artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Perhaps you should read the rules. They say that the forum is for posting pictures. It suggests that if you want comments or critiques, to post in Analysis. It does NOT say that anyone can say what they want about the photo.
Tell me, why would you show something if you did not want the viewer's reaction or response?
I do not get the hypersensitivity, and do not expect anything from the comments here except what the person wants to say, from "I like" to "bores me" to "a little more contrast might get closer to what you want.
I STAND FOR FREEDOM.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

If you include freedom to state factual untruths as "alternative facts", then you have to support this statement!


Andy

10MPlayer Loc: California

We actually have a Photo Critique Section that's dedicated to nothing but photo critique. There are specific rules there stating what a good critique should look like. It also has a one photo rule so people don't post a whole series of pics from their latest vaction trip. It's set up so people who want serious conversation on how they can improve a picture can get some honest evaluation.

The Analysis Section is for discussion of technical problems with photos. It IS NOT for critique of artistic impressions or concerns.

As for the Gallery, I don't think anyone should offer critique unless it's asked for. It's just a place to informally show off your photos with no expectations or them being fine art.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Could you be more specific? Especially how you would determine "truth"? What you mean by "alternative facts"? It seems to me you are being purposely obfuscating.
I hope to receive if I post, and likewise would honor the person who posts a photo, an honest response. Where supported by "facts," let's say compositional principles, these would be pointed out. Where a pure opinion, that would be owned.
Are some complicating a wet dream here?

Bill_de Loc: US

I have friends who transfer some of their photos to their cell phones. Some take pictures with their cell phones. They show these pictures to their friends, neighbors and coworkers. They are not looking for folks to comment on the quality of the image, but just showing them what they have seen.

The Photo Gallery is a place to show what you see outside your window or on an around the world trip. And if you want ask for a critique. Critiques are opinions and you know what they say about opinions. So, if not requested keep it to yourself.

Many comments that are made in the gallery are not critiquing the image but acknowledging the subject. You can recognize a beautiful flower even if the focus is off a bit. How sharp does an image need to be to tell Grandpa he has a beautiful granddaughter? He probably doesn't care if the horizon is off.

I too stand for freedom, including freedom from unwanted criticism.

As I said earlier, my signature line invites critiques and that goes for anything I post. Not everyone wants it.

I am referring only to the Photo Gallery.

---

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

We talk past each other. I will say what I want, generously and courteously. I expect the same for any photo I post. One can ignore what is not wanted. Freedom works both ways, and I am anti-Puritan. It is not forbidden to comment, so if I think I have something to say, I will. I suppose you will do what you think is right. End of story for me.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I guess I have been pontificating about this subject for years and about these questions on too many occasions to count- right here on this forum and others. This time. I'll give Y' all the condensed and simplified version.

The entire concept of CONSTRUCTIVE critique is one of the best and most effective teaching and learning tools in photographic education. Seeking, offering, to analyze and accept and sometimes embracing critiques, for what they are worth, can be enlightening and healthy for the critic and the recipient- the teacher and the student, the mentor and mentee, the photographer and the client.

There are some important caveats. It is not an activity for those who have no interest in learning, improving or embracing the ideas or visions of others. It can be repugnant for those who are only vying for compliments. Incidentally, in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with folks who just want to do photography for fun and do not want or need any serious analysis of the work.

It is not a place for those who just like to "pat -troll" the forum looking for others to belittle and beat up- psychologically, that is.

Some folks just don't like unsolicited advice- not all that rare in human behavior.

If you want critiques, here on the forum, seek them out in the sections that are appropriate and designated for critical analysis. The rules and policies are in the form rules and usually spelled out in more detail out in the section descriptions and individual rules and policies contained therein. Read them!

If you care to offer critiques, the same approach applies- do it where it is acceptable as a section policy. I have never been fortunate enough to have any formal pedagogical training but my own on-the-job teaching experience has taught me that you can't help, educate or enlighten anyone with discouragement or any form of browbeating, insulting or snide remarks or personal attacks.

Just saying that you like or dislike an image is kinda useless. Making a decent and effective critique is not all that difficult. Start off on a positive note- there has got to be something good even in the most poorly crafted image- even if it is just the fact that the maker has made an effort and is putting their work up for analysis. Point out the good points, if any, and then point out the distractions or faults, if any. If you know all the aesthetics and express the technicalities in the correct technical terminology and nomenclature- go ahead. If you are a rookie and just getting your feet wet, simply explain how the image impacts or effects- you will never learn if you don't try.

