I've decided to slightly modify my requirements for pictures which I'll leave critiques on. This is mostly meant as a "carrot" approach rather than a "stick". :)
I will only comment on pictures which do not have "N/A" in the photographer comments section. It doesn't have to have much, but I want to know a bit of why you took the picture and perhaps some really rough PP steps. Not only does it help my critiques, but it shows me you are willing to put something into the equation as well. EXIF data (aperture, ISO, shutter speed) is helpful as well, but I won't require that.
I put this in a new thread because you obviously won't know if you qualify scorewise until after you normally leave your own comments (although I guess you could edit it after).
We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
I'd just like to encourage people to put this information on every entry. Remember that the ultimate purpose of this site is to help people learn more about photography, and this information is pretty essential if someone is to learn from (and not just "enjoy") your photo.
It's also handy just in case validation is requested on your photo -- having the editing steps written out already is a real time-saver.
The only time I don't enter this info is if I'm right up against the submission deadline and don't have time.
I think I get a bit overdetailed in some of my descriptions but I do it because I like it when others do it. I like reading about how and why people took their pics. I like to hear how the shot may have evolved from something radically different or what kind of scary or stupid circumstances someone put themselves in to get the shot. Its nice to have a wider perspective on a photo from the point of view of the photographer.
I'd just like to encourage people to put this information on every entry.
I'm 100% with ya. Just trying to find a way to encourage the practice...
The Critique Club has the same policy : )
The Critique Club only requires EXIF data .. some of us have been trying to get people away from N/A as the information that can be provided enables a better critique.
When we critique less and say it is because of having no details we get told off. If we don't critique a picture because it has no details we get told off. But the details do allow so much to be said ..
Hey DrAchoo, I have a question for you. I received a comment from you on a current challenge, it was very helpful and pointed out somethings I could change/work on and you showed me your score which was much higher than my actual score. My actual score is around 5.5, but if I wanted to get a comment, 1) Do you comment on the same image twice? 2) If you do, then do you try and explain why it was average to the masses or do you go into more detail into the entry. I am just curious, I have a pretty good grasps on why voters are giving it mostly five and sixes, I would have probably given it the same. I am just wondering if you have come across this before.
I'd just like to encourage people to put this information on every entry.
I'm 100% with ya. Just trying to find a way to encourage the practice...
The Critique Club has the same policy : )
The Critique Club only requires EXIF data .. some of us have been trying to get people away from N/A as the information that can be provided enables a better critique.
When we critique less and say it is because of having no details we get told off. If we don't critique a picture because it has no details we get told off. But the details do allow so much to be said ..
Oh well
{/rant off}
Kari
Oh, I guess I've heard so much talk about it I thought that policy was in place ... : (
Hey DrAchoo, I have a question for you. I received a comment from you on a current challenge, it was very helpful and pointed out somethings I could change/work on and you showed me your score which was much higher than my actual score. My actual score is around 5.5, but if I wanted to get a comment, 1) Do you comment on the same image twice? 2) If you do, then do you try and explain why it was average to the masses or do you go into more detail into the entry. I am just curious, I have a pretty good grasps on why voters are giving it mostly five and sixes, I would have probably given it the same. I am just wondering if you have come across this before.
Just give me a buzz after and I'd be happy to take a look. Were you one of the people in my little experiment? For the rest, I took the very first 15 pictures that came up in "The Number 10" and used a timer to force a 30 second look, then I left a comment.
... I took the very first 15 pictures that came up in "The Number 10" and used a timer to force a 30 second look, then I left a comment.
Your technique bears a similarity to one I heard was used by John Muir to do his homework when he was in college ... something involving his books, a large wooden clock, and a conveyor belt ... : )
Were you one of the people in my little experiment?
yes, but now my mouth tastes like metal. any explanations doctor?
I was more just curious if you ended up commenting a second time how your comments differed.
Were you one of the people in my little experiment?
yes, but now my mouth tastes like metal. any explanations doctor?
I was more just curious if you ended up commenting a second time how your comments differed.
Hmmm, I don't recall doing many twice, but I also don't recall changing my opinion too often. Sometimes with some insight from comments I feel different. Take artoole's Apollo shot in Stationery. I didn't leave a comment, but at first I thought it was a simple setup and a simple picture (would have likely given a 6 or maybe 7). After reading the setup, I was quite a bit more impressed and would have gone with the 8 or 9.
