The TrekEarth Forums

The TrekEarth Forums (https://www.trekearth.com/forums/index.php)
-   General (https://www.trekearth.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=15)
-   -   The Critique Conspiracy (https://www.trekearth.com/forums/showthread.php?t=286559)

hoorge 08-31-2006 02:56 PM

The Critique Conspiracy
 
I enjoy posting my pictures on TE and get a thrill when I receive critiques both positive and negative. It makes me improve on my photography, I learn from it, and it motivates me to post more.

So, do you have to be an uppidy and have some longevity, and be one of "the gang" to receive critiques? Before you tell me that I have to critique others to receive critiques on my own pictures, I know that. I have been actively critiquing other TE members' pictures in the hopes they would do so for mine. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Shouldn't it be a courtesy to critique pictures of others who have left you one?

I have seen galleries of some TE members who have mediocre pictures but yet they receive critiques from the waazoo and for the most part they are even positive ones. What gives? It's quite maddening to try so hard but yet get no respect and gratitude from other members who should have learnt courtesy during their upbringing.

Thanks for taking the time to hear me.
Cheers!

-Harjit

Keitht 08-31-2006 03:20 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
It is certainly more difficult to get work critiqued now, but I believe that is down more to the number of images going through the system than for any other reason. To stand much chance an image needs to have some sort of impact as a thumbnail to make it stand out from the crowd. I think if you look at your own images that have received a lot of comment you will see that to be predominantly true.
"You critique mine, I'll critique yours" is more difficult as it has the potential to create something of a closed shop. I do quite often look at the work of somebody who has critiqued my work, but if I don't see anything I want to comment on I won't submit a critique for the sake of it.
There certainly seemed to be a clique in the earlier days of TE, who would give glowing critiques which appeared to me to relate more to the photographer than the quality of the work. I have seen little evidence of that recently.
Looking at your pictures, there is currently only one that hasn't received any attention. That's a pretty good hit rate.

dino94 08-31-2006 03:21 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Hello Harjit, I understands a little your disappointment in the way in which the persons criticize or choose the photographs to be criticized, but unfortunately the selection criteria are more emotional and cultural than "professional", moreover the barrier of the languages, the culture and even social, makes that the persons train clans, often inconciemment, it is a natural and human manner which governs our people. The coutoisy also makes that you will tend to be lenient with the people with whom you criticize the photographs. And as you will tend to comment on more as to criticize good and beautiful photograph rather than to criticize a bad photograph. A good exercise would be to criticize and give councils to the not evaluated photographs. It is in the nature of the things, and one must make with. Personally there is no time to me to come to criticize and comment on photographs on TE, therefore unconsciously I makes a selectif sorting in what I will look at (being of Portuguese origin, I look at initially the photographs of Portugal), then generally I randomly look in the pages the photographs which attracts my glance, and I comment on them, therefore I have a little the same reaction as the pluspart of the races. But I as prefer, as somebody comes to criticize my photographs by saying that I made a bad technical choice or that the composition is to be improved and proposes even a WS to me, for me it is more constructive than a smile a saying comment than it is beautiful. Cordially, Armandino

foxy 08-31-2006 03:32 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Hi Harjit,

I totally 100% agree with you that. Conspiracy !!! They do exist here.
You're with "the gang" or you're not. So how is goes.
Anyway, one thing for sure ....I still enjoying this site. In terms of pictures - all pictures. No favours or specific one in "the gang".
Glad to know that I'm not alone , Harjit.
Cheers!!!

Davids 08-31-2006 03:34 PM

courtesy or not?
 
The question is "Shouldn't it be a courtesy to critique pictures of others who have left you one?"
No.
I normaly return the favour and look at someones work.
Some periods, I give random critiques, looking at the galery, or if I like a critique from someone, I look at their photo's.
But there is no way in telling if people 'return the favour' (lately they didn't).
Does it matter? Yes, because I also like a slap on the shoulder and advise on how to go on.
But, I'm also old enough to understand that for whatever reason, 'plan A' is part of my mind and that has a tendency to blur reality.

dino94 08-31-2006 03:45 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Sorry for my first intervention, but I clicked too quickly on validation instead of preview. Herewith a re-examined and corrected version (after machine translation, because my English leaves something to be desired)

