i would love to see more traffic (more images) on this site- what does everyone think about doing something to increase the posts? perhaps changing the rules to allow 2 images per week? greg

-- Greg Rothschild (gnr@toast.net), January 17, 1999

Answers

I like your idea personally, but I think the problem might be that there should be more people, not more post. Maybe Philip would give into a direct link from photo.net/photo?

-- Tait Stangl (taits@usa.net), January 17, 1999.

I agree with more pointers. May be I am not very bright but I still do not know how to get from "The photo.net nature photography pages" to this page! I can get to ANY OTHER page except this one. If the link is there it is a well kept secret! Once I went to friend's house and wanted to show him the page. It took me more than 15 minutes by trial and error and knowing that this page resided in the directory of www.greenspun.com I was able to find it. My point is that if I am a regular contributor and I can not find the page on any computer beside mine (bookmarked!) what kind of a chance a newcomer would have? I also understand that Bob has to put up with new people who mess-up the page, and sometimes post unacceptable images (including myself). But IMO it is a risk that the forum should take in order to stay more interesting and to survive.

-- Bahman Farzad (cpgbooks@mindspring.com), January 17, 1999.

Bahman, if you go to http://photo.net/photo/nature, you need to scroll down to reach the hyperlinked line for Image Critique line (hint: it's right above the Travel section). That hotlink will take you to the Rules pages which has a hotlink to the image critique. The path to the nature photography image critique is there; it most certainly is not hidden from the public.

I think traffic here has dropped because many people couldn't handle negative comments about their images (they were taking it as a personal attack rather than criticism about one of their works) or the subsequent flame wars that occured by different camps. Many people take the "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything" stance. I mentioned that most famous artists received tons of criticism, often times to the level of what be described as public ridicule or ostracism.

Let's say an image is posted that is pretty terrible. Fine, I decide to say nothing. Does the photographer learn anything? Probably not.

Of course, I got heavily flamed for my comments and decided to stay away from the image critique because if I couldn't feel comfortable being frank about my opinions, I might as well spare myself the grief. I can't tell who will cry, go ballistic, or just nod in agreement, if I say something less than "wonderful", "great", "beautiful", "I wish I took this shot." People were literally sending me personal e-mail saying "Who made you the expert on aesthetics?!? Nobody ever succeed by getting criticized!!!" Utter bullshit.

I recently dropped by the image critique after many months and posted a couple of comments. In both cases, I stated that the images were frameable quality so I don't expect to get flamed by the photographers in question. Still, dishing out "I like this image" is a bit unsatisfying, and unless the moderator can nurture an environment where true criticism is welcomed, I rather doubt the utility of this image critique forum.

-- Sean Yamamoto (seany@altavista.net), January 17, 1999.

Sean makes a couple of good points that I'd like to add to. As far as critisizing an image is concerned, there are a lot of images here that I don't like. The problem is that some are in areas that I have no interest in. It is a rare day when I post anything about an abstract photo. I don't like abstract painting, and I like abstract photos even less for the most part. Since I am biased against this type of picture to begin with I have no business commenting on such an image. The same goes for a few other types of images as well, but you get the point I'm sure. If I don't like the gonre in general, I don't feel I am qualified to post. The other is when I see something that is the type of picture I would have taken if I had been there. If I like it and can put what I like into works, I post. Sometimes I can't come up with anything but "WOW!" though. If I don't like the image I normally ignore it. Why? If you look at my email address, you will notice I not only don't have a scanner, I don't even have a computer at the moment. Until I can post a picture that will prove I know what I am talking about I'm not going to tell someone what they have posted is bad, unless it is obvious. It prevents the "We've never seen any of your work, so who do you think you are?" type of flames. Provided my wife and I stay in good health and able to earn money, that part will change in a few months. Even so, unless I feel I have done a better job myself, I am unlikely to post negative comments.

-- Brad (reloader@webtv.net), January 17, 1999.

I have to second the comment that this forum can be difficult to find. Sure, I can find it "eventually" after loosing my bookmark, but the links could be more intuitive.

-- Mike Green (mgprod@mindspring.com), January 17, 1999.

