I’ve been sketching and thinking deeply about my capstone project lately. I’ve done close readings of web based critique systems like Flickr, Deviant Art, Dribbble, etc. I’ve also been talking recently about the value of quickly prototyping a design. So tonight, I took a recent sketch of my capstone project, Give A Crit, and created a quick (non-interactive) prototype. This took me about 40 minutes using Keynote templates by Keynotopia, just one of many providers of keynote templates for prototyping. So, I present here, for your critique, a quick prototype sketch of Give a Crit, specifically of the critique functionality.
One main thought behind this sketch is to provide some ambiguity of the design so that photographers giving critique can provide meaning as they see fit. Furthermore, this sketch is totally lacking in the photograph’s technical details, which I believe will add value when giving a critique. These technical details could live below the photograph’s description, but I haven’t put much thought into that feature yet. Click on the image below for a full size version.
This project is ongoing and will change by leaps and bounds. I’ve conducted very little primary research at this point. Most of my thoughts have centered around a formal analysis of flickr, facebook, deviant art, smug mug, dribbble, and others. Formalist theories (Bell, Wolfman), Structuralist theories (Hebdish, Polhemus), and Use Quality theories (Lowgren) have also provided some grounding to my work, but will be further expanded upon in the future.
Questions: Will others be able to see the critics? Or just the photographer?
Suggestion:
To me it seems like you are asking for the photographers to give a laundry list of good and bad, and then follow it up with “commentary”.
Perhaps an emphasis on the rationale of the critique might be useful.
Lynn, great question and suggestions.
Others will be able to see the critique and comment on it providing a conversation and dialogue between the photographer (who can participate) and the viewers.
An emphasis on the rationale would likely be useful. I’m hoping that by providing some ambiguity, as well as designing these critiques to be ‘serious’ that criticizers will indeed rationalize their critique within the commentary section. Whether or not this works well has yet to be determined.
Thanks for the comments!