When you receive a critique, the key to peace and tranquility and preservation of your self-image is to learn to take it from who it comes and for what it is worth. On a forum like this, not everyone is a "professor", a professional or an aficionado of fine photography. Some are highly skilled and knowledgeable advanced amateurs and professionals. Some folks have a "good eye" for aesthetics but don't know how to express their opinions. Others will say nice things just to be nice. After a while, you will get to know who's who and what to take seriously. As a professional photographer, many of my clients have no particular artistic or technical savvy but I am still interested in their opinions and how they react to my work - I get critiqued all the time- it keeps me on my game! If you receive a criticism you disagree with, don't argue endlessly, ask for more details and offer more information. Usually, there are more that one opinion in these threads, go for the consensus and act on them. If you don't learn anything or find anything useful, it becomes a futile exercise.

Harsh, demeaning or vulgar remarks or retorts should be deleted. I only manage/co-manage 3 sections and I will do that but some sections let them ride. It's part of life on the web.

As a personal policy, I do not offer unsolicited critiques, especially in sections where they are not expected to permitted.
Folks who want constructive critiques should ask for them- SEEK AND YE SHALL FIND!

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

I politely and respectfully disagree, and have literally just this minute had an example that contradicts your approach. (Yours is of course valid for you. And mine, for me.) Someone posted a first shot in Photo Gallery. I said, honestly as I saw it, that the idea was good, but that better contrast and saturation might bring the photo closer to what the shooter wanted.

The photographer replied that he wished he knew how. Then we started a PM session where I was able to show him how, and suggest ways to continue to learn and improve. He is happier and better able to communicate what he wants with his photos now. That, to me, is the joy of responding to a photo, the teacher in me happy to see someone get more of what they want through a little instruction.

While there are similar examples, others have ignored my responses. That, too, is okay. I am for saying what you see, and letting the poster do what they want with it.

gessman Loc: Colorado

You've been a member of uhh since May 2012 so you were around early enough to recall how the forum has evolved and why. I don't recall seeing much of you until just lately so perhaps you were too busy and not engaged on a daily basis but if you had been then you must be aware of how rancorous and contentious it was earlier in the Photo Gallery. People were teeing off on each other with the drop of a hat and it really got to be pretty unpleasant. Combine that with the fact that there is a nucleus of about 25 insecure prima donnas who have figured out how to monopolize the submissions daily and get at least one and sometimes up to five threads in the Photo Gallery section of the Daily Digest almost every day and most of them need no critique, if you ask them.

People who didn't want critique became very adamant and that's when the "no unsolicited" idea came about which was also closely followed by the opening of the Photo Analysis section so those folks who wanted critique had a place to show their work specifically so they could get constructive criticism. Up to that point, i think the only breakaway forum from the Photo Gallery was the macro section. Macro shots flooded the Photo Gallery and most folks didn't want to be having to skip over all the macro shots. At the same time, the macro enthusiasts weren't getting enough space so the macro section started up.

Admin wasn't particularly interested in having specialty forums but finally gave in if some of the people interested in a specialty would volunteer to run it and a couple of people stepped up and it took off. Initially, if you'll recall, the Daily Digest consisted of Main Discussion, Photo Gallery, a Links section for referrals, Chit Chat Section, and the classified section. As more and more people joined something had to be done so other sections broke off from that nucleus and it is what it has become. It has been a few years now that the "no unsolicited criticism" rule was put into place to avoid some of the rancor that was going on. We lost a lot of very talented people who felt they didn't need to come here and try to help people who were just spittin' in their faces so they moved on as a lot of new members left and have not returned.

Admin isn't inclined to micro-manage uhh but he will step in. If you say what you want, when you want, people must not have been upset by what you've said because you should know that if they were put off by your comments they would likely have reported you to Admin who would have most likely said something to you if it became flagrant, often repeated, and upsetting to people. Disinclined though Admin may be, if something is brought to his attention enough, he will eventually act.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I don't understand what you are disagreeing with. I am at a disadvantage in that I don't usually participate in the Gallery. It's not that I dislike that section or disagree with its rules- I just don't have the time to participate in all the sections and would rather concentrate on the ones where I may offer some help- usually technical stuff.

So...I just clicked on the "Gallery" section and read the policies. Seems they allow limited critiques but not in-depth protracted ones. I don't fully understand the reasoning behind that but I am sure there are some legitimate concerns that brought about that policy. There are enough sections that allow more comprehensive critiques.

