Improving the TP sharing forums

[smooth]

Then all you will get is

Good shot or

Very good shot

Thats a very good shot............ Anything to meet the minimum (or they wont bother posting)

Trying to force people to do something they dont want to do won't work with the results you after,

I see where you are coming from but I think it would force people to say why they like a shot if all they are inclined to say is 'good shot' or... like you say, they wont bother posting at all.... which would up the quality of the feedback.

 

[Arkady]

If people think they're being 'forced' to say something, most will say nothing.

 

[Dinsdale]

Personally i think the forum is structured OK as it is, If you don’t want crit post in the 'Photos for fun section' and if you want in-depth crit there's already a section for it, where you can post your idea behind the shot, what crit you want etc etc.

Why do you need to be labelled as a beginner intermediate or pro ? if a image has something wrong with it (or right with it) having a label regarding your skill level / classification is not going to change it – it will still have issues.

People need to post honest crit - if a shots not in focus say post that, if the compositions crap - post what’s wrong with it and what you may have done to change it - if its flat, post that - if it’s noisy post that -, but always add what you think could be done to improve the shot and remember something’s are subjective, so your opinion may not be the same as others !.

Posting good comments against a poor image helps no one, they will carry posting crap and never improve.

If someone gets upset with your honest crit - try discussing it with them or if its the its 'straight from the camera....' type reply suggest they post in the 'Photos for fun section' and they only post in the crit section if THEY WANT HONEST CRIT.

And if you see a 'Nice shot' comment and you can see a problem - reply with your observations and suggestions and if people can’t take Constructive Crit then perhaps TP is not the place for them to be posting in the CRIT sections. Personally i don’t have an issue with ‘Nice shot’ comments as long as its posted against a ‘Nice shot’

As I've not been in here long and am nothing more than a beginner (even though Nikon have invited me to joint their Professional Users Group :shrug, I don't feel I've the right to start making suggestions. However, as you have "to be in it to win it" so to speak here's my tuppence worth.

I totally agree with the comments above. "Nice shot!" :razz:

 

[erding]

If people think they're being 'forced' to say something, most will say nothing.

Very true, which gives a thread lots of views and few replies - which is one of the problems needing to be overcome.

 

[Kev M]

Bunch of bloody lefties trying to control everything we do, thought we'd seen the last of that for a few years

 

[Marcel]

I really am banging my head here about the number of views a thread has.
Please stop looking at the number of replies to views ratio, it's NOT proportionate at all! It doesn't give a true representation of how many people looked at the thread and didn't want to comment.

I left the views column in the "My posts" section because I thought people still understood that they shouldnt be using it as a benchmark to how many people are viewing their thread and not replying.

We took it out because we didn't want people getting despondent at the lack of replies. Go look at any major forum and have a look at the view to replies ratio for a photo sharing....and you'll find very similar.

 

[Kaouthia]

Please stop looking at the number of replies to views ratio, it's NOT proportionate at all! It doesn't give a true representation of how many people looked at the thread and didn't want to comment.

Especially when you consider all kinds of search engines and bots hit up websites these days, plus people visiting from search results that have no inclination to even register, let alone post.

 

[Amp34]

If people think they're being 'forced' to say something, most will say nothing.

Very true, I dont think a minimum character count would be a good idea either. I don't think "nice shot" should be banned either, we need to be creating an atmosphere where people actually find it better to actually give some crit/comment that the OP actually wants. For those that just want a warm fuzzy feeling then "nice shot" is fine, but those that ask for proer crit should get it...

As I've not been in here long and am nothing more than a beginner (even though Nikon have invited me to joint their Professional Users Group :shrug, I don't feel I've the right to start making suggestions. However, as you have "to be in it to win it" so to speak here's my tuppence worth.

I totally agree with the comments above. "Nice shot!" :razz:

But it is in your interest as a photographer to try and look critically at an image. It may not be yours but if you actually look and comment on others you may realise that you make similar mistakes or something similar. It helps push you as well as others, especially at the beginner stage. IMO at least.


Definately don't have experience in the user information. How about having a comment written above the input box on the "new thread" page stating you need to write something about the photo and if you ask for crit then you need to be able to take it (instead of the compulsary word limit)?