I agree that the pages are hard to find. On the other hand I participate in this forum rather than Sunrise because there is so much on Sunrise it is overwelming. I like the limited posts because it is possible to look at each one every week without spending all night. I have decided to make more comments after Frank's little lecture. It is important to comment to make the forum a success. I think I will learn something by putting into words how I repsond to an image. It certainly is important to be civil and carefull but I know I want to know how to improve my shots or help decide if the image is interesting or marginal. It is hard for me to make negative comments but that is a lot of what this forum is about, Constructive criticism. Compared to Usenet groups the people that particpate in this forum are saints. I think each of us novice or pro can identify good work and can provide valuable feedback to the group.

-- Micheal F. Kelly (kellys@alaska.net), January 17, 1999.

I would suggest putting the link on the main photo.net/photo/nature page. There is a section labeled Image Cretique but no link. Just a link to instructions. It does lead one to believe that something has been forgotten.

The key here is to critisize constructively. Netative comments never do any good. If you don't like the shot keep quiet or else say why in a positive constructive way that will help the photographer in the future. I agree that the "I like it" or "I think it is crap" comments are not at all useful and if it was me, I would delete them. The purpose of the forum is criticism. It's just that some people don't know how. Lack of response is also useless. I would suggest that if there is no response after several days that the moderators take it u[on themselves to respond. No one like to be ignored.

I agree " Nobody ever succeed by getting criticized!!!" Utter bullshit."

Cheers

Cheers

-- Bill (Bill.Wyman@utas.edu.au), January 17, 1999.

there seems to be a few common thoughts here: the link from the photo.net site is hard to find (i concur), and making that link easier to find may be the best way to get more traffic here. the question is- am i the only one that wants to see more posts? i post both here and at the sunrise site. i find that the comments i receive here tend to be more helpful in teaching me what to do to improve my skills. i think that the guidelines here (50k, no 'hand of man', no digital manipulation, etc. will keep the posts on track. i have learned a lot from this forum and i am grateful to the maintainers- greg

-- greg rothschild (gnr@toast.net), January 17, 1999.

Yes, yes, criticism should be constructive. What the hell does that mean? C'mon, go look up criticism in the dictionary: "the act or art of analyzing and judging the quality of a literary or artistic work, musical performance, art exhibit, dramatic production, etc." (Unabridged Random House Dictionary).

Now go read a newspaper or magazine review of a restaurant, film, play, book, opera, or sporting event. You will read many examples of, "the coaches stupidly decided to take a time out," "our idiot waiter didn't know that Pinot Noir was a red wine," "the soprano's voice cracked in Act II", etc. ad nauseam.

I nor anybody else ever told anyone they were wasting their time trying to learn photography. However, people started weeping or going on hysterical rampages because someone said "the composition is dull" or "the light is uninteresting" or even "the image is crooked".

If you don't want to hear anyone say anything negative, participate in 4-H or county fair-type events where they use the "Danish system" of judging (judging based on achievement of a certain quality level, thus is possible that everyone or nobody wins a prize; in 4-H and county fairs, though, the standard practice is to present everyone with a ribbon of some sort).

Look, the downturn in this image critique forum's traffic is because of the lack of quality, forthright, and honest criticism for those who really desire it, and those who couldn't stand the heat got out of the kitchen. The hotlink is in the same place it was a year ago and the URL certainly hasn't changed.

-- Sean Yamamoto (seany@altavista.net), January 17, 1999.

Sean

"criticism should be constructive. What the hell does that mean?" It means: give suggestions, tell them how to improve, what to crop etc., after all it is a learning tool.

"However, people started weeping or going on hysterical rampages because someone said "the composition is dull" or "the light is uninteresting" or even "the image is crooked"." These are exactly the usless type of comments that need to be changed. "the composition is dull" corrected to "The composition is dull, but moving to a lower perspective and including more of the great stream would have improved it greatly" is useful. "the image is crooked" becomes "the image is crooked because sealevel is always horizontal. Be aware of it in your future shots". See what I mean?

"Now go read a newspaper or magazine review of a restaurant, film, play, book, opera, or sporting event. You will read many examples of, "the coaches stupidly decided to take a time out," "our idiot waiter didn't know that Pinot Noir was a red wine," "the soprano's voice cracked in Act II", etc. ad nauseam." This is usless. These are reviews and their purpose is not suppose to be used for teaching.

BTW Here is what I found when I looked up criticism.

