[RayPA]

I followed Raid's lead and posted the image I used in Critique #2 in the gallery.

It sounds like the 5 participant/ 1 image format is working well. I agree. My initial thought was three images, but I think Oscroft is right. It might start to feel more like work! I'd forgotten just how much fun it is, and how much work it is (for just one image!).

🙂

 

[Rich Silfver]

And you begged Jorge for - and got - a Critique forum? 🙂

 

[Warren T.]

First of all, this whole new critique development on RFF is really great, thanks to all the creators and innovators.

I like everything that I see so far.

My personal preference is for "open" participation, with no theme. While I see the value in having participants who are "into" the particular theme, I also see value in opinions and critiques from people who are not specialist in that theme.

Just my two cents. 🙂

Regards,

Warren

p.s. Ray, I will participate soon. Thanks for the reply to my PM.

 

[RayPA]

First of all, this whole new critique development on RFF is really great, thanks to all the creators and innovators.

I like everything that I see so far.

My personal preference is for "open" participation, with no theme. While I see the value in having participants who are "into" the particular theme, I also see value in opinions and critiques from people who are not specialist in that theme.

Just my two cents. 🙂

Regards,

Warren

p.s. Ray, I will participate soon. Thanks for the reply to my PM.

I prefer the open critique too. I think it's great to enter into a critique and get up tp 5 different genres to look at. How cool is it to get to critique a portrait, a landscape, street shots, still life, candids, etc., in one thread (aah, variety!). However, I don't see the harm in trying out thematic critiques. At some point the whole process of initating critique threads will be done by the membership and if a group wants to critique based on a theme, then so be it. 🙂 There will probably always be open critiques, too.



.

 

[RayPA]

Critique Forum!

Critique Forum!

And you begged Jorge for - and got - a Critique forum? 🙂

Yes I did and yes we got one! 🙂 For all of you who are unaware, you can now find all the Critique threads conveniently located in their own forum. No more searching, just click Forum when on the Home page and scroll down to Critique!

Thank you Jorge and Joe!
🙂



.

 

[RayPA]

We've completed 10 critiques! I just posted the 11th. Any of you who have not joined one, it is really a lot of fun--definitely try it out when you get a chance.

Also, if you have any thoughts on other themes or the frequency of new critique threads let me know. I'll try to post a couple a day (depending on demand), and at various times (for the various time zones). We've a forum now with a sticky with the guidelines, so I'll take my cue from you. If you're going to create a critique thread, please copy and paste the rules/guidelines into the first post (as I've been doing).

🙂

 

[FrankS]

"I think those who feel only another musician can have a valid critique of someone's music, or that only a another pro photographer can critique a photograph, have their heads up their butts. But that's my opinion. "

Not a very respectful way of expressing your opinion.

 

[rbiemer]

Why yes, it was fun and helpful.
More specifically, I think the numbers of both people and photos was good. One person more or less would probably work well also but any larger change in the number of people would either become unwieldy or not give enough different opinions about each photo. One photo per participant is good.
I think if some one wants a critique of multiple images, the smoothest way to do that would be to ask others either generally via a thread in General Discussion or by PMing specific folks.
I like the thematic critique threads that have appeared and hope that the free form threads can continue as well (I like both ideas!).
I got some useful input about the shot I posted--as mentioned in the original thread I am using the suggestions to hopefully make a better image--and will post the "final" version into my gallery.
I will be happy to do this again.
Rob

 

[RayPA]

Why yes, it was fun and helpful.
More specifically, I think the numbers of both people and photos was good. One person more or less would probably work well also but any larger change in the number of people would either become unwieldy or not give enough different opinions about each photo. One photo per participant is good.
I think if some one wants a critique of multiple images, the smoothest way to do that would be to ask others either generally via a thread in General Discussion or by PMing specific folks.
I like the thematic critique threads that have appeared and hope that the free form threads can continue as well (I like both ideas!).
I got some useful input about the shot I posted--as mentioned in the original thread I am using the suggestions to hopefully make a better image--and will post the "final" version into my gallery.
I will be happy to do this again.
Rob

Rob, I dropped in on the portrait and landscape threads, and thought they were great! I liked seeing the various interpretations of the themes.

🙂

 

[RayPA]

Hi All,

We’ve got over 50 critique threads in the books.😱 Here are some of my observations and thoughts, please let me know yours:

We seem to have a strong core group that really enjoys participating in the critiques. This is great. However, is everyone who wants to participate getting an opportunity to do so?
On occasion, I’ve received a few requests to add threads, but on the whole I’ve settled on irregularly posting one new thread every two or three days (sometimes longer, sometimes less). I’ve considered taking this down to once a week, but maybe adding three threads instead of one. Maybe regular scheduling is better?

Five participant threads seem to work best. Five images is a lot of critiquing. Bravo to everyone for managing this. The critiques seem to follow that the critique-ers reply to all images in one thread. Do the participants feel that they are getting enough feedback?

We’ve had some misunderstandings in the thematic critique threads regarding whether an image fit the theme of the critique, so I’ve backed off on those and kept the theme open. Would anyone like to see the thematic critique threads again?

I’ve added a couple of guidelines regarding image size and an image posting timeframe, any suggestions regarding the guidelines?


Thanks!

 

[iml]

Would anyone like to see the thematic critique threads again?

I would like to see this.

Ian

 

[raid]

I like the current critique sessions, and I hope that more RFF members try it out. I also feel that the same group of participants seems to care enough to join. I sometimes fight the urge to join so that others hopefully participate. Sometimes, I wish that a voice comment could be uploaded to state my comments. It makes it more personal. Is this feasible or does it reuire a lot of memory and other technical "stuff" ?

I believe that while it is great to state the positive comments, it is also very important to offer another perspective. It is OK [in my opinion] to say "I would have maybe taken this image that way". This actually may be against the current rules for the critique sessions.Sometimes, a participant gets furious and feels insulted when someone states some perceived negative aspect of a posted image. Why? I want more room for constuctive critique.

Ray, you have done a great job in this all. Thank you.



I would like to see a critique/advice session "What's Wrong With This Image" in which we could post not-so-good images that may benefit from the advices of RFF members.



Raid