That alongside the tags (like the B&W and NSFW ones) showing what sort of comments you want on your shot (can you make it a compulsary choice, forcing you to choose between, fluffy, some crit and hard crit for the thread starters?) to get I think would be the best way. Nothing drastic and no game changing changes, just a bit more guidance for those posting and commenting.

If the poster then chooses hard crit, gets some and then decides they don't like it then it's their tough luck for choosing hard crit tag. Not much more work for the mods but perhaps better than we have now?

 

[Dogfish_magnet]

fluffy, some crit and hard crit

If you post a image in one of the 'Photo Critique' sections you should be prepared for constructive criticism, if you're not then post in the photos for pleasure, if someone posts a image thats badly composed, cluttered, OOF and flat its still badly composed, cluttered, OOF and flat no matter what tag the poster puts on it ! and if its posted in the 'Photo Critique' then that what they should be told!

 

[Dinsdale]

But it is in your interest as a photographer to try and look critically at an image. It may not be yours but if you actually look and comment on others you may realise that you make similar mistakes or something similar. It helps push you as well as others, especially at the beginner stage. IMO at least.

Sorry AMP34 I think you may have misinterpreted my comment. When I said I that I didn't feel I had the right to make comments, I meant comments on the way the forum is run, not C&C on photo's.

That said I completely agree with your comment above.

 

[PsiFox]

As said before you can't semi crit a bad photo because the shooter has asked for only mild crit.

Which part of a bad shot should you pick the left or right side?

As long as it is polite and well intended there should be no problem. Anyone then throwing a paddy isn't really concerned about improving their photography.

 

[Dark Star]

If you post a image in one of the 'Photo Critique' sections you should be prepared for constructive criticism, if you're not then post in the photos for pleasure, if someone posts a image thats badly composed, cluttered, OOF and flat its still badly composed, cluttered, OOF and flat no matter what tag the poster puts on it ! and if its posted in the 'Photo Critique' then that what they should be told!

I agree.

Critique is critique and it simply meeds to be honest, constructive and polite with a degree of consideration towards the poster's experience if that can be ascertained or if that information is offered.

 

[Gordon Scott]

I think the person who posts the photo should say / encourage people to give CC by stating it and also say a bit about the photos(s). I have given lots of CC to people on a competition site I use and some on here. I tend not to comment on a sets of photos that have been thrown up with little thought and am much more likely to comment 1, 2 or maybe 3 photos - not 6... or indeed 6 then another 6 in the next post.

 

[mrgas]

And life bans with immediate suspension of privileges (i.e breathing (C) T Pratchett)) for anybody who replies to their own post to get more images on.

agree with this totally , this is a pet hate of mine

 

[lost]

TP is now a big forum i don't think anyone will argue that point

We have loads of different views which i think we will all agree

I think most of us agree that if we put a image up we would like it critiqued
in some shape or form. A few people may disagree

why not introduce labels to titles on the amount of critique required ie different colours
No Color no critique required
Yellow title mild critique
Red in depth critique

This gives people the choice on what they want to comment on in a forum

Limit the amount of posts does that really make a difference i tend to go back through the pages. the only difference that could make is we get stuck with a load of pages we have already visited then people get bored and leave.

This does'nt probably help towards a complete answer but it would give everyone a bit of what they want.

Regards
Richard

 

[Amp34]

If you post a image in one of the 'Photo Critique' sections you should be prepared for constructive criticism, if you're not then post in the photos for pleasure, if someone posts a image thats badly composed, cluttered, OOF and flat its still badly composed, cluttered, OOF and flat no matter what tag the poster puts on it ! and if its posted in the 'Photo Critique' then that what they should be told!

At the moment we have three sections, the main section, the in depth section and the "photos for pleasure section". I'm just proposing doing away with the latter two and just having the main section with tags to allow for the removal of the other two. At the moment most post in the main section, even if their post would be better served in the "photos for pleasure" section which I think is where part of the problem lies.

Instead you have the "fluffy" tag for those that would currently be served in the "photos for pleasure" forum, the "hard crit" tag for those that would possibly stick them in the in depth forum and the "some crit" tag for photos that should be in the main section (I say should be becuase at the moment is't more a dumping ground for all three sections).

I think something along those lines would work.

Sorry AMP34 I think you may have misinterpreted my comment. When I said I that I didn't feel I had the right to make comments, I meant comments on the way the forum is run, not C&C on photo's.

