# Picture of a guy



## rob91 (Nov 4, 2007)

Tell me what you think. Thanks.


----------



## Black Magic Studio (Nov 5, 2007)

"Bigfoot" is what I think


----------



## a5i736 (Nov 5, 2007)

What are we supposed to critique the burry guy with the plastic bag? Or the blurry red van, could we make this shot any blurrier?  Even if this was in focus and didn't have any motion blur, its a lovely picture of his back and it adds to it when you dutch the frame like that, but what I really like is the big black line in the top left corner, that adds the final touch to this picture for me.  Just try a little bit harder next time, and ask me for a specific thing you want critiqued, on a photo that you actually think needs to be commented on.

Oh and P.S that title "Picture of a guy" wow thats powerful.


----------



## rob91 (Nov 5, 2007)

a5i736 said:


> What are we supposed to critique the burry guy with the plastic bag? Or the blurry red van, could we make this shot any blurrier?  Even if this was in focus and didn't have any motion blur, its a lovely picture of his back and it adds to it when you dutch the frame like that, but what I really like is the big black line in the top left corner, that adds the final touch to this picture for me.  Just try a little bit harder next time, and ask me for a specific thing you want critiqued, on a photo that you actually think needs to be commented on.
> 
> Oh and P.S that title "Picture of a guy" wow thats powerful.



What a narrow piece of criticism.


----------



## The Phototron (Nov 6, 2007)

a5i736 said:


> What are we supposed to critique the burry guy with the plastic bag? Or the blurry red van, could we make this shot any blurrier?  Even if this was in focus and didn't have any motion blur, its a lovely picture of his back and it adds to it when you dutch the frame like that, but what I really like is the big black line in the top left corner, that adds the final touch to this picture for me.  Just try a little bit harder next time, and ask me for a specific thing you want critiqued, on a photo that you actually think needs to be commented on.
> 
> Oh and P.S that title "Picture of a guy" wow thats powerful.


The blurry guy dominate almost half of the picture, go figure.

Anywho, blurry is not necessarily bad, for this particular picture it gives me a sense of a killer leaving the crime scene undetected, hence the blur. But the Sunday newspaper and grocery bag doesn't help. It would help to lower the angle to floor level to make it look like the viewpoint of the victim, again the blur would enforce this visualization.

Btw, your sarcasm isn't obvious at all, could you try any harder?


----------



## faux toe graph (Nov 6, 2007)

a5i736 said:


> What are we supposed to critique the burry guy with the plastic bag? Or the blurry red van, could we make this shot any blurrier?  Even if this was in focus and didn't have any motion blur, its a lovely picture of his back and it adds to it when you dutch the frame like that, but what I really like is the big black line in the top left corner, that adds the final touch to this picture for me.  Just try a little bit harder next time, and ask me for a specific thing you want critiqued, on a photo that you actually think needs to be commented on.
> 
> Oh and P.S that title "Picture of a guy" wow thats powerful.



Bad day?


----------



## Christina (Nov 6, 2007)

Black Magic Studio said:


> "Bigfoot" is what I think



I don't think its the photographer. I think bigfoot is blurry. And that's xtra scary to me!

A large out of focus monster roaming the country side.

Run, get out of here. He's fuzzy!
Lol


----------



## hawkeye (Nov 6, 2007)

Christina said:


> I don't think its the photographer. I think bigfoot is blurry. And that's xtra scary to me!
> 
> A large out of focus monster roaming the country side.
> 
> ...



I miss Mitch


----------



## Bobby Ironsights (Nov 6, 2007)

rob91 said:


> Tell me what you think. Thanks.


 
I think action shots with a pinhole camera are a mistake.

you're welcome.


----------



## cameramike (Nov 6, 2007)

personally i like it because its not what you'd expect, thats just an amateur's opinion, what do i know.


----------



## Alpha (Nov 6, 2007)

a5i736 said:


> What are we supposed to critique the burry guy with the plastic bag? Or the blurry red van, could we make this shot any blurrier?  Even if this was in focus and didn't have any motion blur, its a lovely picture of his back and it adds to it when you dutch the frame like that, but what I really like is the big black line in the top left corner, that adds the final touch to this picture for me.  Just try a little bit harder next time, and ask me for a specific thing you want critiqued, on a photo that you actually think needs to be commented on.
> 
> Oh and P.S that title "Picture of a guy" wow thats powerful.