I understands a little your disappointment in the way in which the persons criticize or choose the photographs to be criticized, but unfortunately the selection criteria are more emotional and cultural than "professional", moreover the barrier of the languages, the culture and even social, makes that the persons train clans, often unconsciously, it is a natural and human manner which governs our people.
The coutoisy also makes that you will tend to be lenient with the people with whom you criticize the photographs.
And as you will tend to comment on more as to criticize good and beautiful photograph rather than to criticize a bad photograph.
A good exercise would be to criticize and give councils to the not evaluated photographs.
It is in the nature of the things, and one must make with. Personally there is no time to me to come to criticize and comment on photographs on TE, therefore unconsciously I makes a selectif sorting in what I will look at (being of Portuguese origin, I look at initially the photographs of Portugal), then generally I randomly look in the pages the photographs which attracts my glance, and I comment on them, therefore I have a little the same reaction as tmost persons.
But I prefer, that somebody comes to criticize my photographs by saying that I made a bad technical choice or that the composition is to be improved and proposes even a WS to me, for me it is more constructive than a smile a saying comment than it is beautiful.

Cordially, Armandino

roamermark 08-31-2006 03:45 PM

Re: courtesy or not?
 
I swear about it for about half an hour every night (tonight my photo was up for for hours and had 6 views) and curse the joint and swear never to return.
Then I settle down and enjoy looking at photos of others, new people or people I admire and are in my favourites.
As for the whole courtesy and reciprocity issue. There are those who live by it and critique 50 to 100 shots a day purely to get visitors....again...doesn't bother me anymore (for long) if I like one of their shots or think I can point out an area for improvement....if not I'll leave it alone.
Enjoy yourself, hope to get some attention...participate the best you can, and learn from those who have good advice to give.
Have Fun
Mark

vapours 08-31-2006 03:50 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
You have given 516 critiques, and received 427 points.
I have given 3387 critiques, and received 3680 points.

So your ratio for critiques given to points received is pretty much no different to mine, and as I go through the gallery of recent photos, most people seem to have the same ratio. I've certainly never felt left out or bitter about the way the system works here, so I can't see why you would feel ignored on this site.

roamermark 08-31-2006 03:53 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Brendan....That is really scary....my points and given critiques match EXACTLY today! Do I win a prize or something?

roamermark 08-31-2006 03:58 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Never mind...I just ruined it by critiquing one of harjuts shots here

Aviller 08-31-2006 04:08 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
I guess once you reach a certain number of points you can post anything and still get about 30 points for it. I've tried to increase my # of critiques now, although I don't always have the time to post that many and sometimes I just like to browse through the galleries. It does make you question the purpose of this site a bit if you don't receive any critiques (or even comments) for a picture which you think turned out well. OK, maybe it didn't but then some helpful tips would be nice.

paulw 08-31-2006 04:12 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Personally, I always check out the most recent photos from my country (Ireland). When I like the image, I post a critique. Some images I don't exactly like and will post a comment or advice.

After that, I'd browse through the gallery and pick photos that capture my attention.

I have days where I critique 15-20 photos, and then there are days I do less. It depends on how much free time I have.

It does seem that people reach a certain point and then get lots of points no matter how good their photo is.

Mostly though, I post photos here because I like the photo, and I think it shows something of the place the image was taken. The points/critiques are more than welcome, but I know that I have learned a lot from posting here.

Just my view.

Porteplume 08-31-2006 04:19 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Bonjour Harjit,

Conspiracy?
I'm a member for more 3 & half years. I try to help as often as I can. I think deeply about pictures before I write a critique or comment, not just "Wow!" or "Great shot!".
I had to look at TE without been logged in as my pointsystem is off but it appears that I wrote more than 5100 critiques and got about 2800 points...
Conspiracy?

Just like I said to Linda:
Don't be upset, keep sending your images, try to look at other's photos, give comments, read critiques, and you'll soon be noticed...
And... JUST ENJOY! :o)))

Amicalement - Viviane

ktanska 08-31-2006 04:36 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
I agree.
There's three kinds of people that receive more critiques than they give:
- Those that give no or very little critique.
- Those that upload absolutely outstanding shots day in day out.
- Really long established members that over 100 members have marked as favourite, and provide excellent photos.

The rest of us just have to live with it. Sometimes it's hard to accept being average, but most of us are.

hoorge 08-31-2006 05:46 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Thanks for agreeing and for the encouragement.
I too enjoy the site very much but I could do without the politics on TE. Despite what people say, there definately is a "who knows who" situation on TE.

