Folks I am seeing critiques being padded with irrelevant text. You are welcome to ask questions or offer commentary on things other than the photo in the photo comment area. But the critique must be about the photograph, and it must be 15 words about the photograph. So a critique that says "This is a beautiful photo of a bird. I wish I had your camera. I'm not very good at bird photography. Thanks for sharing, regards Bambi " subverts photoSIG's critique standard and that's a violation of the rules you agreed to. Only 8 of these words are about the photo, and you need to write 15 words. Any questions on that?

photoSIG Critique Standard

In order to promote high-quality critiques, photoSIG only allows critiques that meet a certain standard to affect a photo's rating. Other critiques are saved and displayed, but have no effect on the photo's rating. A critique that conforms to the photoSIG critique standard (a "conforming" critique) will have colored thumbs, while a "non-conforming" critique will have hollow thumbs.

The photoSIG critique standards has four tests. A critique that passes all of these tests is deemed to conform to the standard.

Length: A conforming critique must be at least 15 unique correctly spelled words about the photograph.

Repetition: A conforming critique must be unique.

Frequency: A conforming critique must be either the first or second critique written by the critic for that particular photographer in the past seven days.

Average rating: A conforming critique must not be part of a pattern of very high ratings (which might indicate rating inflation) or very low ratings (which might indicate revenge rating). photoSIG expects an average rating of about one thumb-up per critique.

To see why a critique you have written does not conform, go to your mySG page, scroll down to the list of critiques you have given, and there will be one of the reasons above beside each critique that does not conform.

To avoid this entirely, use the preview link before submitting your critique. Ths function will let you know if your critique will conform or not and why, allowing you to adjust your critique.

Read 656 times

Reply 

From manortiz/Gigi (2,770) on October 5, 2012 3:46:10 PM CDT always precise, attentive and with a bit of humor to the good Sheena. Thank you very much g&g Reply

From loiswakeman/Lois (16,441) on October 5, 2012 4:01:18 PM CDT When the person is just stating the b. obvious, even that isn't really a proper critique surely, as it could apply to any similar photo ("this is a fine xxxxxxx photo" - if you don't say why it's fine then does that count? I suggest not. We see loads of these here.) Reply

From jpreisch/Jim (2,693) on October 5, 2012 5:04:23 PM CDT Is this a photo critique site or a critique critique site? Jim Reply

From marshall/Marshall (11,954) on October 5, 2012 5:22:35 PM CDT Primarily photos, but a little bit both. We want to get better at everything related to photography. Reply

From markj913/Mark (8,415) on October 6, 2012 2:02:07 AM CDT I'm just curious, but everyone associates the name Bambi with a female name, yet in the movie, Bambi was a guy deer. Why is that? Reply

From robertwallis/Robert (12,897) on October 6, 2012 10:59:51 AM CDT I think it's the "i" suffix on the name, which is usually a feminine or diminutive suffix. Think of one of the Tarzan clones, Bomba the Jungle Boy; it would sound strange as "Bambi the Jungle Boy". Reply

From rickshep/Rick (3,206) on October 6, 2012 3:33:36 AM CDT Thanks, Sheena. Timely, useful, succinct and in the best interests of all. Rick Reply

From portemr/Rosario (13,106) on October 6, 2012 10:19:57 AM CDT Hi Sheena, I really appreciate the time and effort you dedicate to the administration of photoSIG. However I feel that I can not express myself freely, now, to criticize a picture, I have to say always how to improve it, and sometimes I do not know, however I want to make the comment, because I like the image. Now I have to check if I have given a critique a person before, I have to balance how many tumbs up, I have to measure and count the number of words (which are relevant or not), in short, I feel that there are now more and more rules and less freedom. Regards, Rosario. Reply

From karin2007/Karin (19,610) on October 6, 2012 11:44:45 AM CDT I don't think its a matter of not being able to express yourself freely. I think what Sheena tries to do, is, that you have to put more thoughts into a critique - and yes, it is definately getting a bit harder (especially for us non native speakers), but one quality critique is worth much more than five fast written shallow evaluations of a photo ( that sometimes even include irrelevant comments) Reply

From sheenawilkie/Administrator (0) on October 6, 2012 12:48:13 PM CDT First off, I have to say a quick look tells me you are writing great critiques, thanks. Of course if you rate a photo as needs improvement we expect you to address that in some way. How else could it be and make sense? The system can't check that, but everything else you mention, you only have to check preview and the system does it for you. You don't have to check anything. The photoSIG critique standard above has been in place since 2004 long before you even became a member. So these are the rules you agreed to in 2009, nothing new. Perhaps you're just following them better now since you were made aware? Other sites let you just press a like button, many of us find those fun, but less useful. YMMV Reply

From portemr/Rosario (13,106) on October 6, 2012 7:39:24 PM CDT Ok, I probably did not read all the rules when entering photoSIG, but always try to be fair and balanced in my reviews. Thanks for the reply. Reply

Return to forum