Why some and not others?

[rab3rd]

I have been pondering this question for a few months now.

People come to photo forums like this one for several reasons, amongst those reasons is to learn. In order to learn people seek the constructive criticism of those that they preceive to be better than they are at a particular aspect of photography, or photography in general.

During my time as a member of this and several other photo forums I have observed what appears to me to be a "fan based" CC system. I use the work "fan" for lack of a better term, it is early and I havent had enough coffee yet.

Fan does not always mean a well liked photographer. On this forum in particular I have observed on more than one occasion a, lets say, less than capable newbie jump in with great enthusiasm and get hammered for one thing or another. The newbie then gets flustered and tries to defend their position which only makes it worse.

One of two things happens, they "take their ball and go home" or they keep trying. The latter of the two will then be lavished with good CC for a long time to come. Which is great for them.

Then there are the others, those that obviously have a higher level of skill and understanding that post photos. Some of these photographers are just sharing but most I guess would be looking for some CC to improve their skills.

Within this second group I observe that if the photographer is shooting a particular type of photography they are more likely to get CC than other genres may receive. This I can understand becasue the forum may have more members that are adept at that particular genere.

What I have yet to understand is why a group within the second set cant get CC to save their lives. They post photographs without asking for CC and get none. They post asking for CC and get none. While this obviously is a general statement it seems to apply more often than not. When its the latter the CC seems mostly to come from memebers that are new as well. Not from the veterians amongst the memers.

This is not to imply that the newer members dont have any CC to offer, it seems to imply that the veterians arent willing to offer for whatever reason. Maybe they are tired of saying the same things over and over, maybe they look and its so bad they dont want to say anything. I dont really know.

This isnt a rant about me and my post, although I have suffered this same fate. Its really and observation and has peaked my curiosity about the dynamics of online communities.

I would very much be interested to hear what others among us think about this dynamic.

[ldelacruz]

Many factors come into play when I give a critique. Attitude, skill level, genre, are they charging for their work and do they have a blog are a few factors.

[mmuhlenkamp]

A lot of times people don't seem to respond well to REAL constructive criticism. I know I enjoy receiving it (as long as it is constructive and not just "this sucks"). That said, it also takes a lot of time to write out an actual thoughtful and helpful response, sometimes I don't see anything very apparent that could be improved upon, or it would just be a matter of personal taste so I don't respond. I'm sure this is true for the real veterans (I'm more of an advanced hobbyiest I think). Also, there are times when I don't feel qualified enough to REALLY critique something if it's an area of photography I'm not as experienced in.

[jfoureyes]

I've been on internet photo forums since 1996, it seems to be the way it works on all of them....some folks CC, and some folks don't. It's never been a question I've considered before...Now you got me curious.

[rab3rd]

Right? Honestly I started wondering about it because I wasnt getting much CC even if I asked for it. I wondered if my stuff was that bad and then decided that wasnt it, next I wondered if it was my online personality, I dont think it is that I almost always try to be curtious. So I started observing it in general and noticed this dynamic. Being a people watcher, it kind of became an online version of just that. Really a lamens study on human behaviour as it relates to online communities.

There are other observations I have made but its really getting down in the weeds so I didnt get into any of that in this post.

[billbunton]

There are a couple factors that may come in to play. First of all, how are you going to respond? As you mentioned up front, I've seen a number of cases where people have asked for CC, gotten some truly constructive criticism, and taken it as a personal attack. That really tends to make the people providing the CC less prone to do so in the future.

The second one is simply time. To do a _good_ critique takes a lot of time and effort. I frequently manage to hop on here for a few minutes, and can't afford the time to do a useful critique. I'd rather not do one at all rather than a half-baked critique.

[rab3rd]

Are you using "you" specific to me or in general? This really isnt about me. Its just observations brought on from spending time on photo forums. If the question is at me and not in general then I would answer I always thank each person and I never take a defensive stance. If someone asks me why I did a certain thing I will tell them, or if its a unique photo I may explain the aim up front to get better directed CC...

[Abel]

Originally Posted by billbunton

To do a _good_ critique takes a lot of time and effort. I frequently manage to hop on here for a few minutes, and can't afford the time to do a useful critique. I'd rather not do one at all rather than a half-baked critique.

That is exactly how I feel.. well said.

[rab3rd]

I agree its a great response and a very valid point. I started this thread in the hopes of getting this type of info out there. I am sure there are many here that have wondered the same thing. Hopefully this will shed some light on the subject.

[wclavey]

I think you have raised an interesting question - - and it is one that I have talked about with various people over the past few years... but I can certainly only speak for my own behavior.

Like Melissa, consider myself an advanced amateur. I shoot mostly what I would call landscapes (intimate natural scenes, as well as some grand vistas), architectural details, and decaying buildings. I shoot mostly B&W, meaning that, until recently, I shot mostly B&W film and now I shoot mostly digital and convert it to B&W. If I were going to comment on pictures, they pretty much would need to fall into the Venn diagram of photography described above... outside of that, I probably don't have much to offer and you would have to have your head examined to take advice from me!