Darren 08-31-2006 06:01 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
There certainly seemed to be a clique in the earlier days of TE, who would give glowing critiques which appeared to me to relate more to the photographer than the quality of the work. I have seen little evidence of that recently.

Exactly the opposite of my impressions. I think back to the original days of this site, where the membership was quite limited and close knit. It was not at all unusual to see even some quite good photos with multiple yellow faces. Nowadays, I rarely see yellows and I have seen plenty of photos which garner a lot of critiques where very obvious flaws are simply never mentioned. Sites like this will always generate an overabundance of praise relative to harsh criticism, but my impression is that at one point the active members on TE took a real pleasure in being quite critical. Now,I think members are really good at finding what they like in a photo; this certainly has value too, just that negatives are somewhat overlooked.

My impression is also that negative critiques were better handled back then. Nowadays, when critiques mention a flaw in a photo, all too often the photographer either replies with an excuse as to why the flaw couldn't be avoided or a rationalization as to why it is not a flaw. Before, it seemed more that members would take their lumps, be thankful for the critique and move on.

I think there is a sort of justice in the fact that the most active members in giving out critiques tend to get the most in return. Giving a critique is a positive action in this site; it is offering something to someone else. I see no reason why those who give the most get the most in return. Generally, people are getting out of the site what they put into it; seems pretty democratic to me. Doesn't mean you can judge the quality of a photo by its points, but generally you can get a feeling for the level of participation of the photographer.

tcht 08-31-2006 06:04 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
"There's three kinds of people that receive more critiques than they give:"
Hi Kari, actually you've received more points than the no. of critiques you gave - a good sign? :)

My view is that the more you critique, the better you become. Even though the ones you've critiqued didn't "return the favor" or give you "points", you've already learnt something by looking at other people's work. (and may discover how to improve your own pics.)

It seems to me that it's sometimes more beneficial (to my photog.) to critique other people's works than to look at the critiques I've received.

"there definitely is a "who knows who" situation on TE."
That's absolutely true. :) Despite of this, I believe that the best pictures won't be left out...

Darren 08-31-2006 06:07 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Sure there is, and as I posted earlier, why shouldn't there be? If there is a member who is posting a lot of critiques, why shouldn't that member get more in return? If you take efforts to write letters (or emails) to friends in order to keep in contact, wouldn't you expect more mail in return? Why should people who contribute little in way of the currency of any critique site get a lot of that currency in return? Really good photos will get noticed, no matter who shoots them, but an active member will always get noticed more. I don't consider this politics so much as normal social interaction.

Darren 08-31-2006 06:15 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
I agree with everything you have said here. Most importantly I agree that the more you critique, the better you become. I think that anyone who really thinks about what he/she is writing can't help but become a better photographer. I have learned more in writing critiques than in receiving them by a large margin. Not that there is nothing to be learned in getting critiques, of course.

Keitht 08-31-2006 06:41 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
"There certainly seemed to be a clique in the earlier days of TE, who would give glowing critiques which appeared to me to relate more to the photographer than the quality of the work. I have seen little evidence of that recently."

"Exactly the opposite of my impressions. I think back to the original days of this site, where the membership was quite limited and close knit. It was not at all unusual to see even some quite good photos with multiple yellow faces. Nowadays, I rarely see yellows and I have seen plenty of photos which garner a lot of critiques where very obvious flaws are simply never mentioned."

After reading Darren's comments I realised that my original statement required some clarification. I didn't mean to imply that the site was full of cliques in the earlier days i.e. a couple of years ago, but it was apparent that there was a small group of members who always critiqued each other's work and always in glowing terms.
I certainly agree that there seem to be fewer critiques with yellow smilies now, and there are definitely a huge number of 'Well done' and 'Good shot' responses.

Keitht 08-31-2006 07:16 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
I've just been looking at the membership numbers which themselves make interesting reading.
When I joined in July 2003 there were typically about 5 or 6 new members each day. Yesterday there were nearly 90!
On the day I joined there were 3 pages of images posted = about 50. Yesterday there were 43 pages = about 770.
It all helps to explain why people simply aren't getting the same level of feedback as they did 'In the old days'. Back then members could click on each image to get a better impression. At say 10 seconds per image, to have a proper look, it was under 10 minutes. To attempt the same now would take over 2 hours.

BobTrips 08-31-2006 08:31 PM

Rethinking the mission...
 
"There certainly seemed to be a clique in the earlier days of TE, who would give glowing critiques which appeared to me to relate more to the photographer than the quality of the work. I have seen little evidence of that recently."

