# Seriously, why are you here?



## manaheim (Feb 12, 2012)

Stop for a moment.

Drop your ego, let your defenses down, and think about this.

How good are you at Photography, really?  How much of an _artist_ are you?

When you look through your camera lens are you thinking about 8,000 rules, or are you thinking about emotion?  Colors?  Patterns?  Light?  What will look cool?  What will stir people?  What will make the viewer think?

Try to decide how much you know and why you're here.  Think about this honestly.  If you're one of those who is here to learn, then I would strongly encourage you to make a point to not be trying to teach others.  Ask questions.  Listen.  Learn.  If you want to express opinions, by all means do so, but for goodness sake try to say things like "I'm not that experienced, but...", "From what I understand, this may be the answer..."

People who don't know coming across like they do can cause SO much damage.

I see people with a real spark of artistry... far more natural talent than I have after YEARS of trying to beat some artistic sense into myself, and they post a picture and the first thing TPF does is tell them "It's TILTED!" or "THE WHITE BALANCE IS OFF!" or "IT'S UNDEREXPOSED!"

Really?  Seriously?

There isn't exactly a right and wrong to this, guys.  There are some artistic choices, and there is a CLEAR way to tell an accidental overexposure and a deliberate artistic choice.  I will bet you my left arm than 99% of you couldn't tell the two apart... and if you can't, then you have absolutely no business telling anyone that what THEY chose to do was right or wrong.

Think about it.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 12, 2012)

Excuse me while I vomit. 

Get off your horse. If you don't agree with someones CC, post your own. Whoever recieving it can pick and choose which CC to take seriously, just as it should be.


----------



## Josh66 (Feb 12, 2012)

Gotta agree - technical perfection isn't the be-all-end-all, a lot of people here seem to believe it is though...


----------



## manaheim (Feb 12, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Excuse me while I vomit.
> 
> Get off your horse. If you don't agree with someones CC, post your own. Whoever recieving it can pick and choose which CC to take seriously, just as it should be.



Hey, welcome to TPF!


----------



## manaheim (Feb 12, 2012)

Seriously I think I rest my case.

Over, you can lock the thread now.  Bossy just won the internet.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 12, 2012)

Haha. Ok seriously though.

You can't berate someone else on how they give CC. In the beginners forum, the basics *matter*. Rule of thirds, nailing exposure, having an interesting composition, color balance, all of that. The best thing you can do is give CC to the best of YOUR abilities, and if you really take issue, then start a thread on how you think is the best way to CC. Noone is going to learn anything by you coming in an posting about how everyone sucks at life and we suck the creativity out of photography.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 12, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Stop for a moment.
> 
> Drop your ego, let your defenses down, and think about this.
> 
> ...



I couldn't agree with you more.  I see people on here defending themselves when they make a post before anyone comments on it to save their butt.  The End.


----------



## tirediron (Feb 12, 2012)

manaheim said:


> ...there is a CLEAR way to tell an accidental overexposure and a deliberate artistic choice. I will bet you my left arm than 99% of you couldn't tell the two apart...



And you'd probably win.  Enlighten me of guru of photographich knowledge?  How do I tell them apart?  Of thousands of images on TPF for which I have provided critique, I can think of VERY, VERY few where incorrect exposure was deliberately used to good effect.   
There is a reason that we have a term in photography called "correct exposure".  Just sayin'...



manaheim said:


> and if you can't, then you have absolutely no business telling anyone that what THEY chose to do was right or wrong.


  Really?


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 12, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Haha. Ok seriously though.
> 
> You can't berate someone else on how they give CC. In the beginners forum, the basics *matter*. Rule of thirds, nailing exposure, having an interesting composition, color balance, all of that. The best thing you can do is give CC to the best of YOUR abilities, and if you really take issue, then start a thread on how you think is the best way to CC. Noone is going to learn anything by you coming in an posting about how everyone sucks at life and we suck the creativity out of photography.



Off subject.....rule of thirds in my opinion doesn't always apply.


----------



## HughGuessWho (Feb 12, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Haha. Ok seriously though.
> 
> You can't berate someone else on how they give CC. In the beginners forum, the basics *matter*. Rule of thirds, nailing exposure, having an interesting composition, color balance, all of that. The best thing you can do is give CC to the best of YOUR abilities, and if you really take issue, then start a thread on how you think is the best way to CC. Noone is going to learn anything by you coming in an posting about how everyone sucks at life and we suck the creativity out of photography.



Or by going into other threads and degrading and insulting people in the thread when what you are talking about has absolutely NOTHING to do with what the thread is about and is in direct conflict with your opening comments in the beginning of this thread.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 12, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Haha. Ok seriously though.
> ...



Of course not, there's nothing in life so black and white. But starting out, its often difficult to learn how to frame things, and rule of thirds gives you a good guideline. It also helps you realize everything in your frame. The point is to make everything in your frame count for something. Its not supposed to be "stick your subject in 1/3 of image and have empty space in the other 2/3s".


----------



## manaheim (Feb 12, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Haha. Ok seriously though.
> 
> You can't berate someone else on how they give CC. In the beginners forum, the basics *matter*. Rule of thirds, nailing exposure, having an interesting composition, color balance, all of that. The best thing you can do is give CC to the best of YOUR abilities, and if you really take issue, then start a thread on how you think is the best way to CC. Noone is going to learn anything by you coming in an posting about how everyone sucks at life and we suck the creativity out of photography.



Why are beginners giving CC, though?  I mean doesn't that seem just a little weird?  "Hi, I just bought a camera and I have absolutely no clue what I'm doing... oh but hey that picture you took is ALL WRONG!!!"

I mean, would you cluelessly pick up a hammer for the first time and turn to a 20 year veteran architect and tell him he's a whacko for making that  building entirely out of glass and steel?  See what I mean?



tirediron said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > ...there is a CLEAR way to tell an accidental overexposure and a deliberate artistic choice. I will bet you my left arm than 99% of you couldn't tell the two apart...
> ...



Yes, really... and tired... this was hardly a commentary pointed at you.  You have way more clue than I.

And yes, you're right... very few cases of over/underexposure and the like around here are intentional or executed to good purpose (even if an accident)... but the ones that occasionally are, are STILL treated as if they should be "fixed".  And therein lies my point.


----------



## mishele (Feb 12, 2012)

I have a headache already....lol


----------



## manaheim (Feb 12, 2012)

Bossy said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> > Bossy said:
> ...



See but right there... that little microcosm of a discussion on the rule of thirds is WONDERFUL, but isn't what generally happens here.  Generally someone will respond and say "IT DOESNT FOLLOW THE RULE OF THIRDS- THEREFORE ITS BROKEN- FIX IT."  Whereas what you are doing here is having a pretty reasonable discussion on when and where the rule of thirds might work or not, etc.  THAT kind of thing is what TPF needs.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 12, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Haha. Ok seriously though.
> ...



No, you're comparing apples to cheese sticks.  Beginners and experts alike learn from CCing. And there's also a difference in knowing what looks good/right, and being able to do the same thing. I can watch a video and tell you if the lighting works or not, but I couldn't tell you how they did it or the equipment they used.


----------



## HughGuessWho (Feb 12, 2012)

Just look at it like this Manaheim, if everyone was a perfect as you are, there would be no need for this forum.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 12, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Haha. Ok seriously though.
> ...



I felt like throwing myself and my camera in front of a bus when I first got on here........:lmao:


----------



## dxqcanada (Feb 12, 2012)

I do find that Digital Photographers tend to be more inclined to be technically critical of images than Analog Photographers ... just my limited observation (that can be wrong).


----------



## tirediron (Feb 12, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Yes, really... and tired... this was hardly a commentary pointed at you.


I didn't think it was, and wasn't taking it personally



manaheim said:


> You have way more clue than I.


Kind of you to say, but I am hardly an expert, I just talk a lot! 



manaheim said:


> And yes, you're right... very few cases of over/underexposure and the like around here are intentional or executed to good purpose (even if an accident)... but the ones that occasionally are, are STILL treated as if they should be "fixed". And therein lies my point.


Fair enough, but going back to my question, quite seriously, how is it easy to tell accidental from intentional "errors"?


----------



## jaxx419 (Feb 12, 2012)

A friend saw my "beautiful oil mess" photos that are in the fun gallery and he said -- it takes an artist to walk past oil on the ground and make something beautiful of it. 

It might not be technically correct, but I tried and like to think of myself as "artsy".

And I always warn my experience level when leaving "c&c".


----------



## mjhoward (Feb 12, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Why are beginners giving CC, though?  I mean doesn't that seem just a little weird?  "Hi, I just bought a camera and I have absolutely no clue what I'm doing... oh but hey that picture you took is ALL WRONG!!!"



I would guess that the majority of your customers are not professional artists either but you can bet that they've C&C'd any photos in their heads prior to purchase.  You don't have to be an artist to be able to critique something... express what you like and don't like about it, and what you think may have made the piece (in this case photograph) better.  This is just one of the things that makes photography subjective and not objective.


----------



## manaheim (Feb 12, 2012)

Am I, though?

I think, for some reason, that people think that photography is more attainably something you can criticize.  I don't know why, but they do.

And yeah you can probably say how lighting in a video affected you, but I doubt you would have the balls to walk up to a professional director and tell him he did it wrong.

I DO completely understand the value of trying to c/c other's work to learn more yourself... but there's a huge difference between "Gee,the white balance looks weird to me, was that intentional?  Why did you do that?" and "The white balance is wrong.  Fix it."


----------



## Rephargotohp (Feb 12, 2012)

I'm here cuz I ran out of money for Hookers


----------



## Overread (Feb 12, 2012)

Can I lock it - really can I - pretty pretty please can I lock it!


I'm sure we've had this debate before - probably, though I'm surprised at the source of it.
For what its worth I encourage people to talk about photography, no matter what skill level they are at. Actually for beginners encouraging them is a very important step as it helps them view photography more critically and helps them start to work on the process of understanding what it is they are seeing, why they like something and why they don't like it. 
If they make a big mistake normally someone comes in to correct or counter (one would hope that they do so in a polite manner as well). It's all part of the learning process and it generally works pretty well overall. 



manaheim said:


> When you look through your camera lens are you thinking about 8,000 guidelines/theories or are you thinking about emotion?  Colors?  Patterns?  Light?  What will look cool?  What will stir people?  What will make the viewer think?



I have highlighted the key change required here. Furthermore I would argue that the 80000 guidelines are part and parcel of the points that follow - emotions, colour, patterns etc... 


Sure along the way some people say the wrong thing and some people with less experience might try to help others - but eh this is a forum not a school and at its core is communication within an interest group. Part of that (heck even at school its part of the process) is learning who is and isn't worth listening to and people have to make their own darn minds up about that.


----------



## pgriz (Feb 12, 2012)

We all know the expression "he who knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing" and hope that it does not describe us.  Yet it's partly because the "price" is easy to figure out, the "value" is much more difficult, and shifts with circumstance.  In photographic terms, it's much easier to pick on the technical aspects, while the artistic value is more difficult to discern, especially if one doesn't have the training or experience to recognize the "vocabulary" of the image.

