I would like to see some photos from people that post.

Lex.I believe there are many instances where advice is given and the person learning surely needs confirmation the

advisor can do what they are giving advice about ?.

Good advice comes from one, that can do, also.I would place far more faith in someone who was advising me if they

show me by example,or at the very least show me what they are capable of in other areas of photography.

I do not expect everyone who gives advice to be an artist or perfectionist but I would expect one to have at least the

basics of photography within their grasp.There is so much misinformation on the net regarding photography as a

whole,that some reassurance (in any way possible) as to the validity of advice is a real boon.

 

Im talking from experience,as I was lead astray more than once after asking advice from other sites on the net,when I

started a few years ago.

Someone talking technical terms in an articulate way is not necessarily enough.

The posting I do is usually about equipment and such. I don't ever critique another persons images on photo.net, nor do I wish to receive critique from people I don't know. I belong to a camera club (real world) and I receive critique from the members. People I know and respect. I have posted images in the forums before and just like this thread they go without notice. Why bother resizing and posting an image if nobody will even say "good shot" Besides there are a number of people such as in this thread that just make unnecessary negative comments. Who needs it.

>>> There is so much misinformation on the net regarding photography as a whole, ... Im talking from experience,as I was lead astray more than

once after asking advice from other sites on the net,when I started a few years ago.

 

Ditto and bingo. When I started getting interested in street photography around 7 years ago, it would have been **real easy** to succumb to some of

the "advice" posted on one of the forums here. Such as, only RF cams are good for SP, you must have pedigree glass with exquisite bokeh, you

need to be stealthy on the street, large noisy cams are bad, black-tape the brand, battery cams are unreliable, use a 135mm lens, only film is good,

how to engage people (ie don't), and on and on.

 

And then when I poked around looking for pix, people making all those claims either didn't have any photos, or they were just terrible. OTOH, those

not into gear (any cam will work), suggesting working closer is better, stressing technique, etc **all had great photos**.

 

Best decision I ever made - listening to the second group...

"I would like to see some photos from people that post."

 

I will try to post some pictures from my uninspiring collection this weekend or next. Would be it be alright for me to continue asking an occasional question until then? I've learned a lot on this site in the 3 months since my first post. Thanks, everyone, for all the help so far!

My pictures on my own Web site. The URL is on my member page, and I also sometimes post links to specific images in my forum posts when I think that's relevant. So I feel no need to have a separate portfolio here.

Good advice comes from people who know what they're talking about. They don't need to *do* the thing well. Freddie Roach was just an okay boxer, more a tenacious and indomitable pug than anything else. He's unquestionably a great boxing trainer. I'd take him any day over the likes of Sugar Ray Leonard, an incredible boxer with an incredible ego who's more interested in self-aggrandizement than the best interests of boxers under his care.

 

I could cite two perfectly valid examples from many pursuits to counter every claim that only those who have the goods to show can be trusted to give valid advice.

 

It ain't science. It's mostly intuition. You can quickly determine just from reading what someone has written and trying their suggestions whether the advice is solid. Even if they're only regurgitating something they read elsewhere, it's often better than bad advice from an outstanding photographer.

 

Besides, if you're depending more heavily on what people like me say on the web than on finding out for yourself what works, you're spending too much time yakking and not enough time shooting. I tend to rely, admittedly to an annoying extent, on boxing anecdotes, but I learned nothing from reading books about boxing or The Ring magazine or even from coaches. Everything I learned came from sparring with guys who later became some of the toughest pros of their era (some of 'em later became world champs), and every one of 'em left me with lumps that I learned from. It wasn't "unnecessarily negative". That's how I learned. Maybe some folks need more gentle mentoring.

Lex : "They don't need to *do* the thing well. Freddie Roach was just an okay boxer, more a tenacious and indomitable pug than anything else ".

Lex,in my book Freddie certainly was a doer.He got in the ring and proved what he was about.This argument doesnt hold water for me.At least everyone could judge for themselves and saw what he did.

 

I personally learned mostly from practise and love getting out there.This is the most time I`ve spent on a forum in years.I will be out there again from next week.The pleasure in photography for me is spending the day out in Wales or the Cotswolds,here in the UK.In the past I`ve walked 25 miles in a day now I walk much less and shoot far more.:-)

Geoff, that's pretty much what I said. Freddie was a tenacious doer. He proved himself in the ring to be a formidable opponent. Not a champ. Not even close. But he's a masterful trainer.