"Exactly the opposite of my impressions. I think back to the original days of this site, where the membership was quite limited and close knit. It was not at all unusual to see even some quite good photos with multiple yellow faces. Nowadays, I rarely see yellows and I have seen plenty of photos which garner a lot of critiques where very obvious flaws are simply never mentioned."

After reading Darren's comments I realised that my original statement required some clarification. I didn't mean to imply that the site was full of cliques in the earlier days i.e. a couple of years ago, but it was apparent that there was a small group of members who always critiqued each other's work and always in glowing terms.
I certainly agree that there seem to be fewer critiques with yellow smilies now, and there are definitely a huge number of 'Well done' and 'Good shot' responses.


I joined in 2002. I found TE incredibly valuable for my growth as a photographer. Photographs were carefully viewed and helpful feedback was given. TE was truly a critique site.

The community was small enough that most of us got to know each other in terms of skill level and aspirations. That made for a close knit group, but at the same time the site seemed to welcome new members.

Over time membership grew and true critiques were diluted with lots and lots of meaningless comments. To a great extent those comments seem, IMO, to be driven by the desire to acquire points.

Perhaps it's time for Adam to create a new site. A TrekEarth for more serious photographers. A place where the emphasis would be on growth via considered feedback from other like-minded members.

No reason that the databases from the two sites couldn't be merged for those who simply want to browse pictures from one part of the world. But separate the critiques from the comments/points rather than trying to serve multiple purposes with only one site.

kinginexile 08-31-2006 08:36 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
I think the problem is not so much that there would be constant backslapping "cliques", but the contrary, ie. no participation. I have critiqued a lot of pictures from members who were, so to speak, totally out of the blue, neither my favorites, or my "buddies", and I am ready to bet that not one out of 15 had anything to say on my photos. It just went on for too long, and my critiquing enthusiasm is not what it used to be, for sure.

Even considering that they DO not have to reciprocate, it's a bit against the idea of TE. The quality of pix is down, day after day, and that may have to do with the fact that people are not learning from each other that much anymore, maybe. I read the few critiques on your shots, Harjit. You are one of the lucky ones, people are very constructive in their critiques, and their post is worth 20 "you are the greatest" smyley-giving ones, to encourage you to improve...

jinju 09-01-2006 03:18 AM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
My impression is also that negative critiques were better handled back then. Nowadays, when critiques mention a flaw in a photo, all too often the photographer either replies with an excuse as to why the flaw couldn't be avoided or a rationalization as to why it is not a flaw. Before, it seemed more that members would take their lumps, be thankful for the critique and move on.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

A flaw isnt always a flaw Darren. It may be to you, it may not to the photographer. have you read the Flickr groups dismissal of HCB's bicycle photo? The flaws mentioned wre that it wasnt sharp, the focus wasnt right on where it should be. To them that was a flaw, to HCB it wasnt.

Darren 09-01-2006 09:06 AM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
A flaw might not always be a flaw Rafal, but my very strong impression here is that many people do not take criticism well and are way too defensive or make way too many excuses when someone points out something they don't like in a photo. Sure, what is a flaw for one might not be a flaw for another, but when you are dealing with basic photographical principals like poor exposure, cropping in such a way that subjects in the photo interfere with each other, shooting in poor light, missing focus or a host of other things, a flaw in general is a flaw. Even if it is not a flaw to the photographer, when I see a highly commented upon photo which has such "flaws", yet of 10-50 (or more) critiques, noone mentions the "flaw", people just aren't looking very analytically. Of course, when the photographer publicly disagrees with the comment, this sets the tone for the site: this tone is one where noone says negative things as it just isn't worth the effort.

As for the HCB thing, quite frankly that is a total red herring. I will guarantee HCB himself was far more critical of his work than the folks here on TE are. This is how he rose to the level he attained. Quite likely he liked many elements of the photo, but I would be shocked to hear that he thought that photo was flawless. I doubt he thought any of his shots were perfect. I would also guess he took criticism given to him in the way it was intended. HCB was no god. He took more duds in his life than any ten members on TE have taken photos. Not every shot he took was a masterpiece. Of course he also created more masterpieces than pretty much any other photographer.

ktanska 09-01-2006 09:49 AM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
> Hi Kari, actually you've received more points than the no. of critiques > you gave - a good sign? :)

I have given more critiques than have received. I deliberately didn't mention points.
For the rest I agree completely.
Kari

Davids 09-01-2006 09:56 AM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Keith, I agree.
When I joine in 2004, there were about 9 new memebers every day, half a year later it was about 15.
When I started, I received some critiques welcoming me, and that encouraged me to starting writing comments first, and later when I felt more confident, critiques.
I just had a look at the first 10 pages of new members, and the 300 new members posted 74 photos, and wrote 54 critiques. Only a few wrote more than 2 critiques.
To get started now is a lot more difficult than it was before, the mechanism to become part of the community has gone.