If I had a mentally retarded sibling, his critiques would sound EXACTLY like this.


----------



## a5i736 (Nov 6, 2007)

The Phototron said:


> The blurry guy dominate almost half of the picture, go figure.
> 
> Anywho, blurry is not necessarily bad, for this particular picture it gives me a sense of a killer leaving the crime scene undetected, hence the blur. But the Sunday newspaper and grocery bag doesn't help. It would help to lower the angle to floor level to make it look like the viewpoint of the victim, again the blur would enforce this visualization.
> 
> Btw, your sarcasm isn't obvious at all, could you try any harder?



I was trying pretty hard. Oh and all remember this day when a crappy blurry picture gets praise!



MaxBloom said:


> If I had a mentally retarded sibling, his critiques would sound EXACTLY like this.


I bet. (psh)Don't flatter your sibling I'm not "that" smart. Max you know just as well as me, that this had no serious answer to it, this was just plain **** posed on here. Frankly I'm surprised you didn't say it first.


----------



## lostprophet (Nov 6, 2007)

*COMING TO A FORUM NEAR YOU

A TALE OF YET ANOTHER THREAD LOCKED

RATED R* (for mature content)​


----------



## zendianah (Nov 6, 2007)

lostprophet said:


> *COMING TO A FORUM NEAR YOU*​
> 
> *A TALE OF YET ANOTHER THREAD LOCKED*​
> *RATED R* (for mature content)​


 

AM I spamming?  Max Do the truffle shuffle !  Then it will be rated X.. For XTRA funny !


----------



## zendianah (Nov 6, 2007)

Oh.. about the picture of the guy. Sorry it hurts my eyes. It makes me dizzy. I'm sure my photos make people dizzy to !   DIZZY with excitement .  kidding


----------



## a5i736 (Nov 6, 2007)

rob91 said:


> What a narrow piece of criticism.



Ouch, It was narrow wasn't it. Well if it wasn't bad...


----------



## TATTRAT (Nov 6, 2007)

Unibomber returning from a beer run?


----------



## Mesoam (Nov 6, 2007)

i think "am i drunk" 

i realize..."nope"

i go to click out of this window


----------



## Hill202 (Nov 6, 2007)

a5i736 said:


> What are we supposed to critique the burry guy with the plastic bag? Or the blurry red van, could we make this shot any blurrier? Even if this was in focus and didn't have any motion blur, its a lovely picture of his back and it adds to it when you dutch the frame like that, but what I really like is the big black line in the top left corner, that adds the final touch to this picture for me. Just try a little bit harder next time, and ask me for a specific thing you want critiqued, on a photo that you actually think needs to be commented on.
> 
> Oh and P.S that title "Picture of a guy" wow thats powerful.


 
I read alot of your critiques but I never see any of your work posted. Why don't you post a picture and let someone critique your work?


----------



## The Phototron (Nov 6, 2007)

Hill202 said:


> I read alot of your critiques but I never see any of your work posted. Why don't you post a picture and let someone critique your work?


That's not a relevant question because of there are critics and there are artists.


----------



## RKW3 (Nov 6, 2007)

Mesoam said:


> i think "am i drunk"
> 
> i realize..."nope"
> 
> i go to click out of this window



lmao


----------



## Bobby Ironsights (Nov 7, 2007)

Jesus, so much bickering.

I think this is someone's idea of a joke, to post the crappiest image possible, and then see how many people are too nice to mention just how crappy it is.


----------



## LaFoto (Nov 7, 2007)

This is months too late! 
The Challenge of the Month on the worst photo ever has BEEN ... and the winner was a pic where in later cropping a wedding party's heads were cut off ... while this had ALL the potential to become the real winner!

Rob91, please don't mind me.
You chose to start out with two photos that are causing a lot of discussion and you must have planned for this to happen, else you would not have chosen those two... Maybe you'd like to explain?


