So just how thick is your skin?

[KJ Smith]

Originally Posted by ndsimm

As for the one giving the critique, I don't see it as rude if you got the work to back up your opinion/critique, but that's just me

I am so glad I don't have to defend that comment.

[picman]

When I was in school discussion during critique class rapidly evolved beyond "Yeah, I like it" when the instructor countered with "OK, you like it, but would you give a six-pack for it?"

[ronocnikral]

what's interesting about this thread is it has gone full circle - from "tell me why I suck" to "tell me what I did right." The major theme from the OP can be summed up by this snippet.

They're afraid of the internet mob. Nobody wants to get on the wrong side of a mob, so it's easier to play nice. Go along to get along seems to be the secret to a happy online life.

Interestingly enough, now being "rude" is snowballing into a definition that has us all walking on eggshells. so far, just in this thread, we have established that one must intend to be offensive and/or they must subjectively be less skilled than the person they are critiquing.

So the question is, do you want praise? or do you want to get better? I've seen images here that I wouldn't let a stray dog have and people say, "Print it and hang it on the wall." To me, that is the ultimate disservice to someone aspiring to get better. I'm not saying every image shared has to be a "wall-hanger," but I am asking that people be honest instead of honoring everyone's definition of rude and polite, b/c this is how we all get better. Or if someone takes 2/3 of their lunch break to actually leave feedback, don't assemble a lynch mob b/c they didn't point out anything "good."

While I disagree with Rick's suggestion for a complex gauntlet of subforums leaving the mods to move each thread around 2 or 3 times, perhaps a subforum titled "Praise - Due or undue, post here if you want to hear how good your image is" and leave all the rest of the showcase as is.

Unfortunately, this has become a place more for entertainment and less to learn and help others learn. Fortunately for me, I've found my own network to help me advance. And while I truly hope others do find the help they need, it is difficult to stand by and watch people blow smoke up their butts. I know some here think I am "rude," but consider this, I've been called such things as "douchie," but I have never used such deragatory language towards another individual and my intent has always been to help. I may not do it the way some people want to hear or others approve of though.

Certainly, "Go along to get along" is my new model.

Back to the land of unicorns and rainbows...

[iCe]

IMHO -Internet critiques can be

good
really good
or
worthless
really worthless

That's not to say that I don't value them, I do, and I appreciate all comments

but seriously... how much can you really glean from a web sized (100 - 200k) image?

Composition- Yep
Lighting- Yep
Color- Maybe
Sharpness (or lack of sharpness if that is desired)- Maybe but probably not.

Never mind the genre... Each genre has it's own values that are important. For instance, you don't apply some of the standards for what makes a "good" landscape photograph to a portrait.

List some other variables that I left out (above) and rate them for how well they can be critiqued from a little web posting. Disagree with mine if you like.

Then we have good old opinion... there is no standard for opinion. I rarely critique web images anymore. Every now and then I do but usually only if I happen across a "please help" post. Even then what I write is my opinion based on a finite amount of information that I've acquired over the years. In the end... anything that I write must be preceded by FWIW...

Lastly- I've seen some crap images published recently. It seems to me that the over all benchmark for publishable has dropped significantly over the years. There may be hope for me yet...

[auddii]

Originally Posted by ndsimm

CONSTRUCTIVE critique is always the way to go IMHO. Yes, I want to know what's wrong with the shot, but tell me what I did right as well so I can repeat the process.
As for the one giving the critique, I don't see it as rude if you got the work to back up your opinion/critique, but that's just me

I agree that constructive criticism is incredibly important. However, constructive isn't always telling you what you did right (yes, that would be helpful, but someone may not like anything about the photo); it's about telling someone what they did wrong (or in the case of photography it's more of a "what I like" since there is not right or wrong) and suggestions to improve or "fix" it.

What I hate is that if you provide a critique of a photo and state what you don't like and a suggestion or two of what could be done, and the person who posted the photo completely discounts what you say because you didn't say anything nice. I've seen it happen several times, and I just don't understand the thought process of "you didn't tell me it was good so it's not constructive".

I honestly don't know why I care or bother trying to explain it to those people. If they want to ignore advice because they are offended, then it might take them a very long time to improve. Of maybe they like their photos how they are and feel they don't need improvement. I have no idea. For some unknow reason I find it frustrating. Probably because when I look for critique other people may be less likely to give it because they are sick of dealing with the over-sensitive posters.

[ggeen]

There are a lot of good comments within this thread. Not long ago our pastor preached on the virtues of honesty. He qualified this with, be honest but you don't have to be rude.

Bill Parcels is an example of rude. He never seems to have a nice word for anyone. Even if his team just one a game. Parcels seems to focus only on what is wrong.

