Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Why are images in critique gallery who have commented still marked not criticized?
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
It may be that the " Critique Team " has yet to comment, Or maybe the comments are not seen as critique....!
Perhaps a Critique Team member could shed some light on this....
I think the term is "constructive critique" and sometimes the poster of the image does not bother to mark the critique as constructive.
Or as above its not seen as constructive....
If someone considers a comment on an image to be genuinely helpful and constructive, they can click the "nominate as constructive critique" butyton at the bottom right of the comment.It ids usually, but not necessarily, the poster of the pic who nominates a comment on their own pic for critique, though anyone can nominate any comment on any pic.
However, this does not necessarily give the comment a constructive critique (where the comment turns green) automatically. The nominations are reviewed by members of the critique team who decide whether the comment fits the criteria for genuine constructive critique. So some of the nominations are accepted, and some denied. In my experience, it's about fifty-fifty.
The reason for the vetting process is that we get several comments nominated for "constructive critique" which are really just nice comments, and these are denied. This is to avoid a situation where someone can collect constructive critique points for just saying stuff is nice, which waters down the concept of constructive critique which the site actively encourages.
Some of the comments are denied because although they may be helpful, they are only so to a small extent, or are replicating suggestions already made. For instance, I'd be unlikely to allow a comment just for suggesting a straightening of a horizon or a boost in contrast, although the suggestion is no doubt helpful; the comment needs to stand out as being especially helpful Obviously this can be interpreted differently by different critiue team mambers, and indeed by the same member on different days - wherever there is a line or bar drawn, there is bound too be a grey area.
here are the FAQs for the critique gallery.
Hope that covers it, ask away if you're still not sure
It is odd, however, that the owner of the image has no say as to whether they consider the critique to be constructive.
It's probably best that way - impartial judgement is better than someone with a more (potentially) emotional attachment to the work being critiqued. There are always those people who will count "good shot" as terribly constructive input and those who consider worthy critique as insulting.
Asides which if they wish to cast their views on the critique they can always comment in the comments below the photo
Quote: It is odd, however, that the owner of the image has no say as to whether they consider the critique to be constructive
I mustn't have been clear enough, Keith. The owner of the image can nominate any comment for a constructive critique marker, so they do have a say. However, they don't have the final say, the critique team do that. I certainly would give some weight to a borderline decision if it was the OP who nominated it.
If it was left for just anyone to mark the points for themselves (or even just "owners" of the relevant pic) , then believe me the critique gallery would be flooded with a sea of green "nice shot, great tones" comments, and the upshot would be that a constructive critique point would be devalued. It would be nice if it could be left to owners to mark the comments themselves, but believe me, with the sort of stuff we see getting regularly nominated, it would rapidly degenerate. It would also (and yes we have seen signs of it happening) become another area of the site where people buddied up to collect reciprocal points for the kudos.
We've had many a discussion on the critique team - none of us wants to be there just for the sake of being there, and if there was a way to have a system for filtering out genuine constructive stuff from merely flattering stuff wwithout a "middle man", then we'd all be happy to step back and let that happen. But we keep coming back to the syetm as it is now being maybe a necessary evil
I did get it but I do still think it odd when I see some comments greened on my own stuff which I did not nominate and said at the time that I didn't agree with.
Surely the owner of the photo must at least have a percentage say as to whether they found the critique constructive in any way. Not whether some third party nominated because they found it constructive.
I myself had this comment marked green.. Iwould disagree that it was in anyway 'constructive' as I didn't point out how the composition could have been made better.
Oh right Keith, I see your point now. Yes, For my own part I'm certainly more wary of third party nominations and give morre weight to those from the OP.
I'm glad you highlighted the one in question - it's obviously wrong (wasn't me ). It's an imperfact system and things can slip through, mistakes can be made. There are times when it's quiet , and other times when we suddenly have to get through a backlog of twenty or so. Times like this the wrong button can occasionally be hit.
BTW, please don't anyone think I'm the Critique Team, just that I'm the only one around at the moment (the joy of early retirement I suppose )
the problem here is that the method for nominating a comment as good critique is not really clearly defined or spelled out in places that are easily found if you do not have a degree of familiarality with the site and how to navigate the various areas.
day after day, many comments are put forward which are 2 liners that say little more than nice image. or nice image, could be a little brighter. these are obviously rejected. sometimes the OP is cross that they have been rejected, even though they do not correspond to the acceptability of the guidelines. see FAQ.