----------



## rob91 (Nov 7, 2007)

In response to Bobby and Lafoto, I don't know what to say anymore, I'm just laughing very hard now because that is the only reaction possible. To answer your questions, I am very serious and I love this photo - it was not intended as a joke, nor was it intended to create controversy. We seem to be polar opposites on this, and the reactions here are largely negative so all I can do at this point is laugh and shrug it off.

Anyways, we're different, that's fine. I'll keep posting more of my work, maybe someday it will click. Peace.


----------



## Mesoam (Nov 7, 2007)

well here is something to say...what is it about the photo that you actually enjoy?


----------



## JDS (Nov 7, 2007)

Hill202 said:


> I read alot of your critiques but I never see any of your work posted. Why don't you post a picture and let someone critique your work?


You must not have looked very hard...   I would post a link to some of his photos here, but without his permission...  All you have to do is check out his profile and click the link that shows threads he started. :roll:

As for the photo in this thread, I'm curious as to what the OP was going for when he took the photo.


----------



## a5i736 (Nov 7, 2007)

Hill202 said:


> I read alot of your critiques but I never see any of your work posted. Why don't you post a picture and let someone critique your work?



I have posted stuff on here in the past... u can look in my profile to find them, I will post something to be critiqued when I think I need it, thank you (psh)



LaFoto said:


> This is months too late!
> The Challenge of the Month on the worst photo ever has BEEN ... and the winner was a pic where in later cropping a wedding party's heads were cut off ... while this had ALL the potential to become the real winner!



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Thank you LaFoto



Bobby Ironsights said:


> Jesus, so much bickering.
> 
> I think this is someone's idea of a joke, to post the crappiest image possible, and then see how many people are too nice to mention just how crappy it is.


and Thank you too


The Phototron said:


> That's not a relevant question because of there are critics and there are artists.


I would also like to state I am an artist not just a critic.


----------



## MarcusM (Nov 7, 2007)

rob91 said:


> In response to Bobby and Lafoto, I don't know what to say anymore, I'm just laughing very hard now because that is the only reaction possible. To answer your questions, I am very serious and I love this photo - it was not intended as a joke, nor was it intended to create controversy. We seem to be polar opposites on this, and the reactions here are largely negative so all I can do at this point is laugh and shrug it off.
> 
> Anyways, we're different, that's fine. I'll keep posting more of my work, maybe someday it will click. Peace.





Mesoam said:


> well here is something to say...what is it about the photo that you actually enjoy?



I agree with Mesoam...what do you like in this photo rob91? I'm truly curious because I just don't see it. This would be an instant delete off my memory card if I took this. I'm not trying to be negative, just truthful.


----------



## petey (Nov 7, 2007)

this entire thread is out of focus


----------



## doobs (Nov 7, 2007)

This has to be the greatest picture I have ever seen.

Can I order a 16x20 matted and framed please?


----------



## hawkeye (Nov 7, 2007)




----------



## rob91 (Nov 7, 2007)

I'm not going to explain it.


----------



## THORHAMMER (Nov 8, 2007)

Looks like someone is leaving for work in the cold morning. 7AM

I think that van is stationary. And is that food, a paper and a thermos hes 

got ? 

But what is he leaving ? a hotel, train stop ?, or you were his drop off ride..


----------



## altyfc (Nov 8, 2007)

The thing I really like about this picture is the bit to the left that reads "My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit"

It's kind of screaming "look... this picture is just perfect as it is!"


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 8, 2007)

if this image told a story, then it would be nice and strong (in the blurred version!). I just cannot see the story. Sorry.


----------



## altyfc (Nov 8, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> if this image told a story, then it would be nice and strong (in the blurred version!). I just cannot see the story. Sorry.



You can't....

How about...

"Man has his red van stolen whilst nipping to the shops"

"Green monster with red eyes descends on town" (look at it again )

"Man gets chased by photographer"


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 8, 2007)

altyfc said:


> eyes descends on town" (look at it again )



I like that one


----------



## Hill202 (Nov 8, 2007)

This picture has attracted more attention than most. Good or bad, I think thats an accomplishment. If that was Rob's goal, he was successful.


