This has bothered me for a while and for some reason it seems to be getting worse these days. I am referring to assumptions made by commenter's during voting on what may or may not have been done to a photograph. What ever happened to judging a photo on the merits of the photo and NOT what you assume was or wasn't done to it during processing?
It just seems to me that, based on comments I have received and have read, that more and more people are looking at photos and guessing at what may or may not have been done to it and voting/commenting on that assumption and not the photograph itself - composition, technical merit, etc.
When did processing become the main focal point? Or did I wake up and hit my head on something and am just babbling incoherently?
I think maybe the assumptions are an attempt to make what is considered a constructive comment. If I write "this is a blurry mess with zero detail," a bunch of people will complain about how no one ever leaves comments that help them improve or contain constructive advice. If I make a guess and say "looks like you used too much neat image," then maybe that's a better show of telling you how to fix what I don't like. I don't know. It's nearly impossible to leave comments these days without someone complaining about them so I'm surprised they occur with much frequency at all.
I think post processing became the focal point of the commenters because it's become the focal point of the photographers. Take a look around at the number of threads that emphasize shooting it right the first time in comparison to the number of threads asking people to PS polish their turd. I've seen a few people scoffed at for suggesting that the photo actually be taken in a better way (better light, better focus, better exposure, etc) rather than just apply a Photoshop bandaid. I'm certainly not saying that PS isn't a valuable and necessary tool but I do feel like the focus on this site is very PS heavy.
I think post processing became the focal point of the commenters because it's become the focal point of the photographers. Take a look around at the number of threads that emphasize shooting it right the first time in comparison to the number of threads asking people to PS polish their turd. I've seen a few people scoffed at for suggesting that the photo actually be taken in a better way (better light, better focus, better exposure, etc) rather than just apply a Photoshop bandaid. I'm certainly not saying that PS isn't a valuable and necessary tool but I do feel like the focus on this site is very PS heavy.
Anyway, just my two cents back. :)
Well. Look where you are. On the internet. Photography is just a distraction from the real job of sitting in front of a computer :)
I've stopped suggesting that pictures should be taken properly. I've been slapped down enough for my neo-Luddite 'take a properly exposed picture in good light' nonsense. If it doesn't get scoffed at, it just gets ignored as the'yeah, but really, come on lets get real, how do I fix it in Photoshop' discussion rolls on.
ps, please, please, please, post the unicorn picture.
I take it that from what you're saying that the comments are from more than one person and referring to the same thing with your photo? If you looked at your photo with an objective eye would it be easy to assume that what they are referring to may in fact look like what they think has been done?
I think post processing became the focal point of the commenters because it's become the focal point of the photographers. Take a look around at the number of threads that emphasize shooting it right the first time in comparison to the number of threads asking people to PS polish their turd. I've seen a few people scoffed at for suggesting that the photo actually be taken in a better way (better light, better focus, better exposure, etc) rather than just apply a Photoshop bandaid. I'm certainly not saying that PS isn't a valuable and necessary tool but I do feel like the focus on this site is very PS heavy.
Good points!
Wait, if I respond to you instead of the OP am I guilty of being off topic? Hmmm. Guess I'll avoid any discussion and see what the "topic" becomes.
... It's nearly impossible to leave comments these days without someone complaining about them so I'm surprised they occur with much frequency at all. ...
I was looking at some challenge entries that I had commented on recently to compare/evaluate my perspective (using as a learning tool), and I nearly started a thread mentioning that I rarely see any of the long-term experienced photographers on this site chiming in with opinions/comments anymore on challenge photos.
It's a shame really. Time for commenting is certainly a factor I'd imagine... An occasional negative PM perhaps? Although I've not gotten any of those (negative PM's) recently and I'm not usually sugar coating my comments.
Hopefully this post isn't too far off the track of the OP. My apologies if it is.
This has bothered me for a while and for some reason it seems to be getting worse these days. I am referring to assumptions made by commenter's during voting on what may or may not have been done to a photograph. What ever happened to judging a photo on the merits of the photo and NOT what you assume was or wasn't done to it during processing?
It just seems to me that, based on comments I have received and have read, that more and more people are looking at photos and guessing at what may or may not have been done to it and voting/commenting on that assumption and not the photograph itself - composition, technical merit, etc.
When did processing become the main focal point? Or did I wake up and hit my head on something and am just babbling incoherently?
well the processing has become an very important point in digital photography since it's easy accessible to a lot of people, but only in rare occasions processing can save bad taken photo ... so i think it's important to recognize the processing on photos/pictures/images and then accordingly validate the result so you can get the big picture, it's really becoming more and more complex i must admit ...