That describes the 'what' I would comment on and I think that is a small slice of what you see here on TPF. I think the more stringent determiner for offering CC is what I think the reaction of the recipient will be. I make it a habit of watching how people respond to the CC they get before I will respond to a picture. I'm not going to invest time in responding if I do not think it will be regarded as meaningful by the recipient. Nor am I interested in getting into arguments with other respondents. So there are a few people whose posts I will respond to, but many who I still do not have a good feel for or do not think will regard my input as a meaningful, well-intended response. I also do not offer CC to people who are professionals who are posting in their professional field.

Of course, I do see pictures that break all the personal guidelines above but I simply like, and can't say much more than "I like it..." so I will say that. And it is my honest response to the picture. I know people often want more than 'Nice job." but that may be all I can say.

So branching out from my personal behavior, I think that some groups of people emerge who are both good providers and acceptors of CC, especially on specific genres of pictures, and those people comment fairly freely on each others' work. This may give the sense of a 'clique' but is more a reflection of the accepting nature and/or the quality of commentary of the participants.

Now the "piling-on of the newbie" behavior... that's a completely different behavior that I have absolutely no insight to...

[Tom]

There are a couple factors that may come in to play. First of all, how are you going to respond? As you mentioned up front, I've seen a number of cases where people have asked for CC, gotten some truly constructive criticism, and taken it as a personal attack. That really tends to make the people providing the CC less prone to do so in the future.

YES. A thousand times yes.

The second one is simply time. To do a _good_ critique takes a lot of time and effort. I frequently manage to hop on here for a few minutes, and can't afford the time to do a useful critique. I'd rather not do one at all rather than a half-baked critique.

Again, yes. I usually just look at the most recent posts, so if there was one below that, I may not open it up. Of if you are wanting critique on something that doesn't really interest me, I probably don't look it up.

Or if you have a bad attitude. Or you are a biotch. But most of the time, I dont open the thread or dont have time to do one when I see it, promise to come back and never do. If people PM me for a critique, I try to do those.

[rab3rd]

Excellent responses, I am glad you all are taking the time to partcipate in this. I for one am glad to here your thoughts as are others that may be afraid to ask such questions.

[brad]

Originally Posted by billbunton

The second one is simply time. To do a _good_ critique takes a lot of time and effort. I frequently manage to hop on here for a few minutes, and can't afford the time to do a useful critique. I'd rather not do one at all rather than a half-baked critique.

Ditto. Although, I've decided that I don't care how they take it anymore... if I am going to take the time to do a critique, I will be honest. I am always nice when I give a critique and try very hard to find the good things, too... and to be encouraging.. but as Bill says, that takes time.

But that's me, personally... in general, I think there are several factors:

1. A decent photo will not get many comments unless the poster is one of the "in" photographers.. then they will get a bunch of useless "Nice Shot" comments. In the end, a photo won't get many comments unless it is either very, very good or very, very bad. Middle ground, people just shrug.

2. A photo of a less attractive subject will not get many comments (most of the time). This is especially true in The Human Form. An excellent nude male will get fewer comments than an average photo of a nude female... and actually, very few nude males are posted because of this. The same is true for a less attractive person... great pictures of a slightly overweight, less attractive high school senior will have less comments than an attractive one. The same is true for brides or kids. Its even true for animals - a gorgeous picture of a spider is going to get less attention than a beautiful bird.

3. Of course, there are personalities to deal with when leaving a critique.. as someone seeking critique, you see other people get slammed for "defending" their images and you're reluctant. As a a person making the critique, you're afraid you will be taken wrong and slammed for being too harsh or negative.


Personally, one of the primary reasons I rarely post photos here for critique is that I'm usually not seeking approval... I'm not seeking "nice shot." I'm seeking more.. even if its "nice shot," I want to know what you like about it and why. If you don't like it, I want to hear why.. not silence. I can get those things on Facebook.

And when I do post photos to this forum, I am *very* cognizant of #2 above.

[Tom]

2. A photo of a less attractive subject will not get many comments (most of the time). This is especially true in The Human Form. An excellent nude male will get fewer comments than an average photo of a nude female... and actually, very few nude males are posted because of this. The same is true for a less attractive person... great pictures of a slightly overweight, less attractive high school senior will have less comments than an attractive one. The same is true for brides or kids. Its even true for animals - a gorgeous picture of a spider is going to get less attention than a beautiful bird.

I can think of a very below average male in Human Ford that got lots of comments.

[brad]

Originally Posted by billbunton

First of all, how are you going to respond? As you mentioned up front, I've seen a number of cases where people have asked for CC, gotten some truly constructive criticism, and taken it as a personal attack. That really tends to make the people providing the CC less prone to do so in the future.

Oh, and as long as we're talking about it.. this is one of my pet peeves.. consider the following circumstance:

1. OP posts a picture for critique
2. Someone leaves a critique about how something is "wrong" with the photo.. too much shadowing, a crop of the top of a head, not following the "rule of thirds," whatever...
3. OP responds that they did that on purpose...
4. OP is attacked for being defensive or not willing to get better or worse.

Happens ALL the time. Sometimes the person leaving the critique gets a little holier than thou and forgets that their critique is an opinion... and that the answer to step 3 should be "Well, I don't think it worked in this case" and say why instead of attacking. Continue the conversation, do not shut off and say you are right and they are wrong.