----------



## JerryPH (Nov 8, 2007)

Sincerely, I would want to know the viewpoint of the OP.  Seems he wants to be critiqued and when it is, he laughs at it instead of trying to explain his view, which *could* be valid and/or interesting.

As for me... man, that pic made my eyes hurt.


----------



## eravedesigns (Nov 8, 2007)

nvm


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 8, 2007)

eravedesigns said:


> nvm


no idea what that could mean ...

_no very masculine

neat virgin mole

numerous, vast and modern
_
so many possibilities ...


----------



## altyfc (Nov 8, 2007)

I'm guessing "not very much" in response to the original question of "what do you think?"


----------



## a5i736 (Nov 8, 2007)

altyfc said:


> You can't....
> 
> "Man gets chased by photographer"



hahaah


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Nov 8, 2007)

I know! It's an *ARTIST STATEMENT*!


----------



## Steel26 (Nov 16, 2007)

Honestly if this was bumped down a stop or two I would hang this on my wall.

I really don't understand why everyone is bashing this guy.  If nothing else his pictures are interesting to look at.


----------



## ambriz001 (Nov 16, 2007)

Why are you trying to start commotion rob91? Just stop posting these images that don't even make sense.


----------



## Steel26 (Nov 16, 2007)

wow. why can't he post images like everyone else?


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 16, 2007)

Steel26 said:


> H  If nothing else his pictures are interesting to look at.



don't think so ... but the thread is always interesting


----------



## Arch (Nov 16, 2007)

my view is quite simple. As a photo on its own it doesn't work, there is no reason for it to be blurry other than by accident. So the image as purley a 'photo' does nothing for me.

There is however the possiblilty that the OP is exploring an artistic theme as in his other blurred images he posted on this forum. However, artistic themes need an explination, a reason for deliberately taking the image away from general photography and into the realms of the artworld. Even a simple title can sometimes help explain a piece of art. So by the OP refusing to say anything about this i would immediately deem the view of artistic merit null and void, meaning the only suitable place left for an image such as this is the trashcan.

Sorry to be so harsh, but as a forum moderator i have to view this in two ways, 1. he has a good reason for wanting to explore this 'vision' or 2. he is a forum troll that wants to create a flame war thread.... in which case i will lock it.

So to the OP rob, you are welcome to continue posting and joining in with the community, but please do not ask for opinions if you are not prepared to give explinations... it just creates arguement and flaming, ty.


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 16, 2007)

Archangel said:


> 2. he is a forum troll that wants to create a flame war thread.... in which case i will lock it.



OK, but currently I cannot see any flaming really ... it is just people getting a bit silly and others trying to understand the OPs intentions.


----------



## Arch (Nov 16, 2007)

we do not allow flame wars on this forum period. There have been several flaming posts not just in this thread, but as i indicated on the OP's other threads of the same theme. Im sure some plp wouldnt lock them on this basis, but i on the other hand would, or at least give warning as i have.


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 16, 2007)

well, we have more flaming posts hidden in some more serious discussion threads.

But let's not discuss how to measure the flaming content of a thread, or it's flame war potential, but just keep our eyes open 

I agree, while everyone should be allowed to state his opinion, moderators have to step in if things get out of control and threads go amok.


----------



## 'Daniel' (Nov 16, 2007)

Archangel said:


> my view is quite simple. As a photo on its own it doesn't work, there is no reason for it to be blurry other than by accident. So the image as purley a 'photo' does nothing for me.
> 
> There is however the possiblilty that the OP is exploring an artistic theme as in his other blurred images he posted on this forum. However, artistic themes need an explination, a reason for deliberately taking the image away from general photography and into the realms of the artworld. Even a simple title can sometimes help explain a piece of art. So by the OP refusing to say anything about this i would immediately deem the view of artistic merit null and void, meaning the only suitable place left for an image such as this is the trashcan.



I have to say I disagree, It seems to me it's you who needs the an explanation.  A photographer does not need to title or explain their work.  this is the general gallery where people display work.  If this was by some famous person I don't think people would think the artistic merit would be "null and void".  You seem to tbe basing your argument on some concept of what you think a photograph should be.  To have that in your head to apply to your own photographs and whether you like others is fair enough but to make someone else apply that is not fair.