 

If Freddie was a photographer, his portfolio would look pretty much like mine. Competent with occasional moments of promise. I think I'm better at evaluating the photos of others than I am at creating great photos. But I'm nowhere near a "masterful" mentor or artistic critic.

 

If the only mark of credibility is an excellent portfolio, best of luck getting critiques and mentoring from folks who will meet your demanding standards. There are out there a very tiny handful or people who excel at both doing and teaching. Consider yourself fortunate in the extreme if ever you meet one. Especially if you don't have to pay for the privilege.

 

Meanwhile, perhaps photo.net will suffice as second fiddle.

>>> If the only mark of credibility is an excellent portfolio, best of luck getting critiques and mentoring from folks who will meet your

demanding standards. There are out there a very tiny handful or people who excel at both doing and teaching.

 

Actually I find the opposite to be true - and almost all the time. Those with good bodies of work seem to be the ones most knowledgeable

and can also speak easily and with direct first person experience. I could probably name at least a couple dozen people here on pnet...

 

I've yet to find great advice on pnet from those that don't have photos posted somewhere. A lot of 10th-hand regurgitated internet drivel

and

opinion is easy to find...

 

Those who feel they know everything there is to know about photography will disagree as it's then easy to separate bs from fact knowing

the

answers ahead of time. For me, one who's still learning, I'll continue to look for evidence of great photos when considering proffered

advice.

So far, it's been an almost 100% positive correlation. Works for me...

Actually, that's a pretty good endorsement of photo.net, Brad. The place does seem to draw some top notch photographers who can and will share what they can when approached in the right spirit. That's what's kept me here for so long.

 

But I don't know if that's a reflection of the rest of the web or the real world. I know some outstanding photographers who are also lovely people, but our interests and approaches are so different that I'm not sure we learn anything other than enjoying visits and viewings.

 

Some of the best info I've read on photo.net and elsewhere over the years came from folks who are long retired. No online portfolio. But their credibility is otherwise well established, either through reputation or knowledge gained through experience.

 

Occasionally an absolute rookie will offer information or insight that cuts through the B.S.

 

And some of us ... some of me ... don't know when to shut the heck up.

I`ve read with interest peoples view.I actually dont demand high standards in any portfolio,but I would love to see at least a sprinkling of photos in a collection.For me its not about having to prove anything.It just adds so much more and at the very least shows a person has, or is getting out there....

 

It doesnt take much to post a couple of images.Being told one has had a photo published or one is a professional doesnt do it for me.

 

Lex > "Meanwhile, perhaps photo.net will suffice as second fiddle".

Not for me Lex,I readily admit that there are some fantastic contributors on this wonderful site,and many superb images that I come back time and again to view.

I met a guy named Pythagoras.

 

He said, "I invented a puzzle."

 

I said, "Prove it."

Pythagoras believed that : all brothers of the order should observe strict loyalty and secrecy.

Brian : "I just checked my photo.net gallery before replying. It won't inspire much confidence in my ability to advise anybody about anything",

 

If ever you have anything to say Brian your images would speak volumes and I for one would listen intently.Nice work indeed.

Brad,you have exciting photos.A unique style.Like them very much,they have drama about them.....

Having posted images or not, this is all irrelevent. What one should do with posted comments is to harmonize them across many other posted comments, and off line books too. Those that post pictures BS no less then those that don't.

 

I think the biggest reason people look for posted pictures (after reading one's posted comments) is to find something to jab the poster of a "bad" comment with, and especially if they don't like the posted comment.

 

Why people think posted images will somehow add credence to one's comments is beyound me.

 

With internet information, it is always best to harmonize posted comments across many, many others; to find a common idea, in concluding what the best practices might be, for a given issue/problem/situation.

>>> I think the biggest reason people look for posted pictures (after reading one's posted comments) is to find something to jab the

poster of a "bad" comment with, and especially if they don't like the posted comment.

 

The biggest reason? I'm curious, can you post some links corroborating that?

 

I look to photos to help assess the believability of information from a poster. If I find photos that speak to the assertion under discussion

(whether it's SP, wildlife, sports, PJ, etc), I'm far more likely to take that assertion at face value. No photos, no thanks.

 

You wouldn't believe (or maybe you would) some of the claims from some people on a subject, yet when you look for photos, there's no

evidence the poster has actually engaged in walking the talk.