I think maybe the assumptions are an attempt to make what is considered a constructive comment. If I write "this is a blurry mess with zero detail," a bunch of people will complain about how no one ever leaves comments that help them improve or contain constructive advice. If I make a guess and say "looks like you used too much neat image," then maybe that's a better show of telling you how to fix what I don't like. I don't know. It's nearly impossible to leave comments these days without someone complaining about them so I'm surprised they occur with much frequency at all.
I think post processing became the focal point of the commenters because it's become the focal point of the photographers. Take a look around at the number of threads that emphasize shooting it right the first time in comparison to the number of threads asking people to PS polish their turd. I've seen a few people scoffed at for suggesting that the photo actually be taken in a better way (better light, better focus, better exposure, etc) rather than just apply a Photoshop bandaid. I'm certainly not saying that PS isn't a valuable and necessary tool but I do feel like the focus on this site is very PS heavy.
Anyway, just my two cents back. :)
what mk said. especially the bolded part.
I feel your pain though. BUT, try to remember that they are all opinions, and 99% of the commenters are commenting in good faith and trying to be helpful. Some are better than others, but still, at least they are taking the time to view the pictures and leave their opinions.
Two other points.
One, Gordon (I think) said it best the other day -- getting votes and comments is a privilege, not a right.
Also (and not necessarily in reply to the OP, but just a periphery issue), it is a comment box, not a critique box. "Nice" is a comment. "Good shot" is too. I think we need to step away from the plate and stop expecting long, detailed, tactful explanations and remember that the box is for "comments."
I don't expect long detailed comments. But comments left that demonstrate that processing was the only thing looked at, an assumption is made on what that processing may or may not have been (incorrectly I might add) and then told the shot was voted down due to that erroneous assumption - processing was the main issue for that voter. That is what disturbs me.
For the record I am not complaining about comments per se, just the fact that comments seem to be more and more on just the assumed processing of a shot as opposed to the merits of the shot itself.
I don't expect long detailed comments. But comments left that demonstrate that processing was the only thing looked at....
How on earth can the processing be the only thing that was looked at? Perhaps it's the only thing they feel qualified to comment on? Perhaps it's the most obvious feature?
But how could someone see the processing without seeing the photo?
Sorry, I can't follow you here.
Anyway, my ADHD is kicking in; I smell popcorn, so I'm moving on :)
I don't expect long detailed comments. But comments left that demonstrate that processing was the only thing looked at, an assumption is made on what that processing may or may not have been (incorrectly I might add) and then told the shot was voted down due to that erroneous assumption - processing was the main issue for that voter. That is what disturbs me.
For the record I am not complaining about comments per se, just the fact that comments seem to be more and more on just the assumed processing of a shot as opposed to the merits of the shot itself.
Acutally, it could just be that processing was the only thing they felt they could offer any advice on. Maybe they thought the rest of the shot was awesome, but were simply offering you something easy to fix so that it could be even better?
... Also (and not necessarily in reply to the OP, but just a periphery issue), it is a comment box, not a critique box. "Nice" is a comment. "Good shot" is too. I think we need to step away from the plate and stop expecting long, detailed, tactful explanations and remember that the box is for "comments."
I like this view that it is a comment box - sometimes I forget that myself. It does beg a question however, if it's just a comment (i.e. "Nice"), why is there a tick box to say it was "helpful"? :D
That is my point - they can't see what processing was done, yet they are assuming - again, incorrectly, what it was and voting/commenting accordingly, as demonstrated by the comment left.
Example comment: The area you cloned in this shot wasn't done as well as it could have been. It looks funny. 4
This is pretty close to a comment I received recently. The area in question was not cloned, it happened to be the natural variation of the person's skin texture. It didn't even look cloned, just not exactly the same as the adjacent exposed skin.
Example comment: Based on the wires in the background you over sharpened this shot. See how they look striped? 3
This is also almost verbatim. The wires were not striped and the shot was not even sharpened. I don't know about electrical lines in the area of the commenter, but here they have a silver cable and black cable twisted together. The striped (assumed over sharpened) appearance was in fact a true representation of the wire - a silver cable with a black high voltage line twisted around it.
Comments are just an explanation of how a person voted. They may be inaccurate in terms of describing your photo but they aren't incorrect because they're describing what the voter based their vote on. Just consider them clues to your score.
Comments are just an explanation of how a person voted. They may be inaccurate in terms of describing your photo but they aren't incorrect because they're describing what the voter based their vote on. Just consider them clues to your score.