Thoughts?


----------



## LaFoto (Nov 16, 2007)

Everyone can at all times argue that what looks like a photographic, technical and compositional accident to some (most) is actually a piece of art to others. With the argument that a blurred photo of an unknown 21-year old actually is "art" you can quench any argument stating otherwise. For there is no discussing TASTES. 

But believe me, there are pieces in the big museums that are totally priceless these days that I (personally) fail to quite see as the big art they are said to be, while (note that!) I even LIKE some of those pieces.

And probably the THOUGHT PROCESS that had preceded those works actually DOES lift those works into the realm of the true arts. Only don't I know those thought processes, UNLESS I get the chance to either read about them (statement by the artist given somewhere) or hear about them (TV interview, for example) or I even get the chance to speak to the artist himself. That may very well CHANGE my mind. 

But if someone just says "Either you all get it or you are simply too stupid" (at 21 years of age, very mature personality, I assume) then it WILL provoke controversion! The attitude of the OP is what is even more cause for discussion, I think, than the (missing) quality of his photos, and that is the reason for these lengthy, in part also silly, but always quite "effective" threads (and I am sure the OP basks in all this and rubs his hands and grins).


----------



## Digital Matt (Nov 16, 2007)

I think art and the "art world", in it's inherently wide and liberal constraints, produces some of the most close minded people.  Never have I seen more bickering and insulting than in discussions of art by "artists".


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 16, 2007)

the point to me is, everyone with mediocre photography skills can take one of his ok-shots and blur it in postprocessing (if done on a computer it takes one second or less).

So, I  cannot see (a) any process here which requires some thought, and I cannot see (b) any pleasing or at least interesting result. I agree "pleasing" is very subject to taste. But for me, to take something serious, it needs at least (a) or (b).

[edit:] Forgot something ... or it has to (c) serve a particular purpose. But I cannot see the purpose here.


----------



## Mohain (Nov 16, 2007)

Looking back on rob91's posts I would say he's exploring a theme/concept. I applaud you for trying something unconventional and sticking with it. I don't think you're there yet but I think you should stick at it and it. Eventually it should all fall into place :thumbup:


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 16, 2007)

Digital Matt said:


> I think art and the "art world", in it's inherently wide and liberal constraints, produces some of the most close minded people.  Never have I seen more bickering and insulting than in discussions of art by "artists".



You are right, but non-artists and non-photographers would hardly discuss anything here. They would say it is a dull and blurry picture. full stop.

Only those, *who would like to see more in it, but cannot see more even if they try hard*, only those people take the effort of discussing in this thread  ...


----------



## LaFoto (Nov 16, 2007)

Mohain, if that is the case, then it would have been the simplest of matters for Rob91 to say so in ONE sentence and none of these threads would even NEED to be there (nothing against good discussions, I am more referring to the "borderline" elements these threads also provoke.) Everyone would have been happy with the explanation and even been helpful! You know what these forums are like. But the attitude which accompany these photos is what riles ... must not say "people", don't know, but ... yes. Well. Me.


----------



## Arch (Nov 16, 2007)

Corinna is exactly right... the point is is the OP's attitude towards being part of the discussion. We as a mod team are concearned about posters who simply 'light the fire' then stand back and watch the flames, without ANY explination OR attempt to answer anyones questions.

To Daniel, i think you mis-understand the point im trying to make, im not saying all photography needs a title... re-read what i wrote... im saying if he takes it from the realms of general photography into a vague art form then CO-OPERATION in answering plps questions is the courteous thing to do, rather than letting plp argue needlessly. That is my main concern, its weather he is in fact a forum troll and doesnt take his postings seriously, not whether my opinion of it being classed as art or not.


----------



## Digital Matt (Nov 16, 2007)

I personally would not really want to be a part of this conversation if this were my picture, and I received the kind of responses he has gotten.  I think you as a mod team are to quick to defend the forum members responses, because you have a inherent prejudice to the photo.  If your first thought is, "This picture is total crap.  The photog obviously didn't put forth any effort, and it makes me angry because I put so much effort into my craft!", then you probably shouldn't comment, because you are unable to really look past your own prejudice.

