Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/10/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I on the other hand oppose the form suggested by Joe. Not knowing Joe, at first I thought he was kidding. The scales suggest an order, a consistence and a permanence which to me do not exist. I much prefer the free format; if you have something to say, then say it; if you don't, don't. As simple as that. If you are moved to say Wow, then Wow is it. We don't need no stinking submission form. The left brain should know when to leave the right one alone. - - Phong > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Andrew > Amundsen > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 12:45 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] PAW -- Criticism or Stroking? > > > Joe, I really like this approach you have suggested. I hope others will pick > up on something along these lines. > > Sincerly, Andrew Amundsen > > >From: "Joseph Codispoti" <joecodi@clearsightusa.com> wrote(snip): > > I think that if the photographer is submitting a photo for criticism, the > > submission announcement could/should be accompanied by a form requesting > > criticism. > > The form, to be filled by respondents, should say, at a minimum: > > > > Title: > > Strong Points: > > Weak points: > > Points to improve: > > Overall artistic rating (1-10): > > Overall technical rating (1-10): > > > > With such a form (or similar), the criticism would cover much of what a > > picture is about. Furthermore, the critic would be compelled to cover all > > points and not just "awesome". > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html