Davids 09-01-2006 10:14 AM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Herve, I had the same experience the last couple of weeks. I don't have a big 'buddy circle', only a few members periodicly visit my photo's. For the rest, It comes down to posting new photo's and luck.
Last weeks, I tried the random aproach, without posting new photo's, because I want critiques to help me to improve. I feel that I'm not progressing the way I want to, I need new inspiration, and new theme's. Hardly any of them returned 'the favour'. They don't have to, but I miss the feedback.
Harjit has the same problem, and the feedback is quite constructive, but it also shows that there is problem now, just imagine if you are new!

There was once a proposal to allow a post after writing a minimum of critiques. But the problem of the quality of critiques will only get bigger. The quality of the photo's is now also critisised more and more.

in all we have three problems;
- quantity of feedback
- quality of feedback
- quality of photo's

kinginexile 09-01-2006 10:21 AM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
which reminds me he, HCB, said "your first 10 000 shots are the worst ones". Roughly translated in digitsl mediums, for me at least, that would mean 100 000. Sounds about right, the 100 001st should be roughly around the fall or winter of 2008...

Though we should be weary to abide by what he said. For one luminous insight, a lot seemed coming from a very anally retentive public personality. He seemed in his later decades totally negating the relevance of having been a photographer. Not fun, grumpy old man HCB.... :-(

jinju 09-01-2006 10:44 AM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Seperate the personality from the work, if thats possible. I also always wandered, how could someone who didnt like the medium be so good at it. And thats how he came across in the interviews and stuff I read about him. That he didnt like it.

About rules, I think keeping to the rules is sometimes a blind alley. Many times imperfections speak much more forcefully.

jinju 09-01-2006 10:53 AM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
I disagree. I think there are several new photographers on TE who have become big members of the community. The fact that they are extremely good photographers certainly helps but they are also very involved in the community and write a lot of critiques.

oochappan 09-01-2006 11:42 AM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
I see a lot of discussions about the critiques, the quality, the quantitity, the very sujective rules, the non-participation, the non-attention, the vast growing posts, the decreasing value of the site and so on .....
but
no one tries to find a solution here, maybe dissapointed from the past that any proposal is mostly put aside and never get the hoped respons, neither from members ... so all become rather passive complaining about some lost pleasures when this community was smaller ....
still
let me throw in a crazy proposal maybe to recover a bit maybe ... ? I do not hope it will be given a thought, but at least I propose something ...

let's consider that we get 20 ratings a day ...

OK let's make it 30 ratings a post and to make it even more complicate, your first post is for free but your next post you have to earn too by doing at least 5 ratings a post otherwise you can't post the next one anymore ....

think about the consequences then on the level of quantity, quality ... could both increase ? And spotting out the better shots could that be improved in this way too ?

Maybe a crazy proposal and most probably denied for the more complicate calculations that the system has to do, although these times it shouldn't be a problem anymore ... :))

At least I hope to see some more creative solutions, even the most crazy one, why not, but let's stay creative minded in stead of only complaining, no ?

Luko 09-01-2006 12:50 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Though we should be weary to abide by what he said. For one luminous insight, a lot seemed coming from a very anally retentive public personality. He seemed in his later decades totally negating the relevance of having been a photographer. Not fun, grumpy old man HCB.... :-(

Just name HCB and I'll come running ;-)..

I disagree with your analysis Hervé, you're reding his life the wrong way, starting from the end, which leads you to misunderstanding IMO.
(Advice : read Assouline's HCB biography).

HCB was a curious but never compromising mind, sometimes very opiniated. Friend of the surrealist poets while they were not known yet, went in far away countries while transport were not as easy as today, although he had no assignment for, met incredible people.

Even in his thirties, he threw many of his negs just because he thought they were not worth, on the other part he tried to push everything to the limit.