To answer your question, I am here because I find it relatively easy to see things in the imagery of other people, but I become blind and mute when it comes to trying to do the art myself.  At least, that's the way it feels to me, and I would like to feel, if not mastery, at least a level of comfort with my creative side.  In my photographic journey, I've found that I had some very fundamental holes in my knowlede, and these were causing me to, at best, misread a situation, and at worse, completely blow it.  So part of the journey, was to go back and learn some of the fundamentals that i was ignorant of.  In my case, I used light, but I did not understand it.  Nor did I appreciate how much effort goes into the preparation for taking an image.  In various forums, in my club workshops, and in the competitions that I have participated in, I've learned both the depth of my ignorance, but also the paths I needed to follow to at least know the basics.  I've learned a lot in this forum, pursuing the links that many posters have given us, and these in turn lead to other bits and (occasionally) founts of information. 

As for the critiques, that is a skill-set of its own.  We often have a "feeling" about something, but have difficulty putting that feeling into words.  Yet that is exactly what a good critique demands, to read the emotional message, interprete it, and then to reconstruct it using the language of words.  It's translation, really.  And if you know several languages, you know how difficult it can be to capture the essence of a message in one language, and render it properly in another.   It ain't easy...  And we do need to cut some slack to those who try to do it.  Getting it wrong, is part of the journey to getting it right.


----------



## Overread (Feb 12, 2012)

manaheim said:


> And yeah you can probably say how lighting in a video affected you, but I doubt you would have the balls to walk up to a professional director and tell him he did it wrong.



I'll happily tell George Lucas that Han Fired first and that Jar Jar was not meant to be.


----------



## manaheim (Feb 12, 2012)

jaxx419 said:


> A friend saw my "beautiful oil mess" photos that are in the fun gallery and he said -- it takes an artist to walk past oil on the ground and make something beautiful of it.
> 
> It might not be technically correct, but I tried and like to think of myself as "artsy".



I love this comment.  Thank you for posting it.



mjhoward said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > Why are beginners giving CC, though? I mean doesn't that seem just a little weird? "Hi, I just bought a camera and I have absolutely no clue what I'm doing... oh but hey that picture you took is ALL WRONG!!!"
> ...



The majority of people who think they're C/Cing something are really just saying whether they like it or not.  One of my photos which is a "big seller", is artistically ok and technically a train wreck, but people love it.  Again... most folks don't really know what a good photo is.  They may know what they like, and there's nothing wrong with that, but if any one of these people suggested to a professional that this photo was "good", I'd have to run out of the room for fear that the pro would look me in the eye and I'd die from embarrassment.


----------



## chuasam (Feb 12, 2012)

Overread said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > And yeah you can probably say how lighting in a video affected you, but I doubt you would have the balls to walk up to a professional director and tell him he did it wrong.
> ...


 I could happily tell Uwe Boll that every movie he ever made sucks balls.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 12, 2012)

Overread said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > And yeah you can probably say how lighting in a video affected you, but I doubt you would have the balls to walk up to a professional director and tell him he did it wrong.
> ...



My 17 year old son ordered a tee shirt from thinkgeek.com that says "Han shot first."  Off subject....sorry....


----------



## mishele (Feb 12, 2012)

Rephargotohp said:


> I'm here cuz I ran out of money for Hookers



BEST LINE OF THE NIGHT!!!

I'm cheap....just sayin


----------



## manaheim (Feb 12, 2012)

Fairly said, Over.

I'm surprised you're surprised, btw.



pgriz said:


> We all know the expression "he who knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing" and hope that it does not describe us. Yet it's partly because the "price" is easy to figure out, the "value" is much more difficult, and shifts with circumstance. In photographic terms, it's much easier to pick on the technical aspects, while the artistic value is more difficult to discern, especially if one doesn't have the training or experience to recognize the "vocabulary" of the image.
> 
> To answer your question, I am here because I find it relatively easy to see things in the imagery of other people, but I become blind and mute when it comes to trying to do the art myself. At least, that's the way it feels to me, and I would like to feel, if not mastery, at least a level of comfort with my creative side. In my photographic journey, I've found that I had some very fundamental holes in my knowlede, and these were causing me to, at best, misread a situation, and at worse, completely blow it. So part of the journey, was to go back and learn some of the fundamentals that i was ignorant of. In my case, I used light, but I did not understand it. Nor did I appreciate how much effort goes into the preparation for taking an image. In various forums, in my club workshops, and in the competitions that I have participated in, I've learned both the depth of my ignorance, but also the paths I needed to follow to at least know the basics. I've learned a lot in this forum, pursuing the links that many posters have given us, and these in turn lead to other bits and (occasionally) founts of information.
> 
> As for the critiques, that is a skill-set of its own. We often have a "feeling" about something, but have difficulty putting that feeling into words. Yet that is exactly what a good critique demands, to read the emotional message, interprete it, and then to reconstruct it using the language of words. It's translation, really. And if you know several languages, you know how difficult it can be to capture the essence of a message in one language, and render it properly in another. It ain't easy... And we do need to cut some slack to those who try to do it. Getting it wrong, is part of the journey to getting it right.



This was beautiful.

Ok, I'll shaddap and let everyone yell at me for a while now. lol


----------



## Bossy (Feb 12, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Am I, though?
> 
> I think, for some reason, that people think that photography is more attainably something you can criticize.  I don't know why, but they do.
> 
> ...



Hah. If I had the chance, I'd tell a couple directors how they f'd up. Then its up to them *as professionals* to either take my 2 cents or leave it.

Which moves on to phrasing. Its your job as the one receiving CC to sort through and process it. Someone says they love it, next person says its off, 3rd person says its flat out wrong, I'm going to look at my image and see if I agree or if it still stands as a good image to me. Thats the point of CC, to have outside POVs. And if 20 people are saying its flat out wrong, then maybe thats something I really need to look into.


----------



## dxqcanada (Feb 12, 2012)

"I've giv'n her all she's got captain, an' I canna give her  no more." -- Scotty


----------



## johnb304 (Feb 12, 2012)

People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 12, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Why are beginners giving CC, though?  I mean doesn't that seem just a little weird?  "Hi, I just bought a camera and I have absolutely no clue what I'm doing... oh but hey that picture you took is ALL WRONG!!!"



About this question that was brought up...  I will say this.  THIS IS VERY FRUSTRATING!

When I am trying to help someone, and make some suggestions on what might help improve the image...... then suddenly four or five people (who admit to being new to photography in their intro the day before) come along... and tell the OP I am working with, that the image is fine just like it is.. and doesn't need any changes. Who is the OP supposed to believe? I feel like I just wasted my time! I find newbie C&C does much more harm then good.... at least when they are C&C'ing another newbie that doesn't know any better!

Comments?


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 12, 2012)

I'm here for the drama.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 12, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> I'm here for the drama.



Yea.. me too, buddy!    ( and the likes! Cant forget the likes!)


----------



## Overread (Feb 12, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > Why are beginners giving CC, though?  I mean doesn't that seem just a little weird?  "Hi, I just bought a camera and I have absolutely no clue what I'm doing... oh but hey that picture you took is ALL WRONG!!!"
> ...



Generally backing up your point with sound reasoning and explanations normally carries ones point over the head of points made without such clarifications. In the end its the photographers choice who they will and won't listen to - sometimes that means you will get ignored. Just gotta get used to that - pick up and move on - you can't win em all and there ain't no point getting bitter about the ones you don't win.


----------



## SCraig (Feb 12, 2012)

Please keep in mind that one of the "C"s in "C&C" stands for "Comment".  Traditionally it is the first "C as in "Comment and Critique".  I feel that it is traditionally the first "C' simply because EVERYONE knows whether they like or dislike a photograph simply by looking at it and can comment on what they like and dislike about one.  Admittedly it does require a certain level of knowledge to provide useful "Critique" of a photograph however no knowledge is required to "Comment" on one.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 12, 2012)

SCraig said:


> Please keep in mind that one of the "C"s in "C&C" stands for "Comment".  Traditionally it is the first "C as in "Comment and Critique".  I feel that it is traditionally the first "C' simply because EVERYONE knows whether they like or dislike a photograph simply by looking at it and can comment on what they like and dislike about one.  Admittedly it does require a certain level of knowledge to provide useful "Critique" of a photograph however no knowledge is required to "Comment" on one.



I've always known it as Constructive Criticism.


----------



## tirediron (Feb 12, 2012)

Bossy said:


> SCraig said:
> 
> 
> > Please keep in mind that one of the "C"s in "C&C" stands for "Comment". Traditionally it is the first "C as in "Comment and Critique". I feel that it is traditionally the first "C' simply because EVERYONE knows whether they like or dislike a photograph simply by looking at it and can comment on what they like and dislike about one. Admittedly it does require a certain level of knowledge to provide useful "Critique" of a photograph however no knowledge is required to "Comment" on one.
> ...


You mean, as in, "Constructive & Criticism"?


----------



## pgriz (Feb 12, 2012)

I thought it meant "crucify".


----------



## Bossy (Feb 12, 2012)

tirediron said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > SCraig said:
> ...



No I mean as, criticism given constructively. There's never been an &.


----------



## manaheim (Feb 12, 2012)

Does anyone wonder at all why TPF selected Over as a moderator?   Man.  Someone should hire this guy to be an embassador to a prickly foreign country.


----------



## marmots (Feb 12, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Off subject.....rule of thirds in my opinion doesn't always apply.



well i think this is an important thing to think about regardless of whether or not it's off subject


the way i see this, without anyone else's opinion...

the rule of thirds has a lot to do with direction and motion.  the only reason one would use it would be to show these things.  


for example when i was just starting i posted an image of someone looking dead on, directly at the camera, with no tilt, or anything, and i had it perfectly centered.  well, someone on here told me that this was wrong, and i should have them off center.  being a newbie, i adjusted it, and deleted the original, without even realizing it looked worse.  

i think there are some clear situations in which the rule of thirds doesn't apply, without even seeing the image

but once again, the whole thing about direction is just something i deduced over time.  i could be wrong


----------



## Bossy (Feb 12, 2012)

marmots said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> > Off subject.....rule of thirds in my opinion doesn't always apply.
> ...



And yet you can have some dead center and still follow the rules of thirds.

Moral of the story, don't ever delete your originals!


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Feb 12, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Off subject.....rule of thirds in my opinion doesn't always apply.



Pretty sure I can say with absolutely certainty that when it comes to artistic media like photography, the ONLY thing that always applies is the rule that says "If the image looks good to the viewer, it is good."

The end.  You can all go home now.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Feb 12, 2012)

Overread said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > And yeah you can probably say how lighting in a video affected you, but I doubt you would have the balls to walk up to a professional director and tell him he did it wrong.
> ...