1. The act of criticizing, especially adversely. 2. A critical comment or judgment. 3. a. The art, skill, or profession of making discriminating judgments and evaluations, especially of literary or other artistic works. b. A review or article expressing such judgment and evaluation. (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition)

Seems many like defination No. 1.

I prefer No 2

""Still, dishing out "I like this image" is a bit unsatisfying, and unless the moderator can nurture an environment where true criticism is welcomed, I rather doubt the utility of this image critique forum." I couldn't agree more.

There is really no right or wrong here and we've strayed a long way from the question.

I for one would like to see more posts. Even I will post soon as soon as my "computer advisor" returns from holiday and helps me get it setup. BTW I have a pretty tough skin so I will welcome your comments.

Cheers

-- Bill (Bill.Wyman@utas.edu.au), January 18, 1999.

I agree with previous posters advocating a more visible link from photo.net. I also feel that an increase in the maximum number of posts per week would be a benefit to the forum. About the critique, I think that if you decide to put your image here for "critique", be prepared that you will hopefully not only get nonsense responses like "nice picture". I think it was Mr.Kolwicz (spelling??), who drew up some guidelines for constructive criticism, and I really want to agree with those. However, it is easy to be rude and scornful when sitting behind a screen at home. Act the way you would, if the person whose picture you are criticising, is actually present. I don't think that the flamers would be so bold when they actually face the other person. If you can't provide constructive comments, don't post a response! This forum generally holds a very high standard of its critique and I haven't actually seen very many flames or nonsense critique. Even though my access to a scanner is poor, I have still learned a lot from reading the posts regularly. Someday I will definitely start posting my images here and I expect them to be criticised. After all, you have to crack a few eggs to make an omelet.

Magnus.

-- Magnus Wahlkvist (magnus@sparta.lu.se), January 18, 1999.

As a relative newby on the forum (since this past summer) I can't comment on the change in volume over time. I gather that there has been some decline. Speaking for myself, I often find that, once the commentary on a particular image has run its course, I am anxious to post another even before the new week comes up on the calendar. Given current volumes I believe that two per week might be appropriate. If improved visibility is achieved for the site and if that results in increased traffic the limit could be set back to one per week.

With regard to the nature of the criticism, I have always accepted and taken consideration of the full range of comments (the good, the bad and the ugly). Most of all I value the constructive comments on how a give image might have been improved. They often contribute most to the desire to hone one's skills.

Thanks to Bob and all participants for the opportunity to view and post images and to receive and to offer comments. As one who also posts images to the sunrise site (generally of non-nature shots) I have found the level of criticism to be somewhat more frank and therefore more useful here.

Regards,

Garry

-- Garry Schaefer (schaefer@pangea.ca), January 18, 1999.

Personally, I decided not to post my egret images after seeing Greg's;)

-- Joe Boyd (boydjw@traveller.com), January 18, 1999.

Oh man...Pick a hot topic and postings really take off. I would like to add myself in the request list for a more visible link (my bookmark is my only pointer also!). I have been following this forum now for a little over two years as a silent participant with only a couple of image postings. The silence is mainly a feeling of inadequacy in the technical skills of photography. I also agree that postings have declined, possibly for similar thoughts from other amateurs. I regularly check for new postings and comments and critiques on the images. This has been an invaluable tool me for learning something none of the books have taught me - perception of picture from the viewer. I have only recently purchased a scanner and look forward with much enthusiasm to posting images here for this forum's critique. Negative comments from this group I hold with high regard; comments from the Sunrise site, I don't give much regard. The spirit in which this forum is conducted is what makes it valuable - people trying to learn from people. As long as people offer critiques in that "spirit," then it really shouldn't matter what words are chosen to convey their thoughts.

-- Robert McCabe (rbmccabe@home.com), January 18, 1999.

Problem number 1 is that this forum is kept secret.

You have to wander the photo.net/photo pages for a while to stumble over the Nature section, and then have to wander the Narure Section for a while to find the image critique forum. Why not make a link to it on photo.net/photo beside the Q&A and nature discussion forum?

It takes me at least five minutes to find this forum from photo.net/photo if I'm not at my home machine and thus don't have it bookmarked in Netscape.

-- Kristian Elof Sxrensen (elof@image.dk), January 18, 1999.

Bullshit. This forum is not secret.