That said I completely agree with your comment above.

Yup, sounds like I misunderstood you. thought you meant comments on photos.

 

[Amp34]

As said before you can't semi crit a bad photo because the shooter has asked for only mild crit.

Which part of a bad shot should you pick the left or right side?

As long as it is polite and well intended there should be no problem. Anyone then throwing a paddy isn't really concerned about improving their photography.

I think you're missing my point, which I think is my fault. I should have used "in depth crit", not "hard crit".

I think most of us agree that if we put a image up we would like it critiqued
in some shape or form. A few people may disagree

why not introduce labels to titles on the amount of critique required ie different colours
No Color no critique required
Yellow title mild critique
Red in depth critique

This gives people the choice on what they want to comment on in a forum

Exactly what I'm suggesting.

The only issue with having no colour is the critique forum would seem awash with non critiqued photos. Selecting one of three colours would force people to choose.

 

[alexkidd]

oh with regards to crit on a selection of photos i've realised why i don't do it

i find it irritating writing something about one photo then having to scroll up (or back a page) to check the next one and then write something and then again and then write something and so on and so forth

kinda spoils the flow in crit for me

perhaps a different way of displaying images in thread? however i don't know how feasible that is with the forum mechanics.

 

[Dogfish_magnet]

At the moment we have three sections, the main section, the in depth section and the "photos for pleasure section". I'm just proposing doing away with the latter two and just having the main section with tags to allow for the removal of the other two. At the moment most post in the main section, even if their post would be better served in the "photos for pleasure" section which I think is where part of the problem lies.

Instead you have the "fluffy" tag for those that would currently be served in the "photos for pleasure" forum, the "hard crit" tag for those that would possibly stick them in the in depth forum and the "some crit" tag for photos that should be in the main section (I say should be because at the moment isn't more a dumping ground for all three sections).

I think something along those lines would work.



Yup, sounds like I misunderstood you. thought you meant comments on photos.

Why should a system be changed because people cant be bothered to post in the correct section and cant face the truth. - i still cant get my head around some crit and harsh crit surly you want constructive crit or smoke blowing up ..............


If a image is posted in anything but the 'Photos for pleasure' it should be assumed that truthful constructive crit is required and if someone gets all upset at the crit posted they should ask a mod to move it or just post it on flickr in the first place.

 

[spxxxx]

I'm one of a few who posts more than six per thread but feel that it tells a story and we post to hopefully help others starting out etc ....

I don't think limiting the image posts will help anything, but rather hinder/ stifle , and feel that skill / consistency is shown over more images ... and is part of a basis for C&C ... anyone can find a couple of good images to post ....

Another thing is .. surely just having the guidelines that "any" image posted in "any" section is open for C&C ... and replace the crit section for a fluffy bunny section where people just sharing can post what may be technically flawed images just beacuse they have something to tell.

However for the above to work then there needs to be so form of skill rating as C&C should be governed by the skill level of the poster.

 

[Slimbert]

How about a tick box that has to be ticked by the poster when starting a new thread in the critique section, forcing the thread starter to agree to accept the crit that may be fired at their images.....:shrug:

I don't mean that as a license for other members to be nasty for the sake of it etc, but it may make people think twice before putting themselves in the firing line, and stop a few dummy spits.....or maybe help soften the potential blow for newer members who might not be used to receiving serious/bubble-bursting crit!

 

[lost]

I think you're missing my point, which I think is my fault. I should have used "in depth crit", not "hard crit".



Exactly what I'm suggesting.

The only issue with having no colour is the critique forum would seem awash with non critiqued photos. Selecting one of three colours would force people to choose.

Why should people be forced into choosing

Some people don't want their photos critiqued they want to share a image
For one reason or another Bird I.D some unusual behaviour trate. i feel that has to be respected

Some people want their photos critiqued throughly without nice photo those people have to accept that they may not get as many people responding to their post but the feed back they get will at least give them what they want

And the colours will let people choose which threads they want to look at

To me i will brouse like i normally do


As some one who has been a Chairman of a local Camera club. A Judge at a few different clubs i have already seen this senario before on a smaller scale

You get 50% who live for competitions and 50% who are'nt interested in competition at all if you don't strike the right balance the club stagnates and dies You have to interest everyone. Same with what we are discussing
That's why i would'nt fancy Marcel and co's job
Regards
Richard

 

[Amp34]

Why should a system be changed because people cant be bothered to post in the correct section and cant face the truth. - i still cant get my head around some crit and harsh crit surly you want constructive crit or smoke blowing up ..............


