Comment by neom | Hacker News Reader

Comment by neom | Hacker News Reader

In film school we had this super kind dude who was generally very popular among our class (I liked him a lot too). He would always get raving reviewers in our critique and criticism (C&C) class. Frankly, I always found his work to be very mediocre but he was just such a sweet guy nobody gave him any straight feedback. One day he brought in a film to our C&C class that was so poorly white balanced I couldn't not say something. So I stuck up my hand and told him "the white balance is so poorly executed on this everyone looks like they're suffering from a severe case of jaundice. It's all I can focus on and it's not helping your film". I think it was the first time he had gotten direct feedback and he started to cry and left the room. Boy did I ever get it from the rest of the class. People really laid into me, folks wouldn't talk to me for a week after etc. It was so annoying because everyone loved him and nobody wanted to hurt his feelings. After I went to see our C&C class prof for a 1:1 and I explained the situation, he said in your career you're going to have to give a lot of feedback, and it's going to be hard to know how everyone will react to it. Some people will start a war, some people will improve, but to tilt it the scale against war... always start by finding something good and talking about that first. I've used that advice going forward and I suspect it's served me well.

I agree with you, although I think your example does perhaps display some missing social understanding, even if the intention was good-natured.

> the white balance is so poorly executed on this everyone looks like they're suffering from a severe case of jaundice. It's all I can focus on and it's not helping your film

It's a bit much right? There is a way to give strong negative feedback without sounding affected. You could have communicated the same thing with the slightly toned down: "The white balance is really poorly executed unfortunately. It's all I can focus on and it's not helping your film."

I liked the original article by the author as an example of giving negative feedback.

Very easy to offend or unprotectet to criticism people will not react differently to your just "sligthly" toned version. Slight toning is insufficient when the reaction is that implosive. And I am unsure if this is where the change need to happen - considering that this is critiques class not universal sensitivity training -, but in the receiving end instead. The tone of the original wasn't that harsh, the cut part was more like illustrational/explanatory.

> ... always start by finding something good and talking about that first.

It's sometimes called the "shit sandwich". (1) Say something nice about the person's work, (2) then shit all over it, (3) then say something else nice about it.

Ah yes, the old "commend, recommend, commend" as it's known in London corporate circles.

That "banana on the wall" art piece was an original thought to critize art, but my oh my that wasn't art in the slightest deserving a spot in that art gallery. Though the guy eating the banana on camera corrected all that. Masterful finishing.

Like this? (sorry, I am an art noob)

I don't think it applies here, but it helps to praise in public and criticise in private. You must give people every opportunity to save face.

It's also good to tone down your criticism and pick the right words. Directness does not work well in every situation.

I agree, actually in reading the original review by Ben and I think it was a very fair and balanced bit, heck it's hardly even an art review I found it's a social commentary more generally.

Just the whole situation spurred that thought about feedback and criticism, and how you never know how people will react - so I thought I'd share it.

> criticise in private

That seems to be at odds with the purpose of an art critic.

yes art critiques, specifically giving them, was probably the most formative part of my school days. I arrived at the same formula - you need to 'steelman' the artists intentions first - then your critique becomes directed at the steelman, not at them personally.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com