Charles_Webster Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 I've been a paying member here since January, and I try hard to be a contributing member of the community. I don't rate, I critique. And only when it's dreadfully bad do I not give suggestions for improvement. But when I criticized this photo http://www.photo.net/photo/4897419 saying that "there's more to street photography than bad snaps" the photog got her knickers in a twist and cited the fact that there are more than 1.6 million gallery photographs as her justification for her comment "your comment speaks a lot of your perosnality! sincerely sorry for you!" When I criticized this photo http://www.photo.net/photo/4914919 as being out of focus, I was told it was "diffuse glow" as though I should be able to tell the difference. I didn't ask whether the blown highlights were deliberate also. When I posted this B&W photo in my own gallery, http://www.photo.net/photo/4865523 I was advised to "invest in a better camera." Where is the value-add that I'm supposed to get from sitting here and writing constructive criticism of 10-20 photos a week? Where's the sense of community that's supposed to come from honest give and take communication about our shared passion, photography? Who are these photographers who say they want to learn from those of us who have been doing it for 40 or more years, but instead fly off the handle when criticized? Is it all about ego stroking? is it all about style over substance? Instead, I see Phil wanting to make this a place where the newcomer can quickly find answers about what camera to buy. A place where real artists like Sylvie Leuders and David McCracken have their photos removed as "pornographic" while puerile soft porn by Ann & Barney goes by almost every day? What am I getting for my membership fee, and more, what am I getting back for my investment in the photo.net community? Is it all about style over substance after all? In which case, why do I bother hanging out here, posting my photos here, wading through endless cute children pictures, hoping for one picture that stirs my soul? Someone please tell me one compelling reason not to take my pictures somewhere else, such as pBase? <Chas> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_skomial Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Charles, take it easy and try to ignore this. The Internet is mostly annonymous. People hide behind meaningless names, so they will avoid responsibility for their text. For this reason I do not post, and do not rate anyone, just trying to help on technical side of the photography. Yet myself, and even my children (!), got verbal abuse from people here. Just take it easy and forget this, it is not worth your time. I have received many thank you notes on the web, and via email, and that matters more. Good Luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_b Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Well, Charles, that's the nature of the internet. Some people accept critiques, some don't, some get upset, some ignore you. It would be the same if the photos were laid out in front of you with photographers present. Except that some would probably try to hit you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seven Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 I know how you feel about emotive, defensive - and sometimes plain rude - responses to critiques (you were very diplomatic in not mentioning the magenta cast), however, the problems you're experiencing are not symptomatic of photo.net alone but of the entire <p><a href="http://forum.pbase.com/viewtopic.php?t=23583">cyberspace critique culture</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mharris Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Well first off I want to say your picture was better and more interesting to me than the two you critiqued. Sometimes people who say things like "get a better camera" sit around and fondle theirs like it was a sex organ and never put it to it's intended use, they just polish it. Secondly, and I think this is the important part saying a picture is out of focus, or just a picture of pillar is not really constructive. A better way to approach that is ask if the results were intended. What I mean to say is say what you feel about the photo but leave the photographer with something to build on. Open a dialog. For example, " The action in your photo seems to behind a pillar, was this what you wanted to convey as your message? Waiting a few seconds may have presented a more interesting shot." Or the second one, "It appears to me that this photo is either out of focus or over-photoshopped, things to consider are shutter speed,or is your camera in need of a focus adjustment? The framing and colors are very nice but to me seem to be lost in the mis-focus."<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amorteguy Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 I was a paying member, but I gave up because I have no use for a pocket full of numbers. Numbers mean NOTHING. When I was active here I rarely gave a rating without a written critique. What the hell is the point of a number? I tried once again to post a new image and got 20 new numbers... whopeee. (Well, one person was thoughtful enough to write something in a critique.) I am about to post my own soapbox on my opinion of this site as it is. I too have received ridiculous flames from people here with all-too-thin skin. Also, what was her response supposed to mean anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nino Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 PN should seriously consider removing the ability for non-subscribers to submit photos for critique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nino Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 I also gave up submitting photos for critique, as it seems most people could not be bothered making a comment and some of the ones that do only do so in the hope of reciprocity. PN number rating system should be given the flick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugh_hill Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Charles, Michael has a point now don't get me wrong I agree on