Brian Legge
Veteran
I apologize if you feel like I singled you out Ranchu, that was not at all my intent (and I intentionally attribute the deleted comment).
To be explicit here, I'm not talking about a specific photo in the thread. I'm talking about the critiques in general.
To be explicit here, I'm not talking about a specific photo in the thread. I'm talking about the critiques in general.
Ranchu
Veteran
Ya, and 99% of the critiques in that thread said 'why', a much higher percentage than a non 'brutal' critique thread, so what you're implying isn't true.
FrankS
Registered User
Has no one ever heard the term "brutally honest"? Idioms are not meant to be taken literally, so providing a dictionary definition of brutal, is off the mark.
I have posted recently that perhaps my wording choice was not optimal.
I have posted recently that perhaps my wording choice was not optimal.
Ranchu
Veteran
It's your word choice being used against you, nobody can really object to this
"Please don't misconstrue my intentions. I used the word brutal simply to differentiate the nature of my thread from the usual critiques here where either people offering critiques are too polite to say anything too negative (or say nothing for fear of insulting), or when someone does freely speak their mind, the poster of the pic being criticized gets all hurt, melodramatic, and argumentative."
..which is clear.
"Please don't misconstrue my intentions. I used the word brutal simply to differentiate the nature of my thread from the usual critiques here where either people offering critiques are too polite to say anything too negative (or say nothing for fear of insulting), or when someone does freely speak their mind, the poster of the pic being criticized gets all hurt, melodramatic, and argumentative."
..which is clear.
FrankS
Registered User
Yeah, I thought I had it covered.
Bingley
Veteran
I posted two photos on the other thread and got some useful (to me) feedback, including some critiques that appeared to be thoughtful. I figured I knew what I was getting into, and was prepared for a bashing. But I don't find the feedback on Flickr to be conducive to improving one's photography (at least, not in the groups I usually post to), so being on the receiving end of more robust and unvarnished commentary seemed like an idea whose time had come.
That said, what I think the other thread revealed was that there is no consensus on RFF about what the substance and tone of a critique should be, whether "brutal," 'honest," "candid" or whatever. I think others posting above have said something similar.
Maybe the way forward is for members who want their photos critiqued to start their own threads, perhaps with a short statement about what they're trying to accomplish, and invite comments from other members, including questions about the photos so there could be some sort of dialogue (I like that idea). Anyway, my two cents.
That said, what I think the other thread revealed was that there is no consensus on RFF about what the substance and tone of a critique should be, whether "brutal," 'honest," "candid" or whatever. I think others posting above have said something similar.
Maybe the way forward is for members who want their photos critiqued to start their own threads, perhaps with a short statement about what they're trying to accomplish, and invite comments from other members, including questions about the photos so there could be some sort of dialogue (I like that idea). Anyway, my two cents.
FrankS
Registered User
Sounds like a good plan. Maybe an indication of how "robust" a critique is desired would be useful.
Bingley
Veteran
Is that a rhetorical question? I think the discussion here has been directed to the other thread as a whole, and not to any particular contributor. I think what posters here have pointed out is that a lot of the other thread turned into a debate about what constituted criticism, which distracted from the actual critiques of photos. I don't necessarily think it's rude if someone I've invited to critique a photo of mine says "delete it."
paulfish4570
Veteran
your friends reflect you, Ned. 
Dan Daniel
Well-known
Because they are friends in the flesh, and any intention and distinction has been honed over weeks/months/decades of interactions.
Try this: go to a bus stop. Turn to the stranger next to you and tell him that his haircut is crap and he should be ashamed to show his ugly head in public.
Why are you so dense that you can't understand a basic fact about social dynamics??
FrankS
Registered User
Passive-aggressive, Paul?
FrankS
Registered User
Analogy fail: the stranger hasn't asked for any opinion of his haircut, let alone a robust one.
The " are you so dense?" part is just rude. Oh, the irony!
Dan Daniel
Well-known
OK, add to the bus stop analogy the person being a nodding acquaintance who he discusses the weather with every few days. He mentions that he got a haircut yesterday. Now go...
And I wasn't being ironic. I was being deliberate. He asked about the difference. He must be socially retarded to not get it; I bet he and his friends still punch it other in the arm to show how tough they are, etc.
daveleo
what?
There is a correlation emerging here between what people suddenly show up in a discussion and how confrontational the discussion becomes beyond that point.
Ranchu
Veteran
Correlation is not causation, dave. So unfortunate that people don't always agree with you. You could call me a retard with a bad haircut if you like.
burancap
Veteran
And your example really is not good, or are you not familiar with Danny Sullivan?
paulfish4570
Veteran
har!, frank.
i can be actively aggressive, too ...
i was yanking Ned's chain, but pointing out the obvious, too.
context of criticism is important, if one is seeking criticism ...
i can be actively aggressive, too ...
i was yanking Ned's chain, but pointing out the obvious, too.
context of criticism is important, if one is seeking criticism ...
FrankS
Registered User
; )
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
We seem to be getting locked into a discussion about the fairness or not of the comments that are being posted in the mentioned thread and the behaviour of the participants ... I have no problem with either so far.
What I'm searching for (with help) is a way to contain this trend of totally honest critiquing and make it easily available for those that want it. Possibly a forum actually dedicated to it and named as such. The term 'brutal' doesn't really worry me either as the context it's being used in identifies/suggests it as totally honest but not necessarilly aggressive or violent.
Carry on ... this is good!
What I'm searching for (with help) is a way to contain this trend of totally honest critiquing and make it easily available for those that want it. Possibly a forum actually dedicated to it and named as such. The term 'brutal' doesn't really worry me either as the context it's being used in identifies/suggests it as totally honest but not necessarilly aggressive or violent.
Carry on ... this is good!
FrankS
Registered User
We seem to be getting locked into a discussion about the fairness or not of the comments that are being posted in the mentioned thread and the behaviour of the participants ... I have no problem with either so far.
What I'm searching for (with help) is a way to contain this trend of totally honest critiquing and make it easily available for those that want it. Possibly a forum actually dedicated to it and named as such. The term 'brutal' doesn't really worry me either as the context it's being used in identifies/suggests it as totally honest but not necessarilly aggressive or violent.
Carry on ... this is good!
Thank you Keith!
It's kind of funny that some are complaining about harsh comments in a thread with a clear description of what to expect. This could work if comments deemed (by some) to be over the top, were simply ignored. No comments on comments allowed. This is what's interfering with that thread, IMO.