THE CRIT TEAM RARELY OR NEVER NOMINATE EACH OTHER may it be said, but it would be nice if OPs would occasionally acknowledge the effort it takes to offer a critique which can take quite some time and thought. some do, some never even respond.
as for greening the proposal, im on the team and dont fully know who gets to take part, i have many turned down too. i have to turn down more than 50% because they dont meet criteria we have to satisfy, but i cant speak for everyones interpretation and im sure that the results will be a bit hit and miss when there is a big backlog.
as for me, if the critique is polite, detailed, correct, offers a solution or improvement , it dosnt have to be long winded to count. others i fear see this different, just as we are all working independantly, without a clear leader or without specific briefing. we are just attemting to help and keep up with a never ending supply of images and good critique reviews.
if you get a critique and its helpful and correct, then PLEASE nominate the comments for good critique points. thats what the tick box (although its not easy to find or understand) is there for. after all its our only payment, the wages are really low
Quote: the problem here is that the method for nominating a comment as good critique is not really clearly defined or spelled out in places that are easily found if you do not have a degree of familiarity with the site and how to navigate the various areas.
When you click on the link it pops up a box with a link to the FAQs and a "Do you want to continue ?"
Is there any way it could be more obvious/clear/easy to find ?
oh yes, im sure that it could.
there is at this present time small single blue line of text that says "mark as good critique" we have never thought this to be clear from the outset
it presumes that those who see it understand it, know what it means, and how to deal with it. believe it or not, there are may who have been on ages who havnt even noticed it or that its a live statement that needs to be clicked on to activate.
this blatently obvious to those who offer critiques by the sheer number of people who do not nominate comments for good critique points. if it was obvious / clear / easy to find , far more critiques would be put forward.
further more far, far too many "nice shot" comments do actually get put forward so the link to FAQ is clearly not working well either.
it should have a tickbox and a comment saying "if you think this is a good critique tick this box"
i would like to think that these points had been noticed by the management team and mods too.
I thought my observations, as a newish member may be helpful here guys.
I had been uploading for weeks and had been receiving some excellent advice before I even noticed the "Constructive Critique" nomination line. It eventually dawned on me, and after reading the FAQ's and looking through older forum comments, I realised that it was another way of me saying Thank You for all the help I'm being given, for critique that stood out.
I went back through all of my uploads then and clicked when I though the critique was particularly helpful to me, trying to keep to the guidlines (sorry Tooth I was probably solely responsible for a backlog a few weeks ago!).
I understand now the purpose of the nomination, but can quite understand how others may not realize the significance of it.
Could anyone tell me does the recipient of the Constructive Critique Nomination receive any kind of recognition, and are they aware they have been nominated and by whom?
Thanks for the newbie's view Elaine, it's very useful. No it wasn't your fault
In answer to yuor questions, the recipient of a nomination doesn't receive any kind of recognition. You can tell a comment has been nominated if you look at the bottom right of the comment - the "mark as constructive critique" option changes to "pending constructive critique", until such time as the decision is made, in which case it either turns green and says "constructive critique" in bold, or the option disappears altogether if it's not accepted by the critique team. The recognition only comes if and when the nomination is ratified by the critique team.
The identity of who made the nomination is not known either before or after except to the critique team while it is awaiting ratification, and after that only by the admin team and maybe the mods.
To be honest i wouldn't get too worked up about letting people know you nominated their point - if they deserve your thanks you can say so as a comment on the shot, or PM them. The point of the constructive critique point isn't so much to say thanks as to flag to others that you found something helpful.
In terms of the recognition, if you look at any post, the name and avatar of the poster are top left of the comment.Underneath these are a row of wee icons, varying from two to five. The one furthest right in the row (if it's there) looks like a medal on a ribbon, and can either be blue, gold or silver. Hover over it and it will give the number of good critique points that poster has accumulated.
Hope that clarifies a bit more, oh for a perfect systam1 ..thanks for your very useful input Elaine,
Quote: Hope that clarifies a bit more, oh for a perfect systam1 Wink Smile..thanks for your very useful input Elaine,
well perfect or not for me its one of the most useful areas of the site
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
1st March 2014 - 31st March 2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View March's Photo Month Calendar