honesty and that an artistst has to be open to criticism but some times they can be too sensitive or the critique can be to severe. I myself like constructive criticism but I would be upset if someone just attacked my work without proper reason, but thats just me. another thing with street is, it is very rarely perfect because you only have one chance so a lot of the time you lose the shot or it has some inperfection in and the question is do we leave it in or not? and that depends doesent it. I would be quite honoured if you looked at some of mine and gave me your honest opinion on how I might do better in future. regards Hugh Hill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mharris Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Hugh hit the nail on the head with street, you only have a small window to get that shot. It's even harder with an older camera with it's squinty focusing. Sometimes a miss works out and sometimes it doesn't. The question becomes does the picture still tell the story. It's ok to say in a critique that the shot may have been missed. This picture had to be shot quick and I missed the focus but I think the emotion and the story are still there. It was also taken with a Leica IIf which isn't the fastest focuser.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEGREEFOTO Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 G'day Charles, I think that the answers that you have received thus far in regards to your posting would sum up the advise I would give any one in your situation. It is a situation that I find myself in to a certain extent from time to time when dealing with clients that think they know more about photography, then the person they have hired...or so it seems. As the first individual states in her bio....don't critize her too strickly....that would sum it up for me. I don't pretend for one moment that I am the world's greatest...far from it....but like you, I joined this site to learn and share......stay focus on that and dismiss...anything that you know is not to be taken seriously. I see by your studies and folio that you are above all that. Artur Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmccracken Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 It is a question I have asked myself many times too. As you say, I did get some of my photos deleted and I was annoyed but in the end I am still here. More than one person left P.N. after the deletion of my photos. The question you should be asking is not "Why do I bother with photo.net?" Rather, "What are the alernatives?" I haven't yet found one better. The problem with P.N is the size. If you imagine any group of random people there are going to be those you like and those you don't like. The examples you give make me smile. Instead of getting upset with the people in the examples, I would try to see them for the idiots they are. I too have my failings as I am sure you do too. (My pet hate is people who expect critique of their work but are not interested in contributing themselves.) You know your comments are given with the best of intent. I am sure the serious people on here do too. Why let the rest get to you? Try not to bring yourself down to their level and do keep bothering... for now at least! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin carron Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Charles, I am not sure there is a solution to this problem. To write a critique that points out the defects of a shot without sounding harsh and patronising takes about three times as long as just giving the unvarnished truth. In 'real' life if you were standing next to the person and discussing their shot you would maybe say the same thing but soften it with non-verbal communication - smiles, body language etc which the internet does not do. The alternative is to wrap up the negative critique with positive encouragement - 'I see what you are trying for here...' etc. That takes time which you may not want to invest in what could be a hopeless case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennyboy Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Charles, I promise that if you critique my work in the manner you did the linked photos above, I will not get upset. I've got pretty thick skin :) Hey, I'll try get crits out of this site in any way that I can - 'a red face costs nowt' as we say here in Yorkshire! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h._p. Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Well, Chas, I think your critique was concise and accurate. That the person receiving the critique was unhappy with what you wrote is, as she herself put it, not your problem.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles_Webster Posted September 11, 2006 Author Share Posted September 11, 2006 Some interesting answers, thank you all for your responses. I'm hoping this thread produces some interesting discussion. To respond directly to some of you: Michael Harris suggests that my comments could be more constuctive and helpful. I agree, but sometimes I get so sick of the banal crap I see here on PN that someone gets a cabbage thrown at them. Frankly, I think I should throw more cabbages, but... Hugh Hill comments that street photography is a matter of the fleeting moment. Of course, that's why it is what it is! Henri Cartier-Bresson showed that you don't need lightning fast auto-focus, just a good eye. Hugh's Chicago street scene is a good example. Caught the moment. I guess I have to agree with David McCracken's comment "I haven't found a better one [alternative] yet" I just don't see another site that can produce tens of thousands of views of my pictures. Colin also reminds me of the harshness of my critique. I would say the same thing to their faces, were we standing in a gallery. I didn't object to Thomas Saujon's "bland and out of focus" comment on my picture. That's valid criticism. What pissed me off was the comment suggesting that I buy a better camera. And I certainly agree w/ Ben in that "a red face costs nowt"! If I didn't believe that, I would show my pictures only to my friends, who think I'm the world's greatest photographer. But I choose to hang them on the PN wall for all to see, and take