The major purpose of this paper is to clarify the deficiencies identified in the recent paper by Liu et al. (J. Lumin. 130 (2010) 103) as well as to reanalyze the available data and provide corrected results for the orthorhombic crystal field parameters (CFPs) for selected rare-earth ions in garnets. It appears that Liu et al., when utilizing the computer package for standardization of CFPs, have inadvertently confused the properties of CFPs expressed in the Wybourne notation with those in the extended Stevens operator notation. This confusion has led to misinterpretations concerning the orthorhombic standardization transformations and incorrect labeling of the CFP sets as supposedly ‘standardized’ for Yb 3+, Pr 3+, Nd 3+, and Er 3+ ions in various garnets. These deficiencies have prompted us to reconsider the CFP sets determined earlier by matching the experimental data, i.e. the orthorhombic spin Hamiltonian parameters ( g factors, g i , and hyperfine structure constants, A i ; i=x, y, z) and available optical spectral band positions, with the theoretical data calculated using the complete diagonalization method. To further verify the correctness of the present results the CFPs for orthorhombic Yb 3+ centers in Yb 3Al 5O 12 and Yb 3Ga 5O 12 garnets are calculated using the superposition model (SPM), which requires adoption of a well-defined symmetry-adapted axis system (SAAS). Hence, the SPM calculations enable reanalysis of available CFP sets based on the correct standardization procedure and establishing the correspondence between the SAAS and the ‘ nominal’ axis systems assigned to fitted CFP sets. Using the proper SAAS and general transformations of the axis systems, the relations between the calculated g i and/or A i values and the respective principal values determined by EPR experiments can be established. The consistent methodology utilized here may be helpful for proper reanalysis of spectroscopic data for rare-earth and transition-metal ions at orthorhombic symmetry sites in various crystals.