I'm a fairly new user here at photo.net

 

and will soon be registering, setting up album, etc, etc.

 

I'm a pro photographer, usually specialising portraits and events, although I'm happy shooting pretty much anything.

 

In the next day or wo I'll put up a few starter shots, and hopefully like any album it will grow effectively over time

 

as for others, the option is there, top pro photographers may not choose to share too much, (more due to copywrites.

And some of the less pro users may feel a little "scared" because of the gih quality of some of the albums here.

 

Personally, (to put it short) my only interest is that my clients like there shots, So I'm happy sharing some for you guys, and maybe getting some constructive critisism on wher eI can improve, or what I can try,

 

Some people might not want that critisism, and so again that may stop many from wanting to share there pictures.

"No photos, no thanks.

 

You wouldn't believe (or maybe you would) some of the claims from some people on a subject, yet when you look for

photos, there's no evidence the poster has actually engaged in walking the talk."

 

Do you freelance in your profession while at the same time post on a forums detrimental to your profession, with

your real name and a link to your experience level?

 

You assume everyone is like you and doesn't mind the google results. Others are more private and as Josh stated,

shouldn't be dismissed as a "non-citizen". For heavens sake, it could be James Natchwey or Anton Corbin

responding or asking for an answer. So, I give posters that seem to be polite and know what they are talking

about, the benefit of the

doubt. It doesn't take much to figure out experience level simply from from conversation and not needing to

validate arguments

with pretty pictures. I believe everyone

is here for the good, not the worse. PN has a great way of self policing itself without too much moderator

intervention. At the end of the day, I'm sure the "faceless" ones that can "walk the talk" could care less if

some suspicious

weekend hobbyists took them seriously or not.

Garrison brings up an excellent example of the kind of thinking that guides Photo.net policy on this sort of thing.

Garrison, as I said many times earlier, it is **my choice** to seek out corroboration when evaluating information. Also, as I've said

earlier, I've seen a large positive correlation between good information posted and easily discoverable photos from the poster. I've

also seen a large positive correlation between what I consider suspicious or bad information and the lack of photos from the poster.

 

You may chose to believe whatever you want with or without corroboration. That's *your choice*.

 

I don't put myself in the position of already knowing everything, so I it's been an excellent way that helps *me* separate the wheat

from the chaff. I could go on and on about the ton of nonsense I've seen posted with respect to street photography on the forums -

something I'm very familiar with.

Just to be clear, again... I'm not saying people need to post photos. I'm just relating what has served *me* well in the

learning process over the years here.

I will point out that every user is entitled to choose for themselves what method they wish to use to evaluate other user's information. You can roll knucklebones for all I care.

 

However, anyone who tries to crap on another user for the sole reason of not having any photos posted will get smacked with the suspension ruler. I don't have time for that kind of petty arguing. If you want to dispute bad information, by all means do so. If you want to attack people just because they don't have photos posted, go find another website to spend your time on.

I see why some are quite defensive.

 

But from a few posts it does come across that some people expect others to post pictures to prove they can do what they say.

Personally I've been in the photography industry for 11 years (which isnt too bad at the age of 27) and having always been a bit of a computer nerd, I've been using computers for digital image enhancements from the age of 11.

 

Some may not believe me, and no, I haven't posted any pictures yet,

But what many need to understand is a photographer may not choose to post work done for his clients, and so things that are liekly to be uploaded will b more part-time shots, which are taken more for fun than anything.

 

Yes I will be uploading some photo's possibly tonight when I sort out subscription,

 

But I can fully understand why many people may not want to upload.,

 

simply because they may not upload there best possible work, and many people judge a person's knowledge on there work.

Over the years on photo.net I've seen many examples of people retaliating by posting unfavorable comments on photos or assigning low ratings. Some of 'em are brazen enough to declare their intent to do so. I've experienced it a few times myself, tho' it makes me laugh.

 

And it's not alway retaliation for comments made on the vengeful person's own photos. I've seen people go after anyone who dared offer less than effusive praise for their favorite photographer. Or retaliate on photos for comments made on discussion forums, and vice versa.

 

I doubt it's widespread enough to be of major concern and probably not a statistically significant impact on the overall ratings system. But it happens. I'd be happy to provide links to a few amusing examples, but I won't list 'em publicly.

 

IMO, there are valid reasons for not uploading photos here, and for choosing to retain some degree of anonymity or a slightly cloaked identity.