If a image is posted in anything but the 'Photos for pleasure' it should be assumed that truthful constructive crit is required and if someone gets all upset at the crit posted they should ask a mod to move it or just post it on flickr in the first place.

Unfortunately those few that don't actually post in the right section seem to be putting a lot of others off. That's the problem.

Also read the post after the one quited, "harsh" was the wrong word, should have been "in depth".

How about a tick box that has to be ticked by the poster when starting a new thread in the critique section, forcing the thread starter to agree to accept the crit that may be fired at their images.....:shrug:

I don't mean that as a license for other members to be nasty for the sake of it etc, but it may make people think twice before putting themselves in the firing line, and stop a few dummy spits.....or maybe help soften the potential blow for newer members who might not be used to receiving serious/bubble-bursting crit!

That's essentially the same as the system already suggested by a couple of us. Forcing people to choose a specific crit level (from none to some to in depth), that would work better than a forced tick box as it gives more options for those that just want to post a photo to be seen.

 

[Amp34]

Why should people be forced into choosing

Because it's a critique forum. Photos posted in that forum should as standard be expected to be critiqued. There in lies the problem, people just post without realising they may be better off positing in the "just for pleasure" forum.

Some people don't want their photos critiqued they want to share a image
For one reason or another Bird I.D some unusual behaviour trate. i feel that has to be respected

Those that don't want their posts crited or want an identification will choose the "red" tag, saying they want no crit.

Some people want their photos critiqued throughly without nice photo those people have to accept that they may not get as many people responding to their post but the feed back they get will at least give them what they want
And the colours will let people choose which threads they want to look at

To me i will brouse like i normally do

It's just an option to make people think a little more before they just post away.

As you said the colours let people choose what thread they want to look into if they are only interested in some.

I'm a little confused by your post tbh, i'm not sure if you think I'm saying don't have any colours or whether you are saying the colours should be "opt in". Your two main paragraphs seem to contradict each other.

 

[Slimbert]

That's essentially the same as the system already suggested by a couple of us. Forcing people to choose a specific crit level (from none to some to in depth), that would work better than a forced tick box as it gives more options for those that just want to post a photo to be seen.

People could obviously say what kind of crit they are looking for i.e. "I'm very new to photography so please go easy on me" or "I'm fracster proof so give me everything you've got" etc etc.....

I mean't use the tick box, so that people offering crit don't have to walk round on egg shells scarred that someone might dummy spit, as everyone who has posted images in the critique section is aware of what type of comments they might get.....I think a lot of members are scarred of critiquing other peoples work incase of the reaction they might get back from the OP, knowing that the tick box has been ticked, might help those people say what they think?! :shrug:

 

[lost]

Because it's a critique forum. Photos posted in that forum should as standard be expected to be critiqued. There in lies the problem, people just post without realising they may be better off positing in the "just for pleasure" forum.



Those that don't want their posts crited or want an identification will choose the "red" tag, saying they want no crit.



It's just an option to make people think a little more before they just post away.

As you said the colours let people choose what thread they want to look into if they are only interested in some.

I'm a little confused by your post tbh, i'm not sure if you think I'm saying don't have any colours or whether you are saying the colours should be "opt in". Your two main paragraphs seem to contradict each other.

Hi I think we are confusing one another

you put

Forcing people to choose a specific crit level
My idea was you opt in to the crit level of your choice no crit needed
you don't opt in title stays normal colour just trying to make it easier for the mods thats all.

I put forward this idea on the last thread i just feel we need to move slowly forward not jump from the frying pan into the fire but i think we are working around the same idea :bang::bang::bonk:
Im sure we will get it right in the end
Regards
Richard

 

[Amp34]

Sorry, I still don't understand what you mean.:bonk:


The one i'm working to is having three tags (visible next to the title), one of which you have to choose to post a thread in the crit forum:

Red: No critique required, just posting for display
Amber: Looking for general critique
Green: In Depth critique, I want you to pull apart the image and give detailed replies.