:lmao:  Seriously, that's the funniest post I've read on here.  Laughed out loud.  My wife came into the room to see what was so funny.


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 12, 2012)

Are you sulking about the guitar thing? Geez...


----------



## jriepe (Feb 12, 2012)

mishele said:


> Rephargotohp said:
> 
> 
> > I'm here cuz I ran out of money for Hookers
> ...



I'll give you a call only if you promise not to critique my performance because I will definitely be overexposed.

Jerry


----------



## tirediron (Feb 12, 2012)

Bossy said:


> No I mean as, criticism given constructively. There's never been an &.


I understand, but TPF convention usually (used to) include the ampersand.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 12, 2012)

Oh I'm just talking in general, like, in school we're taught constructive crit, I've never read TPF's fine print:er:. So now I know


----------



## e.rose (Feb 12, 2012)

mishele said:


> I have a headache already....lol



Me too... which is why I stopped with your post and decided to quote one earlier one to respond to before I waste too much time reading through what is likely to be 10 pages of junk.  



O|||||||O said:


> Gotta agree - technical perfection isn't the be-all-end-all, a lot of people here seem to believe it is though...



Agreed.

It's the one reason I disappeared for a while.  This place has helped me grow IMMENSELY.  I can't thank some of the users ENOUGH who have helped me progress so quickly in such a short amount of time (and that's not to say I'm done learning or that I'm even that GOOD of a photographer... but where I'm at right now, I thought it would take me 5 years to get there and I've barely been at it for 2), BUT...

...there comes a point when I start to realize that there is also a certain "box" that people have to fit into here to get totally positive C&C... and that "box" was sort of hindering my thought process at times... so I left for a bit, to do things on my own.

That's not to say I DON'T appreciate the C&C I get... I absolutely do and I wish I got MORE of it... however, sometimes, depending on what I was aiming for, I will thank someone for their C&C, after having considered it, and THEN... decide for myself whether or not I feel like it applies for that image.  Sometimes I'm going for something "technically wrong"... and sometimes the things people pick out as wrong with the image are things I overlooked and watch for next time.

So yeah, while I put a lot of effort into being "technically correct" most of the time, and I ALWAYS appreciate people pointing out what I could have done better... I don't think it's the end-all.

I DON'T, however, agree with the statement that newbies shouldn't C&C.

C&Cing other's work is part of the learning process.

If they lead it off with, "I'm new at this, so I'm not sure if this is right, BUT..." it gives the OP a clue not to put all their stock in that one answer.  However, it gives the responder a change to give an answer that may or may not be correct... and if it's not... then someone *will* correct them, and they will have learned from that experience, whereas, if they had quietly C&C'd to themselves and never put out in the open what they *thought* might be the correct answer, they would have never known it was wrong and been given knew insight.

It's like a school classroom.  Teachers ask their students to assess things all the time.  "Tell me what is wrong with this...", "What do you think about this?"... they don't ask for ONLY the students who KNOW they're right to answer... they ask for ANYONE to answer... and if that students answer is incorrect or at fault in anyway, the teacher will point it out and show them where in their thought process they went wrong.

To me TPF is a group learning experience, and *everyone* should be able to share images AND critique... no matter their skill level, because something can be learned from BOTH of those things.

I know *I* learned a lot from doing both... even when I was clueless beyond hope in the beginning.

/sleepy rambling


----------



## Trever1t (Feb 12, 2012)

I'm here for the ladies too


----------



## BuS_RiDeR (Feb 12, 2012)

Seriously, I came here originally to learn and share info.. And to this day I am still learning. My health has been a factor; causing problems whith my vision and color/contrast at times...  But that comes and goes...


----------



## HughGuessWho (Feb 13, 2012)

e.rose said:
			
		

> Me too... which is why I stopped with your post and decided to quote one earlier one to respond to before I waste too much time reading through what is likely to be 10 pages of junk.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> ...



Well said. That is exactly the point many have been trying to make, you, however, said it much better than any of us. The problem is, there are far too many here that have the "Holier than thou" attitude that refuse to allow "constructive" comments, criticism or critique. It's all about "I'm better than you"text and "your wrong" which totally goes against the grain of anything resembling "art". Im pretty sure van Gogh would have thought Picasso's work was "wrong" too. Moral: Opinions are only opinions.


----------



## jriepe (Feb 13, 2012)

Shortly after I got into macro another member of another board was just getting into macro and looking for advice.  Right away wanting to be helpful I told him that a tripod is essential for macro.  A couple experienced macro shooters responded to my comment stating they never use a tripod and then went on to tell me what they did that eliminated the use of a tripod.  And that was to use off camera lighting and shoot in manual.  The use of lighting allows for a faster shutter speed that is going to prevent blur from subject or camera movement.  I felt foolish after giving that advice but how many times on this forum have I seen members telling a new macro shooter that a tripod is a must.  For inanimate objects I'll agree but for insects a tripod is a hindrance and many shots will be missed trying to use one.  Anyway even though I feel my advice was misguided it got two other members to guide me in the right direction.  So if a newbie critiques or gives advice it can be a learning experience for them because disagreeing with their critique may get them to look at things in a different light.  We learn by our own mistakes.

Jerry


----------



## Diffuser (Feb 13, 2012)

As a newbie, I completely see what manaheim is trying to say. Maybe bottom line is the danger of discouraging an artistic vibe by making it too technical? Followed by technical advice from not so
much experienced photographers. I haven't posted a photo yet myself, because I would like to get a better feeling for the board and the individual members. 

As an idea or suggestion, to describe a bit more in detail in a few lines what the 'purpose and feeling' for the photo was, as introduction before asking for critics, would help.
"I walked in the park this morning and shot this bird" might not give enough info, but if you say "I'm working to improve my DOF" or try to create a mystic vibe around the subject, gives more indication.

I can only guess that most newbie posting their first pictures for c&c are mainly asking for comments around best practices?


----------



## sm4him (Feb 13, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > Why are beginners giving CC, though?  I mean doesn't that seem just a little weird?  "Hi, I just bought a camera and I have absolutely no clue what I'm doing... oh but hey that picture you took is ALL WRONG!!!"
> ...



I'm not exactly "new to photography" but in many aspects, I do consider myself at a beginner level (well, maybe a very early intermediate). But I find your comment interesting. Personally, there have been times when I've decided NOT to post because I see that someone who I consider more of an "expert" has already given a thorough C&C.  But, this is a self-policed site; each person has to decide for themselves whether what they have to say has any value...and some people suck at that.

But on the other side of it, the few times I've ASKED for C&C, the way *I* evaluate the comments are:
--Are they, overall, saying the image is worth anything at all? Or are they ALL saying, in essence, "why didn't you just toss them in the bin?"  I already KNOW whether or not *I* like it. If a few people don't, meh...they can just get over it. But nobody here has anything good to say about it, then I re-evaluate why I like it; don't necessarily change my mind, just try to look at it more objectively.

--The MAIN thing I do, is look for the comments of those that I've seen from other threads, know what the blue blazes they are talking about. It is THOSE C&Cs that get the most heavily-weighted for me.  For instance, I posted a night-time, light-trail picture not too long ago. A couple of people kept telling me things like "it's not an interesting building," although I'd already explained in detail what the purpose of the photo was, and that the building was an integral part of that, interesting or not.  But manaheim came on and started telling me how to improve on what I'd done, what to try when I re-shoot, and directed me to his nighttime photography tutorial thread.  That had greater weight than anything, because I've seen his other comments and he clearly knows whereof he speaks, and I've seen his photos, and he CLEARLY knows whereof he speaks.

Point is, it's really up to the OP to decide which C&C they are going to lend the highest value to...and honestly? If they choose to value all the "OOOH, I like it" comments over those that are giving them some actual constructive criticism? Well, they probably weren't going to listen to you even if NOBODY else posted.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 13, 2012)

Before saying anything about c/c, what irritates me is the habit of just replying to everything with a quote of the entire previous stack of comments so that there's 8 inches of quote and two lines of original text.

I think that C/C is an important exercise for anyone, especially 'beginners.' They need to bridge that gap between the emotional reaction and the actual expression of why they think a certain way.
People make isolated technical comments because those kinds of comments are easy and no lose. If I say something is off-center, and it is, I don't have to justify anything I say.
It is harder to make a value judgement and justify it.
Compliments are cheap but have little lasting value.
So, even a positive comment should have some justification or its useless to either the recipeint or the giver.

Several times, I have put some effort in a c/c and someone comes along after and says, 'well, I absolutely love them all the way they are.' I am just tempted to say,"OK, schmuck, why do you love them?'

When I see people who, in their own work and prior discussions, have demonstrated that they have the artistic sensibility of a 2 year old go totally bonkers over a mediocre picture, I just sigh and go on because the entire thread is essentially thrown off kilter by the exaggeration.

And lastly, I tend to ignore arguments from authority. C/C should be valid on its face with a comment and the reason behind this.  
That is, a c/c made without any reason except supposed experience or sales or anything else that isn't right out in front of us.

And, of course, unless one is a household name, if you don't post pictures here, I don't listen to what you say. 
Not that you may not have a valid opinion, but if you don't take your turn at being looked at, you don't get to talk - not to me at least.


----------



## thinkricky (Feb 13, 2012)

Yet another thread about the same bulls#!t

People who post this doesn't realize that you can't change people. Especially on a forum.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 13, 2012)

I am here to share my photos, hear what people think of them.  I also like to give other people constructive criticisms.  *I don't understand why some members here always criticize other people but I almost never see them post anything*. If this statement somewhat true, you better start sharing your photos!  Don't just preach!  It is freaking annoying as hell.


----------



## thinkricky (Feb 13, 2012)

Schwettylens said:
			
		

> I am here to share my photos, hear what people think of them.  I also like to give other people constructive criticisms.  I don't understand why some members here always criticize other people but I almost never see them post anything. If this statement somewhat true, you better start sharing your photos!  Don't just preach!



Very true. I didn't think about that.


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 13, 2012)

The thing with newbie criticism for me, is that people who are new to photography need to know the objective side before they can break all of their bounds and begin getting all artistic. I mean, you can't start making innovative music that will shape the industry without first knowing how to play the instrument.

If you ask a newbie why the decided to tilt that flower, or why they decided to split tone the image, what do you expect their response to be? It's usually not an elaborate, in-depth view of the creative process and purpose of the style, but instead is a comment like "I thought it looked cool  "

You can't disregard the "rules" before knowing the "rules." That's why objective crit. is such a big deal in the beginner's forum. If we tell someone that their exposure is WRONG, we mean it's objectively wrong. If we told them "wow, it really works on a creative level", whose to say that they won't spend many photographic days/weeks making the wrong exposure because we encouraged it? If someone can create a technically good, (albeit generic, maybe) photograph, then it's easier to trust that they know what they're doing artistically. Just because someone deliberately changes the WB of a photo does not mean that they know why they did it, or if it even works for the message that they're trying to convey.

