Just a curiosity thing. Ben recently commented on an image post that he always views the image first before reading what the OP may have to say about it.
This is a non-scientific, two part question.
First part, as a viewer, do you prefer seeing the image first before knowing any details? Technical or backstory? OR do you like to read about what someone has to say about it before studying the image?
Second part, you as the poster, do you prefer to post the image first and provide any text, commentary, details before the image? Or to you prefer to post the image first in the thread and then comment and provide details.
Of course many folks provide few, if any details for which I assume is because they want the image to speak for itself. I agree that an image should always be able to speak for itself, stand on it’s own without any commentary. However, since this is a critique forum and not a NYC Art Gallery… it’s nice to have that commentary and technical details to help with comments and critiques.
Anyway, main question is around your preference on viewing and posting images and associated comments and details.
Thanks for any thoughts. Just curious for discussion