Your suggestion is to have essentially the latter two (Amber and Green) but have it as an option so it is not mandatory to have a tag, any without a tag just being for display with no critique wanted?

 

[lost]

Sorry, I still don't understand what you mean.:bonk:


The one i'm working to is having three tags (visible next to the title), one of which you have to choose to post a thread in the crit forum:

Red: No critique required, just posting for display
Amber: Looking for general critique
Green: In Depth critique, I want you to pull apart the image and give detailed replies.

Your suggestion is to have essentially the latter two (Amber and Green) but have it as an option so it is not mandatory to have a tag, any without a tag just being for display with no critique wanted?

Basically yes but instead of tags i would have liked the complete titles in colour more noticeable when scrolling down pages sorry if i confused you i have been doing accounts all day and nothing makes sense anymore
Regards
Richard

 

[grumpybadger]

OK. Here goes.

In general I have stopped commenting on posts as I am afraid of constructive crit being taken the wrong way so unless I can be gushingly optimistic, or I know the poster has a desire for honesty, I don't post now.

I think the colour scheme idea works well but I am dead against no crit required - that is what the Photos for Pleasure section is all about. I think we should have just General and In Depth options and if people don't want crit, they should use the forum intended for that very purpose. The benefit of a forum over Flikr and the like is that we can get honest feedback and help everyone improve. If we just become a "look and don't comment" forum, then there is no point IMO - that is what Flikr is for. And to Richard's point, I don't think it is about competitiveness but a genuine desire for feedback.

I was dead in favour of the reducing of images per thread and would actually propose reducing it further to 3. I have a real issue critiquing a set of images where they are all very similar and the OP hasn't put the effort into self selection - unless it is specifically a "which is better?" of two similar images

I would really like people to be encouraged (forced?) to put something in the thread about what and why they took the image or some sort of context. If nothing else, I can't be bothered to write any words on a picture where the OP can't either. I've generally found a few words of explanation help get a better response from other members anyway.

I don't like the "grading" system but if you do go for it, can we please avoid "pro"? Earnings are not a reflection of photographic capability in many cases (although not all). How many full time professional wildlife photographers do we have on the forum? I'd hazard at none although a few of us dabble. I'd rather see "beginner", "intermediate" and "advanced" or better still, nothing at all...

Bin In Depth. Do it through the themed sections. Although tighten the definitions a bit as I reckon I'd have to post bat pictures in "birds" at the moment!

Paul

 

[Amp34]

Problem is at the moment not all the "photos for pleasure" are ending in that forum which is why I think we should get rid of both that and the in depth forum and use a tag system. Hopefully that way only those that really want crit will get it and we'll have less moaning about the crit.

Problem is as you say we may end up the opposite and have most images in it not asking for crit, however I think 2 distinct tags would work better than two optional ones.

 

[ivandobski]

Stupid phone!

See below...

 

[ivandobski]

I'd start with the image poster. When I put my first pictures up I said what I wanted them to show, what I liked about them and what I wasn't happy with. I also said that if anyone wanted to have a play with them they could, I wanted harsh criticism (received!) and that I've no idea what I'm doing with a camera.

Essentially you could stick this info in the opening post as subtitles and tick boxes. Pp? Tick. Harsh c&c? Tick. Beginner, intermediate, experienced? Tick whichever. Then a sentence on "i like x y &z, dislike a, b & c and hoped to capture the mood of the day etc...

I think this way it's obvious what is required from people responding to the thread in terms of level and type of criticism.

 

[Kev M]

I think some of you worry too much what other people think. I don't crit all that often, mostly through equal measures of lethargy and apathy. When I do I try to make it worthwhile and not a waste of bandwidth.

The one thing that always applies is that I don't care if the OP gets the hump or not. If you don't like it don't post it in the C&C section. If I upset your sensibilities because your beautiful flower is out of focus am I going to lose any sleep? Nope. It's your problem not mine, you took the OOF photo. I'm not rude but I'm genrally to the point and if you don't like it, never mind, life's tough like that.

So don't say that you don't want to crit for fear of hurting other people's feelings, do it anyway. They're not friends (well not most of them anyway), they're people on the internet and if they're not willing to listen to what you have to say then you wouldn't want them as a friend anyway.