Technical prowess comes before artistic expression in my opinion. Why do you think that mid-century artists would try and duplicate a famous piece of work from one of the artistic master (Da Vinci etc....). It was so they could lean on an objective level how to get the result they want, and also to see what works. Artists don't usually innovate until they have a strong foothold on what is already being done....know what I mean?

If you want more subjective criticism, then post photos in a different forum that has mostly seasoned photographers who assume that you KNOW what you're doing...and don't post in the Beginner's section.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 13, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> If *we* tell someone that their exposure is *WRONG*, *we* mean it's objectively* wrong*.



I don't think there's any *WE* in this. If you think something is *WRONG in your opinion, *then justify it*.
*
Believing that there are classes here where someone has the right through some authority of experience to make pronouncements artificially elevates some people's opinions into a level of authority they don't deserve and depresses others.

I generally listen to critique from anyone who will justify it on either objective or subjective terms, I don't listen to those who won't.
(other vague rules apply)


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 13, 2012)

thinkricky said:


> People who post this doesn't realize that you can't change people. Especially on a forum.



yes, but you can change their behavior.


----------



## KenC (Feb 13, 2012)

A friend of mine used to have a sign on his refrigerator that read: "IGNORE ALIEN ORDERS."  That's sort of how I approach the internet.  If someone says something idiotic or unhelpful I generally ignore it and focus on comments that are more useful.  I've occasionally had comments on photos I've posted that were not really useful, including some of the positive ones.  I agree with those who said that beginners also need to learn how to critique and I think just seeing other critique on here will help those who are interested in developing.  Meanwhile, there will always be some amount of less useful commentary, which we can all live with in the interest of allowing beginners to grow.


----------



## Tee (Feb 13, 2012)

I have money for hookers but sometimes I need a night alone so TPF is my corner bar in the cyber world.  I'll take a shot of Jack and an Iron City, please.  

Manaheim, I agree with you about some thoughts.  Sometimes I pick up the camera and simply shoot while other times I'm thinking the shot through when looking through the viewfinder (clipped limbs, poles coming out of the head, etc).  Yes, when I read "I'm just a newbie and don't know much but..." I skip to the next post.  Those pre-qualifiers can be chalked up to the poster wanting some face time in the threads and wanting to contribute.  Many times, it's lip service or spouting the company line like Understanding Exposure is the holy gospel or lines like the quote below:



luvmyfamily said:


> Off subject.....rule of thirds in my opinion doesn't always apply.


*groan* *facepalm*


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 13, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > If *we* tell someone that their exposure is *WRONG*, *we* mean it's objectively* wrong*.
> ...



lol, thanks for your opinion. Also, saying that a person's authority is undeserved is quite baseless. My professors in college don't depress me; they just inspire me to become better than them. Anyone who gets depressed because of authority is going to have a tough life ahead of them. I don't anyone personally on here, but I've made inferences, and I respect some of the member's opinions because I do feel that they have more authority than I do on certain issues. I'm sorry, but I am not all for free love and anarchy. There are some things that work, and some things that don't.


Also; Is white white? Or is it piss yellow? Or mid-tone grey? 

Are skies detail-less and colorless? Yeah, didn't think so.

If the creator of a photo can't justify their decisions, then I don't have to either. I try to most of the time, but I don't feel obligated to.

Maybe that's not the best way of thinking, but I really don't care.

You say that you listen to critique if it's justified on objective or subjective terms, and yet you supposedly believe that there is no objectivity in photography. Just an observation.

(PS: I wouldn't be so hostile with this post if you hadn't asserted your perceived authority by capitalizing and emphasizing like you believe that I wouldn't understand your stance otherwise.)


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > Why are beginners giving CC, though? I mean doesn't that seem just a little weird? "Hi, I just bought a camera and I have absolutely no clue what I'm doing... oh but hey that picture you took is ALL WRONG!!!"
> ...



Just because noobs may be new to this forum doesn't mean they are new to photography!


----------



## Bossy (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > About this question that was brought up... I will say this. THIS IS VERY FRUSTRATING!
> ...



Reading comprehension fail, try again.


----------



## HughGuessWho (Feb 13, 2012)

I think a few points have been lost in all of the dust.

1 - Have you considered what the definition of "Forum" is?
2 - I dont think anyone is complaining about honest critique. The complaint is about how some people feel like they must always treat others poorly.
3 - And the underlying point in this thread is how people treat people. This forum could be about Under Water Basket Weaving and the concerns would be the same.

It should be photographer (young, old, newbies, old-timers, purists, abstract lovers ) all sharing their points of view, in a civil, enjoyable and productive way, in an effort to further the art of photography. Is that really that difficult to do?


----------



## HughGuessWho (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > manaheim said:
> ...



I concur 100%


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 13, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Maybe that's not the best way of thinking, but I really don't care.
> 
> (PS: I wouldn't be so hostile with this post if you hadn't asserted your perceived authority by capitalizing and emphasizing like you believe that I wouldn't understand your stance otherwise.)



Look what happens when people get confronted with perceived authority in a public situation - they respond with hostility.
Even when that authority does have a valid point, the message is still irritating because it's a public reprimand.

I think it is better to address people as equals, show them why what they have done doesn't look right to me and demonstrate what does look right to me. 

(If you want an authoritative view, I have taught various subjects at the graduate level since 1978 and have always used that approach.)


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > manaheim said:
> ...



Well, the majority of them seem to be, including yourself!


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 13, 2012)

HughGuessWho said:


> It should be photographer (young, old, newbies, old-timers, purists, abstract lovers &#8230 all sharing their points of view, in a civil, enjoyable and productive way, in an effort to further the &#8220;art&#8221; of photography. Is that really that difficult to do?



Hugh.. what drugs are you on? Because I want some!   

In a perfect world that might happen... this is real life! Along with the beautiful flowers, fluffy clouds, and sweet little bunny rabbits.. there is cancer, pollution, corruption and people who are sometime less than nice to each other!


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 13, 2012)

I'm here because of


----------



## HughGuessWho (Feb 13, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> HughGuessWho said:
> 
> 
> > It should be photographer (young, old, newbies, old-timers, purists, abstract lovers &#8230 all sharing their points of view, in a civil, enjoyable and productive way, in an effort to further the &#8220;art&#8221; of photography. Is that really that difficult to do?
> ...



Fair enough. I just dont understand why one would want to join a photography forum if they didnt want to discuss photography. 
**gets back into my yoga position and takes another hit"*


----------



## NickA (Feb 13, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Hugh.. what drugs are you on? Because I want some!
> 
> In a perfect world that might happen... this is real life! Along with the beautiful flowers, fluffy clouds, and sweet little bunny rabbits.. there is cancer, pollution, corruption and people who are sometime less than nice to each other!



Just because it's real life, doesn't make it right.  But you speak the truth.  When people get behind the anonymity of a keyboard and Internet connection, they say things that are totally out of character, or that they wouldn't say in everyday situations.  All forums are the same though, and you can pick out the members that post negativity in almost every situation.  It's best to just add them to your ignore list and move on.


----------



## HughGuessWho (Feb 13, 2012)

NickA said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Hugh.. what drugs are you on? Because I want some!
> ...



Valid point. I think I will take your advice.


----------



## Dagwood56 (Feb 13, 2012)

I'm not going to sift thru 6 pages to find who it was that said something to the effect of -their not bothering to talk to members who don't post photos - As someone who no longer posts photos here, though I did at one time, I kind of take offense at that remark. Due to lifes problems, I presently have a very low end computer with just enough memory to get two prgrams to function, I also have a very slow dial up interent connection, so even though I have a flickr and photo bucket account, I can't get photos to upload to the internet unless I make them postage stamp size and wait 30 minutes per photo! Plus, health issues keep me from getting out and around much to take many photos. I come here because I like photography and like being around others who like photography. I like to see and at times, comment on the work of others. Just because I can't post any photos right now does not mean I do not have the knowledge or desire to comment on other's photos and when I do comment I try to be polite about it. Its not fair or right to judge a persons capability\knowledge based on whether or not they post photos.

 I just felt this needed saying since it seems so many members have become so judgmental of eveything and everyone here lately, including going so far as to nit pick grammar and spelling in some posts. Its all really getting absurd! Like the thread where someone inquired as to what other's used to shoot - and where did that go? A lot of unecessary snarky remarks about guns and nonsense.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 13, 2012)

It was me and I stand by the statement.

If the people who are experienced/trained/skillful don't post, then TPF becomes just a play pen for beginners and when experienced people burn out, what happens then?
I understand and have sympathy for your situation but your situation isn't universal. 
I'm certain you can understand my position.

For my part, I just won't listen to those who finds this place good enough to critique but not worthy to post in - sort of a booty-call for photographers.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 13, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Stop for a moment.
> 
> Drop your ego, let your defenses down, and think about this.
> 
> ...



Seems to me like it's time to go back and quote the Original Post. There are a number of rather new photographers here who act as if they're seasoned, experienced shooters, and they put forth ideas and suggestions as if they have vast experience. There are also many,many more newcomers who preface their remarks as suggested above, by the original poster. People who preface their C&C with statements like, "I'm relatively new, but here's what I think," are helping others understand where the C&C or comments are coming from. Anyway...as far as people who post photos or not...doesn't impress me much either way. I can tell by reading posts who knows what they're talking about, and who only thinks they do.


----------



## HughGuessWho (Feb 13, 2012)

Why do you single out "beginners" in your statement? Looks like it is a playground for some "old-timers" as well. That was an earlier point. Some want to fill the pages with trash talk instead of allowing those who care about the photography world to have discussions about the same.


----------



## MReid (Feb 13, 2012)

It is relative...to someone who doesn't understand the basics...a six month shooter than has even just a few things figured out is an expert.
What makes it tough is that up to a certain point dslr shooters don't know enough to know what they don't know.....so relatively inexperienced shooters have a tendency to think they know more than they do.....even though they mean well.


----------



## chuasam (Feb 13, 2012)

HughGuessWho said:


> Fair enough. I just dont understand why one would want to join a photography forum if they didnt want to discuss photography.
> **gets back into my yoga position and takes another hit"*


Some are here for the sole purpose of trolling and proving to the world that they know a lot about photography whilst being amazing ignorant about taking good pictures.
Some are here to learn, some are here to justify their passion. Some like talking about gear.
I'm here to get ideas and inspiration, to network within the industry, and to encourage those heart is in the right place but just need a little help.


----------



## Snaps (Feb 13, 2012)

No one is going to make me stop telling people i like their pictures and why. And I don't much care what your estimation of my skill set is......


----------



## Fred Berg (Feb 13, 2012)

Someone, not necessarily me, but quite possibly someone not unlike myself, notices something from their window at work or from their car as they drive to their workplace, lets the said something roll around in their mind, where their imagination and fantasy can play with it for a while, then, when the right brain has had its time with the slowly forming idea, the left brain gets in on the act and together they plan their next move. 