On the other hand, only focusing one what is good only leads to trophy children.

I thinks that a constructive criticism (CC) should highlight what worked well in the photograph and what did not. Tips to improve either is a definite add.

[ronocnikral]

Originally Posted by ggeen

There are a lot of good comments within this thread. Not long ago our pastor preached on the virtues of honesty. He qualified this with, be honest but you don't have to be rude.

Bill Parcels is an example of rude. He never seems to have a nice word for anyone. Even if his team just one a game. Parcels seems to focus only on what is wrong.

On the other hand, only focusing one what is good only leads to trophy children.

I thinks that a constructive criticism (CC) should highlight what worked well in the photograph and what did not. Tips to improve either is a definite add.

careful using those words that have something to do with religion!

back on subject, we seem (myself included) to always be focused on how the critiquer acts, but rarely on the critiquee. perhaps the attention needs to be more on how people take critiques and the people who caudle them once they claim their feelings are hurt?

[ggeen]

Originally Posted by ronocnikral

careful using those words that have something to do with religion!

back on subject, we seem (myself included) to always be focused on how the critiquer acts, but rarely on the critiquee. perhaps the attention needs to be more on how people take critiques and the people who caudle them once they claim their feelings are hurt?

No problem. Not trying to start a Jihad here.

You have a point here, though. How one critiques is only half of the story. How one receives the critique is quite another. The mood of the receiver may be a factor. A big problem as mentioned earlier in this thread is the lack of nuance in a textual forum. Voice inflection is gone and so, too, are body language and facial expression. That is why I think setting the mood in ones critique should be important.

[shutterfire]

I personally think that It can be handled in a professional way. Tell them both good and bad. Let the Op glean what needs to be improved. I personally think that if someone take the time to post it and your taking the time to comment you can tell them one thing they did right. break it down composition, lighting, post processing. If you look back in your archive of images I bet everyone here has photos that they thought were good at the time they took it. And now you look at it and say wow I have come a long way.

[bryanlindsey]

Great!

[danchez]

when someone posts for CC and they receive it, good or bad, their only response should be, "thanks", or "appreciate the feedback". Too many times their feelings get hurt and then it turns argumentative and combative. That's when a mod needs to step in and talk to the OP, instead of telling everyone else to handle the OP with kid gloves.

[KJ Smith]

Originally Posted by danchez

when someone posts for CC and they receive it, good or bad, their only response should be, "thanks", or "appreciate the feedback".

Exactly, and they do need to respond.


Then after they get control of their emotions, they need to think about the critique and see if it has some merit to it.

[Nikonfan]

Originally Posted by danchez

when someone posts for CC and they receive it, good or bad, their only response should be, "thanks", or "appreciate the feedback". Too many times their feelings get hurt and then it turns argumentative and combative. That's when a mod needs to step in and talk to the OP, instead of telling everyone else to handle the OP with kid gloves.

I think you have a valid point but I don't agree that the OP should not be allowed to respond other than to say thank you. After all, this is a forum. Without dialog there would be no content.

[brad]

For starters, the article is mis-titled...it should be Why the "Like" Button Makes Your Photography Suck ... which is much closer. The "Like" button is not a criticism or critique.. it just is. Of course, really.. is not that it makes you suck, either, but it could be why you aren't getting better - you don't feel like you have to if everyone "Likes" you.

Originally Posted by shutterfire

I personally think that It can be handled in a professional way. Tell them both good and bad. Let the Op glean what needs to be improved. I personally think that if someone take the time to post it and your taking the time to comment you can tell them one thing they did right. break it down composition, lighting, post processing. If you look back in your archive of images I bet everyone here has photos that they thought were good at the time they took it. And now you look at it and say wow I have come a long way.

Exactly. I have never, ever been told my critique of an image was rude... and I very often have negative things to say about an image. But what I DON'T do is say things like "The composition violates the rule of thirds" - I DO say "If you recrop to put your subject at the lower right, its a stronger image." Same critique - but one is abrupt with no suggestion on how to improve - the other offers advice for improvement. One is rude, the other is not.

A friend recently shared this quote with me... I love it:

“Honesty doesn’t need to be brutal to be effective. Wise love usually leaves stretch marks on us, not bruises.” ~Bob Goff

[Nikonfan]

Originally Posted by brad

I have never, ever been told my critique of an image was rude... and I very often have negative things to say about an image. But what I DON'T do is say things like "The composition violates the rule of thirds" - I DO say "If you recrop to put your subject at the lower right, its a stronger image." Same critique - but one is abrupt with no suggestion on how to improve - the other offers advice for improvement. One is rude, the other is not.

Very well said. This is a great example of hwo to do it!