When you post, make it count or else you might as well have not bothered.

As for the levels/labels nonsense, don't bother. I've used another forum that has those sort of things and even if you asked for full critique you still ended up with a load of nice shot responses. I reckon you'll just end up with all the people too afraid to give an honest opinion for whatever reason only giving nice shot awards to people who have said that's all they can handle. You still won't be getting more critiquing of a decent level going on.

I'm also with Rob on the subject of people posting 20-30 photos in a thread but probably for different reasons. Most of them start with "this is what I was up to yesterday/ a day or two ago" so the chances are we're seeing half the album before the customer does (poster's prerogative), secondly because it looks like free advertising to me. Drop in the venue name , a few key words, a few tags and a complete storyline and it's a nice bit of free advertising on what is probably one of the UKs most highly indexed photography forums.

 

[Dogfish_magnet]

Problem is at the moment not all the "photos for pleasure" are ending in that forum which is why I think we should get rid of both that and the in depth forum and use a tag system. Hopefully that way only those that really want crit will get it and we'll have less moaning about the crit.

Problem is as you say we may end up the opposite and have most images in it not asking for crit, however I think 2 distinct tags would work better than two optional ones.

The problem with that system is that you're going to dilute a section with loads of crappy snap shots which will push the quality images onto the 2nd or 3rd pages very quickly.

To be brutally honest if you don't want any crit or you cant take crit should you really be posting on TP ?

 

[Amp34]

No, but people still do so we'll have to live with it.

EDIT: Just look at the "photos for pleasure" forum. just over 1000 threads, compared to the other forums (yeah I know it was started slightly later than some of the others but still...). It should technically not make any difference.

Maybe with tags (not sure if this is possible) you may even be able to filter them to show only ones wanting crit?

 

[Quantum Sprite]

I registered mainly to comment in this thread as I've been reading TP regularly in my lunchbreaks for a year and a half.
Despite my naff initial thread in the 'welcome' section (I wish the 'backspace' wasn't so close to the 'enter' key!) I'm reasonably switched-on, so this is my take on it;

Can you have the threads in 'Photo critique and sharing' set up so that when you click on a title eg. 'Birds' you have 2 choices, one is 'Critique' and one is 'Just for sharing – no critique required'. That allows both options, as most people interested in 'Birds' would want to see both, and allows the 'critique' photos posted to not get swamped by the photos from the people who just want to show their photos to like-minded people.
This also means people could put multiple images in the 'Just for sharing – no critique required', and only a couple in the 'Critique' thread. (mild or harsh could maybe be geared towards request/profile). That way the “great shot!!!” type comments would go more towards the 'Just for sharing – no critique required' than the 'Critique' thread.
This would hopefully have the advantage of giving an easy choice of which thread to post in for all those who post without reading the instructions.

I think your user-base covers such a wide variety of ages, abilities etc, that asking people to click different colour buttons when they're posting images is too likely to go wrong and if they are all combined under one heading there is still a likelihood that people wanting genuine critique will get pushed down and off the page by all the “look at my picture” threads before people willing to offer genuine critique get to see them.

That would allow you to;
get rid of 'In depth' ,
combine 'General photo sharing' and 'Photos for pleasure' for photos that don't fit in existing sections.

You might then be able to get people posting in the 'Critique' section to say what they want “why is my pic blurry?” and give info on settings “shutter speed ¼ sec” etc.

The forum currently is easy to navigate whether a newby or regular which you don't want to lose by making it too much of a chore to decide where/how to post.

My tuppence worth.
Good luck on whatever you decide.
QS.

 

[RKC]

"Photo Critique and Sharing
Share your photography, galleries and images here, and invite discussion and comments on your work to get helpful advice on how to improve"


as from the title above the word sharing perhaps is causing confusion, if it is purley ctritique then clearly state that, make the sentence below more bold as to what the section is about Ctitique

"Photos for pleasure" move out of that section rename for example Exhibition to make it stand out more

big thread and difficult to follow all of it :bonk: so what i think has probably already been metioned, just my opinion

fwiw i never have a problem how harsh crit is on my work, its the only reason i post images

 

[Sonriendo]

Can you have the threads in 'Photo critique and sharing' set up so that when you click on a title eg. 'Birds' you have 2 choices, one is 'Critique' and one is 'Just for sharing – no critique required'. That allows both options, as most people interested in 'Birds' would want to see both, and allows the 'critique' photos posted to not get swamped by the photos from the people who just want to show their photos to like-minded people.
This also means people could put multiple images in the 'Just for sharing – no critique required', and only a couple in the 'Critique' thread. (mild or harsh could maybe be geared towards request/profile). That way the “great shot!!!” type comments would go more towards the 'Just for sharing – no critique required' than the 'Critique' thread.
This would hopefully have the advantage of giving an easy choice of which thread to post in for all those who post without reading the instructions.