The person chooses a day and time which might, they hope, provide them with the conditions and light they think could be favourable, and, along with the camera, lens and film, all of which they have carefully selected as the best combination to tackle the project as set out to them by R&L brain, sets out to capture on film what they saw from their window at work or from their car driving to their workplace.

They spend a happy hour or so taking careful and well thought out shots of their target and go home happy in the knowledge that they have given it their very best shot. Then come a few tense days waiting for the film to be returned from the lab. The dias or negatives are then carefully selected and scanned, at full resolution you understand, and the resulting photos are sorted once more, and the remaining few are given, where necessary, a final touch of PP until the person is happy with what they have, and rightly feel they have achieved something worthwhile.

Then they post the fruits of their efforts on TPF and wait. After a while, if they are lucky, they get a response to their request for C&C. If they are unlucky, the first person that comments will not like, for whatever reason, possibly not even clear to themselves, the presented work and proceed to talk **** and run the cherished photos, children of the subconscious reaches of the photographer's mind, down. Then, before very long, the flies arrive, attracted by the said ****, and begin to nourish their egos...

I'm not saying this has ever happened to me, but almost certainly it has happened to a person not unlike myself...very probably, anyway.


----------



## mishele (Feb 13, 2012)

Why am I here?! I come here to see you, Man!! 

When people post pictures with information about their intent, they get better C&C.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

HughGuessWho said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > HughGuessWho said:
> ...



I love talking photography.....I joined to TALK photography....not to argue it.  Constructive critisim is best.  No matter what photos people put on here, there is always something wrong with them.  Maybe we should start looking at magazine pics or Sports photography and find flaws in it.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

chuasam said:


> HughGuessWho said:
> 
> 
> > Fair enough. I just dont understand why one would want to join a photography forum if they didnt want to discuss photography.
> ...


And some like bragging.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> I am here to share my photos, hear what people think of them. I also like to give other people constructive criticisms. *I don't understand why some members here always criticize other people but I almost never see them post anything*. If this statement somewhat true, you better start sharing your photos! Don't just preach! It is freaking annoying as hell.



Nice constructive critism.  Instead of saying, "your white balance is off, I see a shadow"...blah, blah......try saying what you like about the photo first.  Kinda like when my kids do something bad, I say "I'm really glad your grades are good in school but..."


----------



## SCraig (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> ... Maybe we should start looking at magazine pics or Sports photography and find flaws in it.


That's WAY too easy.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 13, 2012)

Sugar coated CC's are for pampered children who've never been told the truth in their lives. We aren't children. If you can't handle 20 people telling you your photos look awful (general you) you aren't ready for the general public.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 13, 2012)

SCraig said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> > ... Maybe we should start looking at magazine pics or Sports photography and find flaws in it.
> ...



You mean you don't do that already? Everything is flawed. The point it to figure out if the flaw was a rookie mistake, or if it was intentional, and in either case does it work with the image.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Sugar coated CC's are for pampered children who've never been told the truth in their lives. We aren't children. If you can't handle 20 people telling you your photos look awful (general you) you aren't ready for the general public.



yeah, yeah, blah blah.  You know what they say about opinions.....


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Sugar coated CC's are for pampered children who've never been told the truth in their lives. We aren't children. If you can't handle 20 people telling you your photos look awful (general you) you aren't ready for the general public.



I haven't had ONE person in the general public tell me my photo's are bad. I have people ASKING me to take their photo's because they don't have the eye we do on here.  If it is a tad out of focus, or has white balance issues, they don't know.  Whoever it was that said above that we get on here (internet world) and feel we can say what we want. Would you say that to my face if you were invited to my house for dinner and i pulled up the computer to ask for advice?


----------



## Bossy (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Sugar coated CC's are for pampered children who've never been told the truth in their lives. We aren't children. If you can't handle 20 people telling you your photos look awful (general you) you aren't ready for the general public.
> ...



I didn't know we were specifically talking about you or your images, but yes. If I had some opinion on your work, I would tell you if it sucked or if your wb was off. What kind of friend blows smoke up your ass?


----------



## mishele (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> *Nice constructive critism*. Instead of saying, "your white balance is off, I see a shadow"...blah, blah......try saying what you like about the photo first. Kinda like when my kids do something bad, I say "I'm really glad your grades are good in school but..."



I understand what you want. Just realize you can't control the way people communicate on here. Don't take people so seriously, grow tough skin, hit the ignore button. This place isn't known for coddling. :hug::


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Would you say that to my face if you were invited to my house for dinner and i pulled up the computer to ask for advice?



The general public is, in general, collectively a moron.
Isn't that why you're here; to hear the truth about your work as someone who has some experience sees it?

Don't expect the general public to understand your better work or to criticize your lesser.


----------



## shortpants (Feb 13, 2012)

I'm here to read threads like this one and wish I could get those minutes of my life back.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

mishele said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> > *Nice constructive critism*. Instead of saying, "your white balance is off, I see a shadow"...blah, blah......try saying what you like about the photo first. Kinda like when my kids do something bad, I say "I'm really glad your grades are good in school but..."
> ...



Once again, people say things on here they wouldn't dare say to my face. "This place isn't for coddling?"  No it isn't, but is isn't a bashing session either or place to show what a smartazz you are.  If you were here, at my house, and I pulled up the computer to ask for advice on photo's would you say it in a hateful way?   
:thumbdown:


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 13, 2012)

Here is a present that you can use on all the unhelpful comments.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> > Would you say that to my face if you were invited to my house for dinner and i pulled up the computer to ask for advice?
> ...



Not only talking about myself here...I've seen some great work be ripped apart, lowering the self esteem of someone trying to learn, and I've seen some out of focus budoir photos that do not seem to matter to the men....lol....


----------



## NickA (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> I haven't had ONE person in the general public tell me my photo's are bad. I have people ASKING me to take their photo's because they don't have the eye we do on here.  If it is a tad out of focus, or has white balance issues, they don't know.  _*Whoever it was that said above that we get on here (internet world) and feel we can say what we want*_. Would you say that to my face if you were invited to my house for dinner and i pulled up the computer to ask for advice?



I posted something similar, so if you are talking about my post you took it the opposite way that I meant it.  I meant people say things they wouldn't normally say because they are behind a keyboard and an Internet connection.  It's the same way with sports fans.  You've seen the behavior of people at pro sports games; it's not acceptable in any society.


----------



## tirediron (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Once again, people say things on here they wouldn't dare say to my face.


Really?  I can say with total certainty that I've never made a comment about to a member here that I wouldn't make to his or her face, and I think that goes for most of the regulars here. 



luvmyfamily said:


> If you were here, at my house, and I pulled up the computer to ask for advice on photo's would you say it in a hateful way?


I would not say it in a "hateful" way, but would interpret it in a hateful way?  One of the problems with electronic communication is that it is VERY difficult to impart nuance, inflection or even mood.  Someone can make a post meant in humourous manner, but someone else might interpret it as a personal attack...  "hate" is very subjective.


----------



## mishele (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> mishele said:
> 
> 
> > luvmyfamily said:
> ...


You might as well stop asking the whole "would you say it to my face" question. It doesn't apply. This isn't real world here, can't use the same logic. Most of the people that are dicks on here prolly wouldn't say anything in person. That doesn't change anything. You need to just ignore them, because you aren't going to change them.


----------



## pgriz (Feb 13, 2012)

The best critiques that I have ever received came from sessions with my photo club where a high proportion of members are working professional photographers who still want to talk photography after work.  Images that I thought were fantastic (and my friends and family told me the same), were methodically torn apart,photographic element by photographic element, compositional flaw by compositional flaw, and technical mistake by technical mistake.  No malice, but no mercy either.

If you had an ego going in, it was as thin as a graphene sheet after they finished.  So after the first such session, I knew enough to check my ego at the door.  It was interesting that the opinions were not unanimous &#8211; taste, preference, and inclination of each individual member obviously affected their perceptions.  However, a common thread was the intolerance for lazy work &#8211; if they thought someone took the easy way out, they would pile on. But at the end, you were left by a dissected mess with two or three things that made the image work, and everything else that was detracting or diminishing the image. 

Those critiquing sessions have left me with an appreciation of just how hard it is to give a good critique, and how much work goes into making world-class images.  If you (and here I mean the general, inclusive &#8220;you&#8221 want to improve your images, you need to know what the faults are, how to correct them, and what &#8220;good&#8221;really looks like.  

To pick up Manaheim&#8217;s original post, I&#8217;d like to see more effort put into explaining the opinions. For instance, if &#8220;It&#8217;s underexposed&#8221;is the &#8220;problem&#8221;, then describing why that diminishes the image would be useful.  BS has a way of being revealed when the reasons behind a statement can be examined.  If the giver of the opinion cannot defend their statement or cannot give concrete reasons for/against, then they will reveal themselves as, at best, uninformed. There is a reason why any evidence presented in court is tested by being subjected to cross-examination.  Same goes for scientific inquiry.  Same goes for art jurying.  Same goes even for such things as wine-tasting.

And, finally, the quality of the critique says much about the person giving it.  He or she who knows their art or craft also know the vocabulary to describe the nuances.  If that nuance is missing, then perhaps the critic is either lazy, or incompetent or inexperienced.  The last can be excused (we all were there at one point or another), but not the first two.


----------



## MTVision (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:
			
		

> Once again, people say things on here they wouldn't dare say to my face. "This place isn't for coddling?"  No it isn't, but is isn't a bashing session either or place to show what a smartazz you are.  If you were here, at my house, and I pulled up the computer to ask for advice on photo's would you say it in a hateful way?
> :thumbdown:



Everything I've ever posted I would probably say to someones face. I don't think I'm mean or hateful on here - maybe i come across that way but it's not my intention. I think it's the same with a lot of people. 

Some people can be jerks. But I've also seen a lot of people get defensive over a comment that wasn't meant to be mean or cruel. Buttons get pushed and people react - which may not happen IRL because it's easier to communicate and things don't get misconstrued. 

The thing about friends loving your work - my friends love my photos too. I was asked to do a wedding about 2 months after I got my camera.  Which just goes to show that people don't know **** about photography. It makes me happy when people compliment my work but I know deep down that it's crap. I didn't know it was crap until I started posting here. Now I can look at my photos and know which ones are utter crap. 


There are a couple other forums I belong to and I never post for CC there. They are too nice. They don't pick apart your photos which is what I want and how I will learn. It can be harsh and it can hurt your feelings but You'll probably learn a lot from it. And if you don't like what people say....then ignore them. 


PS - this isn't specifically directed at you luvmyfamily - I just quoted you


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 13, 2012)

Man, is that the truth.
PGriz has said it all.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Sugar coated CC's are for pampered children who've never been told the truth in their lives. We aren't children. If you can't handle 20 people telling you your photos look awful (general you) you aren't ready for the general public.
> ...



Yes.. but I will take hers, over yours.. because she has more experience than you do!  That does count for something!


----------



## Derrel (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > luvmyfamily said:
> ...



I have never seen "great work" ripped apart on this forum. You, luvmyfamily, have been a member here for almost exactly two weeks. So, when was this "great work" ripped apart????

