I had this idea to try and stimulate some more critique activity on the site; basically, instead of entering images, you would provide links to good examples of feedback left on someones image (either your own feedback, or one left by someone else). The "winner" would be the person/s who left the criticism that was deemed to be most constructive; an example, I suppose, of what others should aspire to when leaving feedback of their own. Anyone have anything to say about this idea?

Who would do the 'deeming' to select the winner ?

Is a winner necessary ?

A showcase of good critiques may serve the purpose and having ones critique nominated could be reward enough (?)

I like this idea as a gauge of sorts, on just what members might be looking for in a 'constructive critique'. (I have my idea/approach.. wonder if others feel similarly.)

'Winners' could be decided by the number of creds garnered for their commentary/'constructive critique'. Our peers voting (as they do in the current site run contests) for what they consider to be the 'best' commentary/critique.

And, to my mind, the 'best' need not be always technically oriented commentaries/critiques.

Those that are able to put into words/prose that describe/encapsulate the artist's vision behind an image are just as valuable as the technically based ones.


Side note:

There is a discussion thread in place along these lines, found here:

The Caedesian 'Critique Hall of Fame'