My personal thought on this photo, and this "style" is that it walks a fine line between being really great, and very bad.  Ernst Haas is an example of someone who was very successful with abstract, out of focus, motion blur photography.  I'm sure his many of his contact sheets are full of exposures that "don't work".  They should still be examined, and critiqued, in a positive fashion, to learn from.  After all, we are all learning to hone our craft.  This whole discussion, and the discussions on every one of the OP's photos are extremely negative from square one, yet the photo is blamed for it.


----------



## Arch (Nov 16, 2007)

Again.. it is not the photo, but the not answering people even when they ask what the OP thinks of his own work. If there is no reason or understanding for it to be so 'snapshot like' then it belongs in the snapshot section. I agree some of the responses have been very negative which is unfortuante... but that is entirely my point... unless the OP wants to answer at least some of the more polite questions then this thread is really just set up to be a flame fest.

i.e.....



LaFoto said:


> You chose to start out with two photos that are causing a lot of discussion and you must have planned for this to happen, else you would not have chosen those two... Maybe you'd like to explain?





Mesoam said:


> well here is something to say...what is it about the photo that you actually enjoy?



...and so far...



rob91 said:


> I'm not going to explain it.



Im sure if there were ANY reason for this style and the OP would share with us then all flaming would stop.


----------



## Digital Matt (Nov 16, 2007)

After an initial barrage of immature, negative comments, I would abandon the thread as well.  All of the moderation surrounds the OP's failure to respond, and none of it is aimed at the embarrassing, rude comments by our membership.  It's mind-boggling to me.



> Im sure if there were ANY reason for this style and the OP would share with us then all flaming would stop.



It sounds as if you are endorsing the treatment we've given the guy.


----------



## Arch (Nov 16, 2007)

But he did respond... by saying that he is not going to explain it.

As you know Matt any unprovoked direct attack on any member is not tollerated, and any examples of this from our members are delt with via pm from the mod team. There is no reason for me to openly discuss that here.

As i said previously its not just this thread... but a few others that continued in the same vein. Haveing already known this the OP continued to post i the same way..I am giving the OP a chance to respond, if you think im being unfair then that is your opinion.


----------



## rob91 (Nov 16, 2007)

Archangel said:


> my view is quite simple. As a photo on its own it doesn't work, there is no reason for it to be blurry other than by accident. So the image as purley a 'photo' does nothing for me.
> 
> There is however the possiblilty that the OP is exploring an artistic theme as in his other blurred images he posted on this forum. However, artistic themes need an explination, a reason for deliberately taking the image away from general photography and into the realms of the artworld. Even a simple title can sometimes help explain a piece of art. So by the OP refusing to say anything about this i would immediately deem the view of artistic merit null and void, meaning the only suitable place left for an image such as this is the trashcan.
> 
> ...



Wait a minute, so now it's my responsibility to stop other members from posting hateful and derogatory comments about my work? I thought that's why you admins were here, but hey, I've been wrong before.

And the beauty of this being my art is I can explain it as little or as much as I want to. When the general response is "this photo sucks why don't you explain to me why it doesn't suck" then I don't feel very encouraged to offer a response. I'm very happy that a few have already posted here to say they got something out of the picture. I'm sorry you are so baffled by it, but if that is the case I don't believe there is anything I can say to change your mind.

Also, I have given titles to all my pictures.


----------



## rob91 (Nov 16, 2007)

Steel26 said:


> Honestly if this was bumped down a stop or two I would hang this on my wall.
> 
> I really don't understand why everyone is bashing this guy.  If nothing else his pictures are interesting to look at.



Thanks for the kind words Steel, for this and my other pics. Lord knows I need them.


----------



## Hill202 (Nov 16, 2007)

Rob,

Someone posted in the beginners section a comparison of how thier pictures were critiqued on Flickr vs here on this forum. I think it would be interesting to see what kind of response your type of picture would get on Flickr.

I'll bet at the very least the comments would be polite. Who knows someone might offer some insight on how to further improve your particular style of photography.


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 16, 2007)

i think people got a bit heated up.

i think one has to be careful not to overmoderate a forum, but i have not seen this here yet.