My feeling is that if work is "great" it is almost universally adored here on TPF. "Great work" does not just mean a good exposure and decent focus shot with a d-slr; the threshold for greatness is MUCH higher...the simple, mechanical things, like setting the exposure, and focusing the lens, can be done by the "machine" parts of ANY modern camera...a certain base level of technical fitness is an assumed quantity in a photograph. Cameras have never, ever, ever been as GOOD as they are right now, in 2012. I see a LOT of photos that have excellent technical values--good focus, good exposure, nice color, well-controlled dynamic range, and so on ...but then the composition looks like that of an elementary-school beginner who does not know even the first THING about how to compose a photo... horizontals with the top of the head lopped off, and two HUGE equal patches of dead space on either side of the person....whose, uh, CHIN is ALSO cut off...or take the Dutch tilt pics, with every other image tilted 15-20 degrees...sickening...or the beautifully sharp photo of a child looking to her right, and the entire LEFT edge of the image filled with space that is "behind her", and her line of gaze doing what is called "slamming in to the edge of the frame because the head is poorly-placed within the overall frame. Of course, ALL of these images will have have been made with a $1400 Nikon, Canon, Pentax, or Sony outfit...so all of these shots will have good focus, good exposures, rich, accurate color, and wide dynamic range. The *CAMERA will do its part* in 2012!!! We see LOADS of those kinds of issues: solid "mechanical" and "technical" values, but horribly absent artistic values.

And that, the prevalence of photos that posses solid technical and mechanical qualities, but which lack artistic sense (and I mean that in the most-basic form of 'artistic sense')--that is what makes the work of many beginners subject to some pretty intense C&C here. To the majority of the general public, they see a sharp, clear, focused "pitcher"...they see the subject, usually a family member or a cute kitty or a pretty flower, and they like that. But they do not have the training to know how well the photo stacks up in terms of visual artistry. ANd I do not mean fancy, high-faultin', esoteric, gallery-type artistic values--I mean BASIC compositional skills and BASIC command of the visual language. As somebody pointed out above, after a few months, many d-slr users become proficient, and think they're pretty hot stuff, but they do not know what it is that they do not know...much in the same way a teenager might look like a grown woman or grown man, and THINK and STATE that she or he "knows all about life", or knows, "all about how to drive a car". Then, when say their father, with 30 years' worth of driving on ice and snow tries to give them some pointers on how to do that and survive, the kid throws up his or her arms and screams, "But Dad--I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO DRIVE a car! Enough already!"

We see an awful lot of "I know how to drive a car already!" here...


----------



## MTVision (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:
			
		

> Off subject.....rule of thirds in my opinion doesn't always apply.



Rule of thirds doesn't always apply - its not the only compositional strategy....


----------



## kundalini (Feb 13, 2012)

I'm here for the free popcorn.


Oh, are we back on C&C for newbies again?  This was my vent about 6 months ago.  Not much has changed, eh?  Certainly not my position.  That's why I've been cherry picking.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-then-shall-we-just-let-blind-lead-blind.html


----------



## Bossy (Feb 13, 2012)

kundalini said:


> I'm here for the free popcorn.
> 
> 
> Oh, are we back on C&C for newbies again?  This was my vent about 6 months ago.  Not much has changed, eh?  Certainly not my position.  That's why I've been cherry picking.
> ...


I couldn't get through the whole thing  I stopped at like, page 2.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 13, 2012)

kundalini said:


> I'm here for the free popcorn.
> 
> 
> Oh, are we back on C&C for newbies again?  This was my vent about 6 months ago.  Not much has changed, eh?  Certainly not my position.  That's why I've been cherry picking.
> ...



I went back and read a few responses in that thread Kundalini started last year. It had some pretty good stuff in it!!! Much deeper and more "real" than the majority of replies in this thread...


----------



## chuasam (Feb 13, 2012)

Let me describe the C&C deal at TPF in a cartoon


----------



## Rephargotohp (Feb 13, 2012)

Wow, Hookers are so much better than this...maybe I could sell some more big prints...ahh that has a snowballs chance.

 I do have the magazine money coming but that won't be here till June. Can I read this that long?

F### why didn't I become a Pharmacist...or Charlie Sheen. Stupid , Stupid, Stupid _(Insert sound of banging head on desk)_


----------



## kundalini (Feb 13, 2012)

Bossy said:


> I couldn't get through the whole thing  I stopped at like, page 2.


That thread had 151 posts in it.  Your response in this thread was 115.

 

Only 2 pages?  Really?


----------



## Bossy (Feb 13, 2012)

kundalini said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > I couldn't get through the whole thing  I stopped at like, page 2.
> ...



I'm actively participating in this thread. Its not like I'm going to post on some zombie thread my opinion of y'alls bickering.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

Derrel said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> > The_Traveler said:
> ...



I've been doing photography a lot longer than I've been on this forum.  I said earlier that just because someone is a noob on here doesn't mean they are new at photography.  Wasn't talking about my work.....


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 13, 2012)

Lets shoot!


----------



## Derrel (Feb 13, 2012)

I simply asked when you had seen "great work" ripped apart on this forum. I did not infer that you were a photo newbie. Not in ANY way.


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

MTVision said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Megan, you are a great example of "constructive criticism."  You are NOT rude at all and you have been VERY helpful to me.  Also, I'm not sure how my word of "constructive criticism" turned into "coddling," really??  *There would be a lot more "posters" and less "lurkers" if there were more constructive criticism and less sarcastic remarks*,   Just sayn.......


----------



## Rephargotohp (Feb 13, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> Lets shoot!



Do you have a Flash Gun? erose wants to know


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Megan, you are a great example of "constructive criticism."  You are NOT rude at all and you have been VERY helpful to me.  Also, I'm not sure how my word of "constructive criticism" turned into "coddling," really??  *There would be a lot more "posters" and less "lurkers" if there were more constructive criticism and less sarcastic remarks*,   Just sayn.......



So use the IGNORE function, and move on!


----------



## luvmyfamily (Feb 13, 2012)

Anyway...................lol.


----------



## KmH (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> *There would be a lot more "posters" and less "lurkers" if there were more constructive criticism and less sarcastic remarks*,   Just sayn.......


I doubt that would be true.


----------



## NickA (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Megan, you are a great example of "constructive criticism."  You are NOT rude at all and you have been VERY helpful to me.  Also, I'm not sure how my word of "constructive criticism" turned into "coddling," really??  *There would be a lot more "posters" and less "lurkers" if there were more constructive criticism and less sarcastic remarks*,   Just sayn.......


 


KmH said:


> I doubt that would be true.



I think there is a bit of truth to what she is saying.  I see a lot of "one and done" posts here.  Maybe that's just the nature of the forum though.  But in the end, you really don't have to post photos to learn.  I want to learn more about taking nature shots.  I just read the C&C from other threads and that answers most of my questions.  Same for macro shooting; I've learned a lot just by reading the C&C from the macro forum section.  When I feel I've learned enough, I'll post a couple photos to make sure I'm on the right track.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 13, 2012)

NickA said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> > Megan, you are a great example of "constructive criticism."  You are NOT rude at all and you have been VERY helpful to me.  Also, I'm not sure how my word of "constructive criticism" turned into "coddling," really??  *There would be a lot more "posters" and less "lurkers" if there were more constructive criticism and less sarcastic remarks*,   Just sayn.......
> ...



The trouble with that is you can go a long way "down the wrong track" and then have to "undo / unlearn / break the bad habits you developed" by not posting as you go. 


As far as what "she" is saying goes... many sarcastic remarks are brought about by the individual who the remarks are aimed at. 

Sometimes they get mad because they have been told how good they are , and we tell them the truth. 

Sometimes they won't shut up and listen.. and just keep on yapping! (seen that anywhere recently?)  

Sometime they make comments on something they literally know nothing about, and then whine when they are called on it.

Sometimes someone is just having a bad day.. we are all human!


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 13, 2012)

I just want to ask is there any point to these 10 page long threads. I'm actually not being sarcastic. I'm actually wondering if anyone has ever changed their position on something due one of these threads?  Have you ever learned something? Have you ever seen anything accomplished in this these threads, or is it just endless bickering until the forum is inevitably locked? Real question here.


----------



## KmH (Feb 13, 2012)

Not from what I have seen after being a member here for 32 months now.

Your profile indicates you joined last month?


----------



## Fred Berg (Feb 13, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Sugar coated CC's are for pampered children who've never been told the truth in their lives. We aren't children. If you can't handle 20 people telling you your photos look awful (general you) you aren't ready for the general public.



Yes, but if I've taken, say, 20 hours in the consideration, conception, realisation, processing and presentation of my photo and they, the 20 people who tell me my work is awful, have taken a collective 20 minutes to communicate this to me, perhaps it is they who are not ready.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 13, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> I just want to ask is there any point to these 10 page long threads. I'm actually not being sarcastic. I'm actually wondering if anyone has ever changed their position on something due one of these threads?  Have you ever learned something? Have you ever seen anything accomplished in this these threads, or is it just endless bickering until the forum is inevitably locked? Real question here.



hahaha... point made! Yap yap yap!   :greenpbl:


----------



## Bossy (Feb 13, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> I just want to ask is there any point to these 10 page long threads. I'm actually not being sarcastic. I'm actually wondering if anyone has ever changed their position on something due one of these threads?  Have you ever learned something? Have you ever seen anything accomplished in this these threads, or is it just endless bickering until the forum is inevitably locked? Real question here.



Sure I've learned things. Most not about photography, but its been enlightening none the less


----------



## Bossy (Feb 13, 2012)

Fred Berg said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Sugar coated CC's are for pampered children who've never been told the truth in their lives. We aren't children. If you can't handle 20 people telling you your photos look awful (general you) you aren't ready for the general public.
> ...



It doesn't take 20 hours to communicate the gist of an image. You can spend a month working on an image and still not nail it, and if thats the case, wouldn't you want to know?


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 13, 2012)

I hate the way people can be on this forum. I think some just get off of being mean spirited. I see people who routinely give advice only to give a personal "dig" at the end that was so uncalled for. Why do I stay? Because I've been on other forums and as much as I hate the attitudes of the way people can be, I hate 50 people just telling me photos are straight awesome more.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 13, 2012)

Fred Berg said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Sugar coated CC's are for pampered children who've never been told the truth in their lives. We aren't children. If you can't handle 20 people telling you your photos look awful (general you) you aren't ready for the general public.
> ...



Not if that was 20 hours that you wasted by pursuing something that wasn't worth pursuing! 

Normally if someone spends a good amount of time and thought on a photo, or a set.. it is obvious! And usually treated with more respect because of that...


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 13, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> I hate the way people can be on this forum. I think some just get off of being mean spirited. I see people who routinely give advice only to give a personal "dig" at the end that was so uncalled for. Why do I stay? Because I've been on other forums and as much as I hate the attitudes of the way people can be, I hate 50 people just telling me photos are straight awesome more.