When I offer a critique or if I am asked to provide one, I always offer some instructive or remedial advice to assist the maker with suggestions and methodologies to solve issues. It's kinda my thing- it's what I do. A great deal of successful photography has to do with problem-solving. I just won't get into long involved posts where they are not permitted and may lead to unpleasant exchanges. I have endured many a snide remark and sarcastic quip about my "writing a book", an "essay, novel, etc. So...unless the OP is into it, I try to abridge my remarks as much as I can. I try to refer folks to one of the specialized sections where there is more tolerance and pick up the conversation there.

Unfortunately, I am not a professional technical writer or an English professor by any stretch of the imagination. There are folks here who won't take out a minute to assist anyone but will make a lengthy critique of my spelling, grammar, and lack of brevity.

This ain't a place for the faint of heart!

User ID

`



Sounds about right .... what's it mean ?

:-)


.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Thank you for the clarification by history. It seems there is some strange semi-hatred abroad, difficult for me to understand.

I will continue to respond as carefully and humanly as possible, as I can see no forbidding of responses to a shared photo in the rules for this section. There's always the apology if I fail. Meanwhile, the Big Rule for me is the the Golden Rule.

Bipod

This is a discussion forum, so any post -- whether its a comment, a joke, a poem or a phoito--
can expect to be discussed.

In any discussion, a range of ideas will be expressed -- particularly about a photo, since there
are many different approaches ot any subject or scene and many different styles of photography.
It would be unusual, indeed, if eveyrone agreed.

The more honest and specific the discussion, the more interesting and helpful it is. Nobody
every learned anything from "Great set!" or "Bad set!". "Like this" and "Dislike this" are
equally uninteresting and unhelpful.

Statements of fact are not positive or negative--they are statements of fact. "The sitter is not in
sharp focus" is music to the ears of a poster who just bought a $6500 Leica 90 mm f/2.2
Thrambar portrait lens. So it comes down to the photographer's intentions and how well it suits
the subject (on which there can be a variety of opinions): the statement itself is neither positive
nor negative.

One of the great joys of photography is seeing something that is usually a defect turned into a virtue.
Are the interior scenes in the The Godfather II underexposed? You bet! (And only partially
corrected with push processing). DP Gordon Willis wanted to create a visual metaphor for the
changes in the Micheal Corleone character, and produced a film that literally is darker than its
predecessor. It also created a nice contrast with the brightly lit Sicilian scenes.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Objectivity (or the lack of it) is one issue. Another is sensitivity - or the lack of it. People who are largely insensitive don't relate to others' sensitivity and don't want to relate to it because they see it as unnecessary and a liability - which is a pity because excessive insensitivity is a step towards being something less than human. In the worst cases, insensitive people enjoy taking advantage of other people's sensitivity and the vulnerability that comes with it. To justify that kind of behaviour they reason that being excessively sensitive is at least as big a mistake as excessive insensitivity, and their inner dialogue is to tell themselves that the over-sensitives are setting themselves up for abuse by being excessively vulnerable.

As is the case with most lame justifications there is a grain of truth in that. Over-sensitivity is a step too far in the other direction. As is the case in life, the right answer lies in the middle somewhere between those two extremes. But the problem is we're still left with the insensitives and their bullying ways. And one of the reasons why the problem is so persistent is that the insensitives are well-practised at self-justification. They'll claim that they're just being honest and "telling it like it is", when the truth is they just enjoy their bullying ways.

Whether the problem is a lack of objectivity or a lack of sensitivity, the root cause is the same - selfishness. One of the most defining characteristics of a forum is the extent to which selfishness prevails. Selfishness is not just unconducive to the best kind of interchange, it's detrimental. And that's before we even mention the worst kind of selfishness - trolling - which is a deliberate attempt to further oneself at other people's expense. It would be hard to think of anything more toxic to this shared experience which we call life. Unfortunately trolling is yet another example of something that's perpetuated through the use of lame justifications such as "that's just how life is". Life is like that only when people make it like that. There's nothing inevitable about it. But the sad thing is there's no shortage of people who accept such lame justifications for themselves. And the anonymity of the internet gives them the freedom to pursue their selfish agendas.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Criticism is NOT necessarily adverse in nature--there is such a thing as constructive criticism. Being critical does not necessarily mean being negative.

I agree with Jerry in that people posting in the Gallery are not asking for their photos to be torn apart. As he said, posting in the the FYC section asks for more detained analysis of one’s photos. If a poster says something to the effect of “what do you think,” then the photo is subject to all kinds of comment. However, if the poster does not make such an announcement, the best practice when one has an adverse reaction to a photo not in FYC is simply to move on to another posting. Leave the critical analyzing to the FYC section.