Originally posted by jmsetzler: Originally posted by jimmsp: [i]John, I think most of us want to do a good job on critiquing, and want to do for those who ask for it. A thought. You keep with your distribution process as you have outlined it so far. If I am critic # 1 of 20, in week one I get the photos that have placed 1,21,41,61, etc. If however, photo # 21 has not asked for a critique, I automatically move to # 22. That way #22 gets one extra one - a bonus. And if I were #22, I would love the extra critique. After #22, I return to my list, doing # 41. All you need to do is to have an identifying check box on a photo's summary page to let us know if the artist wants a critique or not. I suppose at worst, a person makes that his first statement in the Image Details box.
Jim, in the beginning we will not be able to have the 'identifying' checkbox for the photo critique requests. This may be possible in the future, but it will not start out that way. If we prove to be successful with our critiques I will definitely look for better ways to do it.
I don't feel comfortable asking the site administrators for changes to the site until I feel that we can make this process work. I would feel really bad about asking for those changes before I felt confident that the 'critique club' is going to stick together....
[/i]
How about just using the Image Details box as a place to request a follow on critique? Jim
Jim, I think the automated check box would work best, but I just can't get that implemented right away.
I would like to start out by critiquing everything. I don't think that would really be a major task in the beginning. I think it will be less than 20 photos per person. Do you think that would be a problem until we see if this process is going to work?
Originally posted by jmsetzler: Jim, I think the automated check box would work best, but I just can't get that implemented right away.
I would like to start out by critiquing everything. I don't think that would really be a major task in the beginning. I think it will be less than 20 photos per person. Do you think that would be a problem until we see if this process is going to work?
I don't think the number will be a problem, esp if we have a few days to get it done. I just don't want to spend valuable time where someone really doesn't care - or worse, really doesn't want it.
Well, initially I think it's ok to start with 20 photos for each critic. Then we'll see how it works and if it's manageable. But in the long run I still think I would like to have max. 10 photos for in-depth critiques.
I have two ideas as possibilites to limit the number of photos: 1. Write a "site news" that everybody who wants in-depth critique sends John an email and only photos of the people who did that will be distributed to the in-depth critics. I think it has to be done just once because either someone wants in-depth critique in general or not. And it doesn't require extra programming by drew/langdon.
2. Only consider photos for in-depth critiques of photographers who are in-depth critics themselves :-)
Originally posted by jimmsp: Originally posted by jmsetzler: [i]Jim, I think the automated check box would work best, but I just can't get that implemented right away.
I would like to start out by critiquing everything. I don't think that would really be a major task in the beginning. I think it will be less than 20 photos per person. Do you think that would be a problem until we see if this process is going to work?
I don't think the number will be a problem, esp if we have a few days to get it done. I just don't want to spend valuable time where someone really doesn't care - or worse, really doesn't want it. [/i]
jim, i agree with this. I just don't have a good solution idea yet. I believe that allowing the voter to ask for the in depth critique would probably generate about a 95% rate of requests... I'm still thinking...
Originally posted by stephan: Well, initially I think it's ok to start with 20 photos for each critic. Then we'll see how it works and if it's manageable. But in the long run I still think I would like to have max. 10 photos for in-depth critiques.
I have two ideas as possibilites to limit the number of photos: 1. Write a "site news" that everybody who wants in-depth critique sends John an email and only photos of the people who did that will be distributed to the in-depth critics. I think it has to be done just once because either someone wants in-depth critique in general or not. And it doesn't require extra programming by drew/langdon.
2. Only consider photos for in-depth critiques of photographers who are in-depth critics themselves :-)
On your number two option, I beleive that would give us maybe two or three photos per week to critique. I haven't received an in depth critique on hardly anything ever....
Your number 1 option has given me another idea. I will think about that some too...
I finally had time to go through this thread from the top. I like the idea, but I'm also worried about being over-extended if I were to commit to more than 10 or so a week. I might wait a couple of weeks and see what other folks are doing first. I highly approve of going back and doing the just-finished challenge -- it's where most of the site communication should be happening anyway. It will be helpful to have not only the EXIF and photographer's comments, but all the other comments as well. It also makes the assignments easier. One thing which would help me know what's expected would be for you to write/post 1 or 2 example critiques. You're welcome to have at any of my photos if you want...
Originally posted by stephan: Well, initially I think it's ok to start with 20 photos for each critic. Then we'll see how it works and if it's manageable. But in the long run I still think I would like to have max. 10 photos for in-depth critiques.
I have two ideas as possibilites to limit the number of photos: 1. Write a "site news" that everybody who wants in-depth critique sends John an email and only photos of the people who did that will be distributed to the in-depth critics. I think it has to be done just once because either someone wants in-depth critique in general or not. And it doesn't require extra programming by drew/langdon.
2. Only consider photos for in-depth critiques of photographers who are in-depth critics themselves :-)
I like a version of #1. I think that everybody should be notified that such a venture is under way. Perhaps Drew could conduct a quick poll on whether someone wants to be critiqued or not - similar to the other polls. That would give us a reality check on participation ( 100% - 75%- 50%- ). I'll guess it will be about 90%.
Originally posted by jmsetzler: Originally posted by jimmsp: [i]Originally posted by jmsetzler: [i]Jim, that is an excellent idea... i will pursue that one immediately.... :)
It's up already. Now that's quick!![/i]
Thank Drew :) [/i]
I was almost going to "accuse" Drew of reading this thread, and anticipating your request. This is the kind of response, however, that makes this site the best one going.
Originally posted by jmsetzler: Any more volunteers?
I'd be interested in seeing the results of the poll. Best results will probably come on Monday after everybody logs on to post their pics on Sun night and see the results on Mon am.
John, i would really like to be involved in this, like someone had said earlier, i comment on the few that i vote on first and then never get to comment on the others, i think this is a great idea..count me in.
Ok... that brings the total number of volunteers up to 23. I think this is enough to start with for now. I will be compiling a list of everyone who has volunteered and I will be making a post in a new thread tonight sometime. We have a few more things to do before we can get started :)
Thanks to everyone who has volunteered :) This should be fun...