Good.. if you leave, who will I tease!


----------



## NickA (Feb 13, 2012)

KmH said:


> Not from what I have seen after being a member here for 32 months now.
> 
> Your profile indicates you joined last month?



I think you're talking about my reply to yours...  Anyway, join date doesn't equate to how long someone has been a visitor to this forum.  That kind of backs up what @luvmyfamily was saying about having for lurkers vs. people that actually join.

I know you're not the type that thinks join date and post count = someone that knows what they are talking about.

And if you weren't replying to my post, carry on.  No one remembers what was said 2 page ago anyway.


----------



## mishele (Feb 13, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> I just want to ask is there any point to these 10 page long threads. I'm actually not being sarcastic. I'm actually wondering if anyone has ever changed their position on something due one of these threads? Have you ever learned something? Have you ever seen anything accomplished in this these threads, or is it just endless bickering until the forum is inevitably locked? Real question here.



Yes.....lol I learn a lot!! I learned which members can take C&C.


----------



## NickA (Feb 13, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> NickA said:
> 
> 
> > luvmyfamily said:
> ...



This is a good point that I'll take into consideration.  When I look at the C&C posts though, I can now "filter" based on who replied to the thread.  Meaning, I put more stock into what some members say over others because they are consistent with their C&C and the reasons behind it.  Like you


----------



## Tee (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Nice constructive critism.  Instead of saying, "your white balance is off, I see a shadow"...blah, blah......try saying what you like about the photo first.  Kinda like when my kids do something bad, I say "I'm really glad your grades are good in school but..."



I think your analogy is a little off.  Telling someone their white balance is off without prefacing it with a sugary sweet fake compliment is not deconstructive. It's truth.  You want someone commenting how cute the little kid looks with spaghetti sauce on his face and how the clipped fingers is so trendsetting but not hear about the yellow and green skin from improper setting of the white balance?  I'll keep that in mind.  

P.S.  You haven't answered Derrel's request of linking us to brilliant cutting edge images getting hacked to pieces while fuzzy lingerie shots are spot on.


----------



## SCraig (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Not only talking about myself here...I've seen some great work be ripped apart, lowering the self esteem of someone trying to learn, and I've seen some out of focus budoir photos that do not seem to matter to the men....lol....


If it were great work then it wouldn't be ripped apart.

My experience with this group here and on other forums is that great work will get the accolades that it deserves while self-proclaimed "Great Work" that sucks will get the critique that it deserves.

It is important to understand that just because your friends or family or inexperienced clients may not complain about your photography, and may in fact compliment it, that doesn't mean anything whatsoever to knowledgeable people.  I have honestly seen self-proclaimed "Professional" wedding photographers put photographs in their online galleries that I would not have paid a dime for.  Paid, "Professional" photographs with trees growing out of the subject's head that any rookie knows to avoid.  Blown highlights on the wedding dress that, once again, any rookie knows to avoid.  Depth of field so shallow that people in the second row of a group shot were completely out of focus.  They were using them as examples of their "Professional" abilities simply because people who did not know any better had told them that they were great.


----------



## slackercruster (Feb 13, 2012)

I'm no big artist. I'm here to learn.


----------



## Compaq (Feb 13, 2012)

Just read 10 pages. Too tired. Post clever reply tomorrow.


----------



## e.rose (Feb 13, 2012)

luvmyfamily said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Sugar coated CC's are for pampered children who've never been told the truth in their lives. We aren't children. If you can't handle 20 people telling you your photos look awful (general you) you aren't ready for the general public.
> ...


 
BOLDED POINT 1:  That's such bullsh*t.  I know a lot of people who know *nothing* about photography, who send me pictures every week, of some "photographer's" FB page and pointing out why *THEY*, the unexperienced, general public, thinks the work SUCKS.  They send it to me, because they know I'm a photographer and feel that I'm one of the few people that they know that will appreciate their unsolicited critique (and often humorous perspective) on that person's work.

Just because your mommy and your best friend refuse to tell you that they think someone looks green, or that your picture is out of focus, DOESN'T mean people don't know.  If they hire someone who is shooting images with green skin and bad focus, it most likely means that they're too CHEAP to pay for a decent photographer...... or they don't want to hurt your feelings and book a sympathy shoot with you... because you're cheap enough.

[And for the record when I say "you"... I don't mean YOU.  I've seen you posting, but I have no idea what your work looks like.  I don't remember.  And I'm too lazy to look.  I'm speaking in general about the "I just got a DSLR yesterday and now I'm starting a business!" types that refuse to actually LEARN anything because all their friends and family think they're "so good!!!!". :er: ]

BOLDED POINT 2:  Abso-****in-loutely I would.  One of my best friends from High School was here the other day to visit.  She brought with her a "portfolio" of work... She's trying to start a "photobooth" business.  She knows NOTHING of image quality, and without her asking my opinion, I asked HER, if I could offer it.  She said yes, and I basically, in so many words, told her the images sucked.

"There's really bad compression on the images and a lot of JPEG artifacting.  What software are you using?  REALLY?  And it only cost you $60?  And it's a BETA version?  And you're trying to sell this to people?  I gotta be honest with you here... I know you don't want to spend more money, but if you expect to gain *anything* from this, you need to update your software to something legit and that won't MURDER the quality of the images after resizing them."

What I said to her was a little more gently put and lengthy, since it was, in fact a dialog and not just me talking at her... but that's basically what I said.  I didn't tell her they looked good.  I didn't tell her that, "You're right... people won't care because you're "cheap", so you shouldn't care either"... I told her the TRUTH... whether or not she wanted to hear it.  Why?  Because I'm her FRIEND, and I don't believe friends should lie to each other.

So don't invite me over to dinner and ask me what I think about your work............ cause I'll TELL you.

[On that same token... if you're in a band and I'm at your show... don't ask me what I thought unless you REALLY want to know.  I'm not a fan of false praises... and I'm not a fan of people offering false praises to me either.]



Bossy said:


> I didn't know we were specifically talking about you or your images, but yes. If I had some opinion on your work, I would tell you if it sucked or if your wb was off. What kind of friend blows smoke up your ass?



A ****ty one.  See above rant.  



The_Traveler said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> > Would you say that to my face if you were invited to my house for dinner and i pulled up the computer to ask for advice?
> ...



This is true.  I guess I shouldn't say that EVERYONE is aware of ****ty work and are just being nice... a lot of them really ARE idiots.

So is that the level of work you're going for?  "Just good enough to fool the idiots"???

My family and friends thought my images were brilliant from the get go.  I'm willing to bet 60% of them were just being nice and 40% of them had no f***ing clue.  That, however wasn't a good enough standard for me.  If someone complimented my images, I'd smile, say "thank you", and then come here to post them and get them torn apart, so that I could learn from them, and be better than everyone else who is satisfied with work "just good enough to fool the idiots."

That's not a very high standard, if that's where you're setting the bar for yourself.



tirediron said:


> luvmyfamily said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, people say things on here they wouldn't dare say to my face.
> ...


 
Agreed on both counts.

I've NEVER said anything in C&C here I wouldn't say to your face.  If I knew your face was too damned sensitive to hear it... then I wouldn't say anything... but then again, I use that tactic on the forum as well.  It doesn't take long to figure out who is too damn sensitive... and once I do, I don't bother commenting on ANYTHING they post.



Rephargotohp said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> > Lets shoot!
> ...



Yeah... DO you?





mishele said:


> blackrose89 said:
> 
> 
> > I just want to ask is there any point to these 10 page long threads. I'm actually not being sarcastic. I'm actually wondering if anyone has ever changed their position on something due one of these threads? Have you ever learned something? Have you ever seen anything accomplished in this these threads, or is it just endless bickering until the forum is inevitably locked? Real question here.
> ...



Exactly.


----------



## tirediron (Feb 13, 2012)

Ye gads... the thread that won't die!


----------



## thinkricky (Feb 13, 2012)

I should have posted this topic in the 1000 posts in a week. We would have definitely hit it on time. (much faster)


----------



## mjhoward (Feb 13, 2012)

thinkricky said:


> I should have posted this topic in the 1000 posts in a week. We would have definitely hit it on time. (much faster)



You wouldn't have had to post this per se... any rant will do 

Or you could have asked for help on your big wedding shoot tomorrow with your kit lens a facebook advertising!


----------



## jake337 (Feb 13, 2012)

Blah blahblah blah blah, blah blah blah blah.



If some is looking for serious critique, try posting to 1x.com, if they even let you.  

But really go to 1x.com and read how the art is critiqued over there.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Feb 13, 2012)

In other news:

This violin player emoticon looks very worried:

:violin:

This worries me.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 14, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> In other news:
> 
> This violin player emoticon looks very worried:
> 
> ...



That may in fact be the worlds tiniest violinist playing the worlds tiniest violin. And the poor guy can't seem to stop playing!


----------



## table1349 (Feb 14, 2012)

I'm just here to read the stupid questions that some people post. :waiting:


FYI anyone that says there is no such thing as a stupid question has never been a teacher, a parent or both.


----------



## manaheim (Feb 14, 2012)

First, I'd like to point out that you CAN, in fact, multiquote on 11 pages of posts. 



Diffuser said:


> As a newbie, I completely see what manaheim is trying to say. Maybe bottom line is the danger of discouraging an artistic vibe by making it too technical? Followed by technical advice from not so
> much experienced photographers.



YES.  Dead on.



thinkricky said:


> Yet another thread about the same bulls#!t
> 
> People who post this doesn't realize that you can't change people. Especially on a forum.



I've always been one to try... either through the occasional cuffing of someone off the back of the head in an individual post, or through the occasional posting of TFHs like this one.  I DO think there is a better way.  I DO think it is possible to make the culture bend, but in a forum as large as this it is challenging.



Snaps said:


> No one is going to make me stop telling people i like their pictures and why. And I don't much care what your estimation of my skill set is......



No one said you couldn't tell them what you liked, only suggested that you should phrase it as such.  "I like this very much" and "This is a great photo" are two staggeringly different statements.  If you don't understand the difference, then you should never say the latter and stick to the former.



pgriz said:


> To pick up Manaheim&#8217;s original post, I&#8217;d like to see more effort put into explaining the opinions. For instance, if &#8220;It&#8217;s underexposed&#8221;is the &#8220;problem&#8221;, then describing why that diminishes the image would be useful. BS has a way of being revealed when the reasons behind a statement can be examined. If the giver of the opinion cannot defend their statement or cannot give concrete reasons for/against, then they will reveal themselves as, at best, uninformed. There is a reason why any evidence presented in court is tested by being subjected to cross-examination. Same goes for scientific inquiry. Same goes for art jurying. Same goes even for such things as wine-tasting.



Yes.  Brilliant.  Thank you for saying this.


Good discussions here.  I actually read all 11 pages.  I hope it's making a dent for some folks.