shots at. I don't believe we learn anything from success, only from failure. Thanks for the support and encouragement. You guys are the ones I post my pictures for. <Chas> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Here I always wonder how folks that have their feelings hurt in the ratings game are going to deal with an actual photo client that has a deadline for a image, is pushy, then wants a discount? , or has to be sued to collect the weeks worth of work? Or changes their mind alot in what image they want? <BR><BR> If all raters here gave ones images a marks that they are great, would this fake feedback help folks? <BR><BR>Would you rate a real customer#1 better who liked all your work, but owes you money bigtime? Or would you rate a real customer#2 better that doesnt always like your work, but buys a decent amount, and prepays in cash? <BR><BR>From a commerical viewpoint the ratings game here appears abit odd, since there is no goal for the image, thus there is going to be a huge variation in folks responses.<BR><BR>Here at the print shop I see a zillion images a day, the ratings game seems as tasty as the chicken meal the kids eat on Napolean Dynamite; after tending to a chicken coop all day. After seeing many hundreds of "fine art" sunsets, cats, soccer shots they tend to merge as one blob. :)<BR><BR>In grade school we had this subsitute teacher the average and dolt kids liked, and teachers pet hated. He would either reverse grade, like a BOT, and give the dolts a A, and the pets F's. Or her would give these cool lectures and tests, where abilty of the lessor kids often got discovered, and the pets flaws shown. A loose cannon teacher or reviewer may change ones mindset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles_Webster Posted September 11, 2006 Author Share Posted September 11, 2006 Yeah, if all the feedback the photog ever gets is "ohhh, you're so great" from friends, what will they do when the client throws the entire assignment in the wastebasket, and says they won't pay for that crap? It happens. <Chas> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnicholson Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Hi Charles, I can't tell you why you should stay but I can tell you why I stay. I stay because buried within all the ratings games, backbiting, and mutual-admiration-societies there are some real gems here. There are people who want honest help and people who want to give honest help. Those people are worth digging for in my opinion. <p> I offer up <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/4082325">this exchange</a> I had with the aforementioned <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=693056">David McCracken</a>. This exchange was priceless to me. Did I achieve a perfect picture in the end? No. But, I improved it and I'm always looking to improve. There are people here, like David, who will give you honest feedback and who will follow up on that feedback. To me, those people make the other nonsense just the price of admission. <p> That's why I stay. <p> One final thought. Just as, in my business, it's inappropriate to refer to someone's work as a "hack", so too is it inappropriate to refer to someone's photographic efforts as "snaps"/snapshots in the context of this site. I think we all know that that is one of those button-pushing words. Obviously you are free to express your opinions as they come to you. But, you can't expect someone to have a thick skin when you call his/her work "snaps" and then be thin-skinned about the response you receive. <p> Just my thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afs760bf Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Pretty good discussion here. I think it's reason to stay for a while longer. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will king Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Very well said Jamie. I agree with Jamie. I compare this site to my golf game. If I go out play 18 holes and as usual I will suck, but that one perfect drive will keep me coming back. Ignore the negatives, and focus on the positives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darius.tulbure Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Nino, are you sure about the non subscribers? I am one and I plan of subscribing, but I can`t even afford a better camera for the moment (I use a Canon Powershot A410). Look in my page, look at how many constructive critiques I gave in 8 months or so and look into my portofolio. Is it so bad?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darius.tulbure Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 This is a correctly made diffuse glow:<br><a href=/photo/4643763><img alt="The Calling" title="The Calling"src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4643763-sm.jpg"height=200 width=150 border=0></a><p>And this is a bad or good "streetscape":<br> <a href=/photo/4274060><img alt="Urban (grayscale)" title="Urban (grayscale)"src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4274060-sm.jpg"height=185 width=200 border=0></a>. Just my thoughts about street photos and diffuse glow in PS. Lol.<p>Charles, I think there are many photgraphers in this site who (would) appreciate your constrtuctive critiques! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith turrill Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Never forget that this is just a website making money for it's owners and advertisers on the internet. In the real world face to face, most of the big mouth attitudes and 3-bombers would probably be saying, "Sir would you like fries or onion rings with that order." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin carron Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Charles, may I come back for another response to your question? Looking at the two shots you specify in your post I would be pushed to find anything positive to say about either of them. So given that there are a lot of good-but-could-be-better shots on PN why not look for those instead? I tend to work through the TRP from the bottom up and look for interesting shots. I can then offer both encouragement and constructive criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now