I think this is the best solution I have read so far

 

[lost]

Problem is at the moment not all the "photos for pleasure" are ending in that forum which is why I think we should get rid of both that and the in depth forum and use a tag system. Hopefully that way only those that really want crit will get it and we'll have less moaning about the crit.

Problem is as you say we may end up the opposite and have most images in it not asking for crit, however I think 2 distinct tags would work better than two optional ones.

Either way it would probably be an improvement over what is there at the moment at least you would have the choice of what threads you wanted to follow

OK. Here goes.

In general I have stopped commenting on posts as I am afraid of constructive crit being taken the wrong way so unless I can be gushingly optimistic, or I know the poster has a desire for honesty, I don't post now.

I think the colour scheme idea works well but I am dead against no crit required - that is what the Photos for Pleasure section is all about. I think we should have just General and In Depth options and if people don't want crit, they should use the forum intended for that very purpose. The benefit of a forum over Flikr and the like is that we can get honest feedback and help everyone improve. If we just become a "look and don't comment" forum, then there is no point IMO - that is what Flikr is for. And to Richard's point, I don't think it is about competitiveness but a genuine desire for feedback.

I was dead in favour of the reducing of images per thread and would actually propose reducing it further to 3. I have a real issue critiquing a set of images where they are all very similar and the OP hasn't put the effort into self selection - unless it is specifically a "which is better?" of two similar images

I would really like people to be encouraged (forced?) to put something in the thread about what and why they took the image or some sort of context. If nothing else, I can't be bothered to write any words on a picture where the OP can't either. I've generally found a few words of explanation help get a better response from other members anyway.

I don't like the "grading" system but if you do go for it, can we please avoid "pro"? Earnings are not a reflection of photographic capability in many cases (although not all). How many full time professional wildlife photographers do we have on the forum? I'd hazard at none although a few of us dabble. I'd rather see "beginner", "intermediate" and "advanced" or better still, nothing at all...

Bin In Depth. Do it through the themed sections. Although tighten the definitions a bit as I reckon I'd have to post bat pictures in "birds" at the moment!

Paul

Hi Paul

Sorry is you miss understood my meaning but it was'nt about competitiveness

I was trying to show how at clubs. The biggest Divide is over competitions in general 50-50 split

Where as on here we have a similar problem some wanting just an in depth critque some not.

If we have to crit everything i think in the wildlife and birds section we could suffer more than most by losing interesting posts

Lets Take Ade's
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=212587
If we have to Critique everything that means if Ade puts up a hide and photographs it we have to critique it or footprints on a bank of a mink just 2 examples. I like threads like that they are informative and you get some cracking photographs to boot amongst it
The photographs are informative to a would be wildlife photographer.
Same could be said of wanting ID,
Photographs showing birds with broken Beaks,
and i could list others
I think you will agree we don't need critique as such for these items .

Then people put up a odd one of a bird or squirrel doing something daft and gives us all a laugh.
You could post it else where but will people go looking if all posts are under one forum not needing Critique :shrug:

I for one like the slightly laid back feeling to the TP Forums where you can have a laugh with people i just don't want to see a knee jerk reaction. Im a member of other forums and i spend more time on this one.

Totally agree with you on the gradings system though

Totally agree over the author having to put more info with their images as well.

Paul never be afraid to Crit mine as Harsh as you like i have broad shoulders and can take it. Im afraid with me i will sometimes put a iffyone up just to see what it provokes.

I just feel to try and push people into something never always works

Regards
Richard

 

[gingerjon]

Can you have the threads in 'Photo critique and sharing' set up so that when you click on a title eg. 'Birds' you have 2 choices, one is 'Critique' and one is 'Just for sharing – no critique required'.

Job done.