I have seen instances of moderator-failure, where things were not judged correctly, but  failure is human.

To me this still is one of the peaceful and open forums. i know some popular forums where you are banned for a lifetime for nothing.


----------



## Arch (Nov 16, 2007)

rob i am not baffled by your image... its just i and others like to be able to communicate with the OP about an image to help us understand WHY it is you do what you do. This leads to constructive conversation and not mindless spamming as some members have done.

All i am suggesting is that on ANY occasion during 3 of your threads in particular you could have said 'hey, i really want to experiment with shapes... or maybe colours... abstract forms... etc etc.. or whatever it is you have in mind. Then it would lead to further opinions about your images and maybe how you can take things further.

On many kinds of forums you get posters that like to start a thread they know will start arguement for whatever reason. These kinds of posters also like to sit back and say nothing once they have started the debate (or whatever)... this is what your threads are starting to look like becuase you wont answer people... except i might add, the ones you have answered so far... the ones that are spamming and not asking you serious questions.

I realise that some comments have been unhelpful to say the least.. but by also refusing to answer people that have a genuine interest in why you are doing what you do, that adds to fueling the fire.

Nossie, im not sure where to beguin.. im also confused as to wether your opinion of what i wrote before is good or bad.

However i will quickly answer a few of your concearns.... 
yes the mod team do decide what is a heated debate and flame war.
Yes corinna was right.
Im not american im british.
We could discuss all day the choice of words we use, what you would prefer to hear is nice to know but thats not how i chose to word myself.
We do have rules about critques... but as dicussed before many times, phrases like 'that sucks' is not acceptable critique...
No one wants a nanny site.

Now could all please refrain from picking this thread apart... my only goal is for rob to see why this thread is heading south... and maybe to salvage it.


----------



## aammoore (Nov 16, 2007)

If this picture popped up on my LCD screen after taking it....my facial expression  :raisedbrow:would have told you everything...and then if that didn't...me deleting it promptly would...

But Hey...if you like it...your the aritst and that's all that matters!  You don't owe anyone anything. 

If we all shot the same work and enjoyed looking at the same pieces we'd be photographers and not artists.


----------



## kalmkidd (Nov 16, 2007)

dude wtf is up with u and blurry pics seriously.


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 16, 2007)

kalmkidd said:


> dude wtf is up with u and blurry pics seriously.



OK, I'll translate: Please, tell us what your intentions and creative ideas are, which inspired this very special style of yours. We would like to understand your pictures.


----------



## kalmkidd (Nov 16, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> OK, I'll translate: Please, tell us what your intentions and creative ideas are, which inspired this very special style of yours. We would like to understand your pictures.



thanks alex lmao


----------



## ambriz001 (Nov 16, 2007)

hawkeye said:


>



This is so funny!


----------



## plentygood (Nov 16, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> OK, I'll translate: Please, tell us what your intentions and creative ideas are, which inspired this very special style of yours. We would like to understand your pictures.


 
I really agree.  I would like to know what inspires you do take shots like this.


----------



## Chiller (Nov 19, 2007)

lostprophet said:


> *COMING TO A FORUM NEAR YOU*​
> 
> *A TALE OF YET ANOTHER THREAD LOCKED*​
> *RATED R* (for mature content)​


 

​
As for the photo...Rob, you have a very unique style and maybe it does need some explaining.   If anything..your photos can sure cause a stir...   ...as for the rest of the members and their attitudes...:thumbdown::thumbdown:​


----------



## newrmdmike (Nov 19, 2007)

well, the photos not for me, but i definitely don't have anything against out of focus photos, or photos with lots of blur.

this photo or a crop of it might actually be super interesting if hung in a certain place (i can't say where or if it even would) but . . . i can say that one thing i think about photos and them being good is that for me to think its good i want to see it again, and aside from the crap this thread has stirred up i don't think there would be any reason i would want to see it again, and so i would say i don't like it.

but i would say keep on experimenting with out of focus shots.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Nov 20, 2007)

I like it! it challenges all of the standards that create the makeup of a 'good' photograph. 

The OP succeeded, this HAD to have been what he was going for!


----------