----------



## ahcigar1 (Feb 15, 2012)

What I think that the main issue is here is how some people post on here.  If someone gets a snide remark from someone and try to defend themselves the one trying to defend themself is the one who then gets attacked and the poster who started with the snide remark gets backed up.  I have seen it many many times on here.  I have been what you all call a lurker on here for a few months now and just recently decided to bite the bullet and join.  And almost immediately get attacked, for simply posting one opinion.  I agree with some people have said in here and there is a proper way to go about things.  I never ask things to be sugarcoated by any means but there is a difference between being constructive and just being cruel.  And also just because someone is a new member of the forum does not mean that they are new to photography.  Because of the reaction I got on this forum I decided to post just one of my photos as a test, and some gave thier critiques which I thanked for there was one poster imparticular who decided to start out with constructive criticism which I took in stride and even thanked for but then decided to insult and take it to another forum on the board.  For me that goes too far and I see it quite often, not just towards me.  There are many newer members but not necissarily new photographers who get the same reaction on this board.  Within my first day I had to block 10 posters for thier attitudes and super ego's.  Getting this type of reaction from posters when never had I said anything negatively toward anyone was completely uncalled for.  This board I have noticed is very much like a high school clique and if you don't fit into that clique right away then you ultimately just face attacks and outright rudeness.


----------



## DiskoJoe (Feb 15, 2012)

Im here because pixtus sucks.


----------



## CMfromIL (Feb 15, 2012)

I'm here because I enjoy taking pictures.  And quite frankly my family (wife and kids) are tired of me showing them pictures I've taken.  

And I've learned quite a few things about how to improve the sport pictures I enjoy taking.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 15, 2012)

ahcigar1 said:


> What I think that the main issue is here is how some people post on here.
> 
> but there is a difference between being constructive and just being cruel.



I have no idea if you can read this or if I was one of the ones you blocked and I can't discern to which situations you were referring but in those points you made above, I agree totally with what you are saying.

I suggest this:
Put the best spin on remarks because intent is difficult to perceive on the web.
The only way to survive in a situation where A**holes can run rampant is to not take it personally.
Just ignore them and listen to people who say things that are respectful and understandable.
(I delight in ignoring people because they deserve it.)


----------



## ahcigar1 (Feb 15, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> ahcigar1 said:
> 
> 
> > What I think that the main issue is here is how some people post on here.
> ...



No you are not one of the people that I have ignored because you were one of the few who were not rude in your responses.  I can take critique and I often do try to take things in stride.  I have learned to grow VERY thick skin in my life, thicker than anyone should ever have to have, but when people throw out insults that is going too far.  And I too find great delight in ignoring.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Feb 15, 2012)

Going back to the original question, although I only read  few of the brilliant responses, I really just couldn't read any more. So, why am I here. For the most part I like to offer advice to those that are interested, try and explain the professional side of photography to those that care, and mostly to have a good laugh every now and then at the multitude of stupidity I have read on this forum.

I know how good I am as a photographer, I don't believe that photography has any rules. I know that there are some great photographers that just enjoy it and aren't looking to make a career out of it, I know that there are some that want to make a career out of it, but don't have a clue about what they are doing, apart from the the on/off switch on their fully auto camera.  I even believe that some people will learn from what I say and it will help them to better images.


----------



## bazooka (Feb 15, 2012)

Long read, but delciously drama-filled as expected. 

I'm here because it was the first google hit when I started researching photography in 2009. I mostly use this forum to pass the time at work when it's slow, which is often. That's not to say I take it lightly. In fact, this forum has been extremely helpful to me and it has good value. Heck, it's free. That's really really good value, both as entertainment, information, and opinion.

As for C&C, I do my best to make it clear that it is based upon my opinion and that I am in no way an authority of photography. I'm really just a noob trying to advance as fast as I can. But it's threads like this that make me wonder if I should continue to post C&C or if I should let the more experienced pro's say how "it really is" and take a passive existence as I did in my first few months of learning the fundamentals.


----------



## nmoody (Feb 15, 2012)

I know I am super late to this game (11 pages? Shesh!) but I am here to learn from others. I dont give C&C, only the occasional "I really like that one, especially that thing about it". But I do learn a lot from what others give for C&C and I have gotten to know a lot of you who I now trust for C&C and others who I just ignore due to their questionable knowledge. 

Its not possible to police C&C but hopefully those people who request it also understand who is actually knowledgeable and who is just here to raise their post count.


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 15, 2012)

jake337 said:


> Blah blahblah blah blah, blah blah blah blah.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for posting this. I'd never even heard of that site.


----------



## Compaq (Feb 15, 2012)

I'm here because I wanted to exploit dedicated members for some quick information about exposure, if I'm not much mistaken. Somehow, I ended up frequenting this place, and now I can't really imagine not checking.



What we all aspiring hobby photographers want is to find our own style. I think finding this style is of paramount importance, because this means you're settling down and becoming satisfied with only satisfying yourself. When I posted pics earlier, I wanted to get positive critique. I wanted to take pictures others liked, and that was mainly what drove me. As I'm learning, and getting more experience, I still want to take pictures others like, but not to the same extent as before. I have a few shots that I think I can be proud of, because I really like them. I also have a picture that everyone seemed to like, but the way it turned out was a little accidental, and so I'm not so proud of that one - though it apparently is a good photograph. When I go out to shoot today, I'm confident that I manage to get a few good ones. A few that I really like. I go out to shoot something that I'm planning beforehand - I rarely go out to "look for subjects". I decide on "I want to document the University campus", and so I shoot buildings, parks and stuff like that. Or I may decide to get a few shots of a really beautiful tree we have, and then I go and focus on that. That's how I do it. And I am confident I'll get a few "keepers" that turn out pretty good, at least according to me.

So, that means I'm starting to find my own style. When I started to write this, I was sure it was related to the thread. However, I can't seem to remember that link, so "just read and disregard" or "read and agree" or whatever. This'll be my "clever" reply I promised.


----------



## Chann (Feb 16, 2012)

This discussion should have happened on the '1000 posts in a week' thread.  It would have greatly helped.


----------



## Tony S (Feb 16, 2012)

I'm here because I have tons of time to kill..... now where do I find a beer in this place?


----------



## kundalini (Feb 16, 2012)

Occasionally there is a thread that supports bacon.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 16, 2012)

Bacon!​


----------



## e.rose (Feb 16, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Bacon!​



WHERE?!?!?!

::searches around desperately for bacon::


----------



## Josh66 (Feb 16, 2012)

e.rose said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Bacon!​
> ...


Funny...  I'm eating some right now.  Seriously.


----------



## e.rose (Feb 16, 2012)

O|||||||O said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > Bitter Jeweler said:
> ...



I hate you.

Seriously.


----------



## EIngerson (Feb 16, 2012)

I'm here to chat it up with like-minded people. Maybe get picked on a little, maybe pick on people some. I'm down for whatever. I'd really like a couple slices of Josh's bacon.


----------



## kundalini (Feb 16, 2012)

Last night I cooked up my infamous *BELTCH *sanwich.

*B*acon, *E*gg, *L*ettuce, *T*omato and *CH*eese.

It soothes the soul.


----------



## camz (Feb 16, 2012)

I'm here because I love you guys


----------



## Overread (Feb 16, 2012)

I'm hungry now.... and I don't have any bacon


----------



## MLeeK (Feb 16, 2012)

How did I miss all of this??? Am I really that oblivious to the world???

I am here to fill in time while my computer is processing. And to irritate my good buddies around here! LOL!


----------



## kundalini (Feb 16, 2012)

Overread said:


> I'm hungry now.... and I don't have any bacon


But when you do.... it's rashers of bacon, not the streaky bacon we thrive on in the states.  How I do miss those rashers.

Of course the Aussies have it figured out.  Best of both worlds.


----------



## Tee (Feb 16, 2012)

kundalini said:
			
		

> But when you do.... it's rashers of bacon, not the streaky bacon we thrive on in the states.  How I do miss those rashers.
> 
> Of course the Aussies have it figured out.  Best of both worlds.



I ate rashers all last summer when I was in Europe. I gotta admit, I enjoyed eating local but I sure did miss some good ole u.s. style bacon.


----------



## Tony S (Feb 16, 2012)

The best of both worlds.... a bacon beer mug.


----------



## mishele (Feb 16, 2012)

I just joined.....
I Love Bacon | Group with Personal Stories, Forums and Chat


----------



## BlackSheep (Feb 16, 2012)

ETA I of course expect both the bacon and the romance.


----------



## tirediron (Feb 16, 2012)

kundalini said:


> Last night I cooked up my infamous *BELTCH *sanwich.
> 
> *B*acon, *E*gg, *L*ettuce, *T*omato and *CH*eese.
> 
> It soothes the soul.


I like!


----------



## Bossy (Feb 16, 2012)

What, too much?​


----------



## tirediron (Feb 16, 2012)

It's never too much!


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 16, 2012)




----------



## Bossy (Feb 16, 2012)

*grumbles* 1 upper.....







​


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 16, 2012)

^^^ to "STALK" Bossy!


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 16, 2012)

Hotter and 2 girls.  2 up.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 16, 2012)

haha touche​


----------



## EIngerson (Feb 16, 2012)

I honestly believe bacon is going to aid in creating world peace.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Feb 16, 2012)

How?  The Muslims and the Jews can't eat it


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 17, 2012)

EIngerson said:


> I honestly believe bacon is going to aid in creating world peace.



Not if I eat it all first!


----------



## fotorobot (Feb 18, 2012)

Because I want to learn something


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 18, 2012)

jake337 said:


> Blah blahblah blah blah, blah blah blah blah.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Wow, thinking of posting there is like thinking of dating Scarlett Johansson, totally out of my league lol!


----------



## pgriz (Feb 18, 2012)

After jake337 posted that, I went over, had a look, and joined.  The quality of the photography is excellent, but when one browsed the forums and the discussions, one finds (well, I do) that there are also a lot of snit-fits going on.  Perhaps the bar is higher than in this forum, but people are still people, complete with egos, imperfect understanding of their own skills/talent, ideological agendas, and occasional personal vendettas.  The difference seems to be that many of the shots posted in this forum (with some notable exceptions) are snap-shotish in that there's not much thought given to the structure and creation of the image, whereas on that forum there seems to be much more focus on getting the image right.  Of course, with greater technical quality, one sees the artistic aspects more clearly (or sees that those were poorly expressed).  I do agree that in general the quality of the critiques is much better and certainly if that level of critique was common here, we'd all be better off from a learning and sharing perspective.

Oh, and I looked to see if there were any bacon shots there - didn't see any.  So I guess this means they are either sensitive to sensibilities of Jews and Muslims, or not up to that level of tomfoolery.  Eh, it takes all kinds, and this place puts a smile (sometimes happy, sometimes wry, sometimes pained) on my face.  Cheers!


----------



## EIngerson (Feb 18, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> How?  The Muslims and the Jews can't eat it



I think you stumped me. LOL


----------