Don't forget that he studied art first : he might have shocked self-esteemed photogs when he soon claimed that there was no art in photography, that it just needed an eye and a finger.
He might have considered photography rather like a state of mind than an art medium : this is quite clearly coming upduring his meeting with Avedon (HCB says he doesn't need to take pics of Avedon, because he has already taken his expression in his mind). This also because obvious when you read about his zen archery theory : to HCB photo is more a sport than an art.

Grumpy old man? I don't think so, provocative like his anarchist mind ever was and just putting things in perspective. HCB was a punk, a real one, not like the young fashionistas.
Also, at some times of his life, HCB didn't want to practise that sport anymore. Drawing never abandoned him, he decided to focus on it and forget the rest.

Why should realism be put aside? In many aspects, I think HCB is the perfect model for a travel photographer, for his state of mind, his technique, his unconpromising search for the better.

I wish many Trekearthians were as open minded as HCB...

Luko

adam_k 09-01-2006 01:41 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
I think that the idea by Henk (oochappan) is worth (at least) considering....

Another solution might be applying limits: for example one photo per week (or 5 or 3 days) instead of per day - especially in the beginning....
This could lead to better selection of pictures being sent...

Davids 09-01-2006 01:49 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Rafal,
no offence ofcoarse, but 'sveral members who become big members' could be exceptions.
The point is that if you look at the statistics, the number of people who join increases, the attention that they get decreases. The same can be said about the photos that are posted every day as Keith points out.
If you go back to the original post of Harjit, and read other reactions, it becomes clear that it is hard 'these days' to get feedback from strangers.

And now my main point;
Besides the small group of TE die-hards, there is a large groop (including me) of TE supporters with little time and who still need learn a lot. Being not-so-talanted and only having time for a few critiques each time, the mentality of TE and it's development is important to them to continue to progress.

Davids 09-01-2006 02:09 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
Henk, I'm glad you're always contructive and finding solutions ;)

We had this discusiions before, so it's not that nobody thougt about it before, and almost the same was proposed back then, and the main critique was that you would get more 'great shot I like it' critiques, harming the quality of TE.
Having said that; if the majority of TE memebers agree that the quality is already less now than it was before, this could be an argument to try to change something.
And than there is the main reason why so far nothing has changed; I don't think that Adam would want to change anything, unless he gets the idea that TE is going for some reason in the wrong direction.

So besides your proposal, there are other possibilities;
- try to find a way to expose the new-posted photos more, for instance by includng a thumb on the left, with the latest uploaded photo, to be refreshed every minute. No matter what you do, being on the forum or writing a critique, you would see more new photos.
- Most of us have now good screens, so the opening galery could hold 30 thumbs, and only if you have older stuff, you could select a smaller view
- before you critique, three new photos apear, and you have to click the one you like best. this only needs a few seconds, and mayby motivates people to look around more.
etc. etc.

Keitht 09-01-2006 03:01 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
There are lots of ideas being thrown into the pot here. Needless to say there will be differing opinions as to which are good and which are bad :-) The only one I definitely disagree with is David's suggestion of increasing the number of thumbnails per page. I understand the logic of keeping new images visible longer, but for me the reduced image size or additional scrolling outweighs the benefit. My monitor is 1280 x 1024, and the thumbnails are as small as I think is reasonable to be able to view them effectively.
Cutting down the number of posts per week may well become necessary. It has already been cut from 2 to 1 per day and may have been higher still in the early days of the site. A balance certainly needs to be struck between discouraging new members and the current flooding of the site.

Aviller 09-01-2006 03:24 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
It seems like pictures disappear from the frontpage quite (perhaps too) quickly. The picture I posted today has thus far gotten a staggering 4 views.

oochappan 09-01-2006 04:13 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
I know I was propsing this already in a more simple way but enlarged it with a minimum required rated critiques of 5 before you can post a new shot ... this will increase and encourage at least more people to write critiques in the sharing spirit and avoid the use of the site as an archive for hollidays snaps, no ?

I speak alone about rated critiques as the unrated ones could still be without limit to balance with a limitation of rated critiques a post ... I have seen here a member with 3 shots, all with more then 100 appreciating points for the thousand and thousand critiques he wrote without posting any new shots ! Kind of ridiculous hé.

Rules are supposed to be there as a kind of antibiotic for diseases, no antibiotics invites diseases till it become deadly ....

Keitht 09-01-2006 05:12 PM

Re: The Critique Conspiracy
 
41 pages of images yesterday. Therefore average time for a picture to be on the 'front page' would be 35 minutes!


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:59 PM.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.