This forum's traffic has decreased in the past year probably because people who couldn't stand the heat got out of the kitchen and those who really wanted the heat couldn't find it here consistently.

If you guys really want to bitch about the traffic volume, send the moderator an e-mail. His e-mail address is at the bottom of every "Post Answer" form. Whatever you do, don't point your fingers at him claiming the "downfall" of this critique forum. Bob has let this critique forum define itself the past year with almost *no* interference. You guys made it into what exists today.

The only thing Bob really doesn't tolerate are folks who can't learn to cut-and-paste raw HTML. He doesn't get paid to do this stuff. He's a volunteer.

-- Sean Yamamoto (seany@altavista.net), January 19, 1999.

Can one carry an intelligent conversation on this forum without being vulgar? Perhaps it is easier to be vulgar that to discuss things intelligently.

-- Bahman Farzad (cpgbooks@mindspring.com), January 19, 1999.

Sean and every one else, as best as I can remember the image critique was apart of the Nature Forum which is linked directly from http://photo.net/photo/, but when the image critique was separated from the nature forum there was no direct link created and so its been since. So I would argue that there does need to be a direct link from the main photo.net pages or even directly from the nature pages, even though you can go to http://www.greeespun.com and click LUSENET and click yet again on Nature Photography Image Critique or go to the nature pages and click Introduction and Rules under Image Critique.

-- Tait Stangl (taits@usa.net), January 20, 1999.

I rather doubt that many of the people posting images for critique are crybabies that have tantrums if they get negative feedback. On the other hand most of them probably prefer negative feedback that includes well thought out solutions for improving the image and most of them probably also prefer the response to have some apparent civility to it. Responses via electronic means always run the risk of having very hard edges. We would go a long way to improving things if we could somehow make our response be the same as if we were standing right next to the person viewing the image they had created.

-- Rod Sorensen (sorenser@mfldclin.edu), January 20, 1999.

I agree that it is not easy to find the critique page. I only recently accidently found it.

I find it quite useful. I think it could stand a two image per week limit.

As for having an intelligent conversation without being vulgar... sorry Mr. Farzad but you don't get to decide what is vulgar and what is not.

-- Jeff Kelley (thocker@ix.netcom.com), January 22, 1999.

I think I agree with Bill's definition of 'criticism'. At least, my fragile ego would like the treatment he describes most. Contrary to the opinions of others, I HAVE seen critiques here that were blatantly rude, condescending, and, otherwise, unecessary. I agree that negative comments should be qualified to include posible remedies; or, at the least, to include a clarification of what the offense actually was. This would maintain this forum as a learning tool; if nothing else, it would also display a little courtesy, but I'm gathering from some other posts that this may be a trite objective...

Having said this, I'll also add that I have largely given up on the Sunrise site, as the quality of WORK here (not just the quality of criticism) seems (to my eye) to be of a much higher caliber here. I use this site as a learning tool, and also as inspiration, as some contributers here truly have a unique perspective on their subject.

-- Scott (bliorg@yahoo.com), January 23, 1999.

Bill, sorry, I was being a bit flip when I asked what is constructive criticism. I did all those things (e.g., advise different strategies for cropping, focusing, DOF, lighting) and people still got mad. Hence, my decision to say only that an image is frameable and offer one nit (if only to show that my brain is actually functioning).

I don't know what Bob (our moderator) thinks exactly about the utility of this image critique forum. I mean, does one really get useful and original feedback outside of what your nearest photographer friend might mention. As far as I can tell, the most consistent help this critique forum offers is species identification.

-- Sean Yamamoto (seany@altavista.net), January 24, 1999.

As a non-camera person, I have been given the greatest gift of all---appreciation. This site is heaven for me. I love the criticism as it gives me some perspective on what I am looking at. I found the site quite easily, as I surf looking for good photography almost every night. I have quite a few of your images on my computer and use them in a slide show and feel blessed every time I turn it on. I am very interested in images of roses as they are one of my favorite things. If anybody knows of any good sites for good rose images, please Email me the URLs. Thank each and every one of you for the joy you have brought into my life. I am a custom picture framer and work with art every day, but I feel like I see "God's" art through the lens of your cameras. Thank you, Frances Parker

-- Frances Parker (fran.parker@prodigy.net), February 06, 1999.