Here's the thing: Not everyone was happy hearing negative things about their photographs, and most negative comments about photographs have said more about the criticizer than the image.
So, what is to be gained by allowing critical comments? Photographers are offended by comments from people whose opinion they neither trust nor crave, and those who offer the comments are offended because their criticisms are usually met with approbation of one sort or another, including moderator deletion.
How do you attract critical review from those who you trust and whose opinion you crave? Not by posting the image on an internet forum. It too often becomes a test of the psychological toughness of the image poster and a challenge to Those Who Must Be Right to demonstrate how they can have something useful (read: critical) to say about anything.
Our guidelines have been variously construed. Some believe that the prohibition on criticism when not specifically allowed should apply to both positive and negative comments, based on the general (and, in could be argued, archaic) definition of the word. Some believe that even their negative comments, because they come from a source of honest expertise (as they see it), should be considered positive criticism.
There's just no way to parse that out in practice. So, here's how I do it: If the person who posted the photograph complains about a criticism, I delete it. If they don't complain, I take it as tacit acceptance of same. To me, that's the only practical approach. The poster can determine the thickness of their own skin, and the value of the comments they received for themselves.
In one recent example, the comment was probably based on the criticizer's poor monitor calibration. But do we really want the photo threads to become a discussion about monitor calibration? Another member complained to me that I should have deleted the positive comments, too. But I don't think anybody really wants that.
The point of image sharing is not to learn how to be a better photographer by having internet experts tell me how bad mine are. (For one thing, I already know that.) The point of image sharing is to bring people along on a journey, and we travel a path when people we trust are in front of us, leading the way. So, I love seeing superb images in the image-sharing forum--I think seeing those images provides all the instruction those forum threads can provide. We have other forums for how-tos.
This is not a case of providing a "safe place" for "snowflakes". I long ago posted one of my images of San Antonio Mission Concepcion, and received a comment about micro-contrast. It's been many years since that comment, but I still remember it, and not in a good way. Even though it may have been true (and I'm not remotely prepared to argue that it isn't), it was not received in a spirit of helpful encouragement. I'm sure the person who made the comment would claim a spirit of helpful encouragement, and that might have been his intent, but he can't know how I'll receive it. Am I a snowflake in need of a safe place? If so, we all do.
So, once again, my practice going forward: If I happen to see a comment that is clearly nasty, I might delete it on my own, but otherwise I will respond to complaints as being the primary evidence of the sort of criticism the guidelines disallow.
This is not an invitation to criticize freely and challenge the image poster to complain. Read what I wrote above and follow the principle.
Oren and Ralph might approach it differently.
Rick "doing his best" Denney
Rick: In general I agree with your thoughtful approach, in summary to let the original poster determine whether to leave criticisms/suggestions attached to his or her post. However I disagree with one premise which I have cropped from your post.
In other sub-forums we specifically ask questions and look for responses, for example in the Darkroom sub-forums. I don't see the image sharing forums as any different in that regard. Many of us include the phrase "C&C welcome" below posted images, specifically because we are interested in comments and critiques. If I, for one, posted images but didn't want any response, I would view that as an exercise in ego fulfillment, nothing more than a desire to put my images out there in the ether. Even after almost 50 years of this hobby/passion (whatever it is to each of us) I can still learn, and still make adjustments.
Let me give one recent example. I posted several images I made on a vacation trip, and to my surprise received a suggestion from one of the most respected members of the Forum on possible improvements via cropping. Admittedly, from another member I might have simply said "ho-hum" and done nothing more. But in this case I decided to try the suggested crops. The exercise made me think about why I chose my original framing, and I did compare the revised versions. In the end I preferred my original and one of the suggested versions. The point is that I learned something, which was why I post images in the first place. This is exactly the same reason that I bring prints to the monthly meetings of my local Photographer's Forum, to hear comments and critiques.
Clearly there is a skill to useful critiques. While it is nice to hear that someone likes an image, it is more useful to know "why" they like it. Similarly, a criticism is only useful if it is followed by a suggestion as to how to improve the image. And of course the original poster must decide which comments he or she values. But I find the exercise very useful.
Indeed there is skill to useful critiques. That skill was being displayed too rarely, which is why the guidelines are the way they are. Had that skill been routinely displayed, the unrest that led to the guideline wouldn’t have bubbled up.
An image is not a question, and being posted in a forum does not seem to me to imply one. In the regular forums, the question is usually explicit—there is a question mark—but even when not it is implied—“do you agree?” That’s why it’s a forum and not a blog.
But an image is a display of work, for sharing. I see no question mark, explicit or implied, unless it is added.
Rick “please invite criticism if you want it” Denney
I think critique is hard to understand as a teaching method until you experience how a paid expert does it.
Good teachers on any level do this.
The recipient of critique becomes empowered, to use the vernacular.
I relate it to improvisation, where each input is positively received, enhanced and provides a 'higher' dialogue.
Chicago's Dell Close is a good example. I learned a lot from his teaching moments.
Tin Can
Perhaps, the poster of an image simply wants to share their image. Tbey are not looking for a critique. However, if o e asks to be critiqued, it can be harsh, but respectful lest it turns away the one asking and causes them to give up their passion.
While I hate everything Hitler, imagine if if he had been accepted to the Vienna Art school? We might very well live in a different world. No WWII, possibly no concentration camps, etc.
My point is that, just because someone puts themselves out there looking for a critique, doesn't mean we act like
a@@holes and shred a persons work. I know many peoe who can't stand Ansel Adams work. Imagine where we would be had someone roasted him on his photos. They would still be great photos, but maybe he would have been content teaching piano his whole life.
Critiques should be asked for and given with respect. Also, the requester might give a critique of their image when they post up to start off the critique session.
My 3 pennies.
This is, IMHO.
If one wants constructive and/or destructive critique about an image it's really easy to say it, it always can be good to have feedback, specially if wanting to learn.
But I feel that the general case is people wanting to share what they crafted, and not wanting a debate about they did, so to me the default context should be "if wanting critique just say it", as it is.
This thread had me thinking, and this morning I had an idea for a new image-sharing thread.
The idea: to have a "Your Best Photograph of [previous month]." Consent for constructive critiques would be implied and discussion of the technical and artistic elements encouraged. One photograph made or developed in the past month would be allowed per poster (I'm not a mod so this wouldn't be enforceable by me, but hopefully that would be understood and adhered to). New work only.
I'm on the way out the door for a day of freelance work so I'll make a thread tonight. Feel free to 'critique' the idea in the meantime .
as my "pal" did with me, how about just make contact with someone you want
a critique from send them the image / show it to them in person or online
and then wait for your unthoughtful/thoughtful response via email message pm
or meet up for tea, coffee, crumpets, meze plate, snacks, devil'd eggs, shrimp and dip
nachos, conversation, vino, brewskis &c..
Bookmarks