Photographers Photo Gallery and Forum participants

<p>I wonder, why the guys who ask questions as well as the guys who participate in the forums answering all kinds of questions dont have photo galleries. OR is it just a mere random that whosoever who particpate in forums I click on, does not seems to have posted any pictures in their galleries. I found that it is around 95% probability that they dont have any any pictures. :)</p>

<p>For me, it's time (or lack of) for posting pictures. The ones I have up there are old and I have far newer stuff.</p>

<p>Between keeping two photography businesses going, dealing with a one year old, running classes.... :-)</p>

<p> </p>

My serious photos are made with a view camera using 8x10 inch sheet film. The negative is contact printed directly onto photo paper. The only way I can display those photos on line is to scan the photo itself on a flat bed scanner. That results in significant quality loss. I prefer not to show the poor scanning results of good quality photos.

<p>There's no requirement that partipants use the photo galleries here. I have many older photos posted here but my recent work goes on my own web site. It's too much time to maintain two sites. That said, many valuable partipants here don't maintain PN galleries. Gene M in the Classic Camera forum is a good example, as is Rick Oleson in the same forum.</p>

<p><Chas></p>

<p>i personally use the bigpicturegallery.com for my pictures. it is quick and easy. i don't see the point of having a gallery here. i have however taken part in the nowords postings a number of times!</p>

<p>Possible answers to why some posters don't have any images in their portflolio here on PN: 1. Too lazy 2. Don't have any photos to post 3. Think their work is too good to post. 4. Think their work is too bad to post. 5. Know a lot about photographic theory but don't know how to take a good photo. 6. Don't want their images lifted by others and misused. 7. Very shy about showing their work. 8. Don't want the possibility of a negative critique or low rate. 8. Would rather write about photography than engage in the physical process of photography. 9. Currently in prison and unable to have a camera but can access the internet in the prison library, which happens to have a lot of photography books. etc., etc. </p>

<p>Hey Tim!<br>

You have made a 9 point exposition that hit all reasons, I even had a laugh!<br>

My problem is not having time between two jobs (full time and the other is Photo and Video).<br>

When not in one place I'm in the other. Right now I'm in the one place where I can work and have time to read and post on PN but can not upload my photos. Believe I will do that next week, only problem is that I register for free so I understand I can only upload 5 photos. Can I get a special treatment to upload more photos, I've got a lot!>)</p>

<p>Umesh, I've often wondered the same thing. No pictures in gallery, no website link...what's the deal?<br /> <br /> 'Pictures speak louder than words' has always been my general direction. When someone offers very "authoritative" advice about photography, I always want to see the "accomplishments" (pictures) that back up that advice. <br /> <br /> I'm not from Missouri, but I still subscribe to a "Show Me" sensibility.</p>

<p><< Currently in prison and unable to have a camera but can access the internet in the prison library, which happens to have a lot of photography books. etc., etc. >></p>

<p>Ha, ha, ha! Love your sense of humor! Truthfully I had thought the same in the past. I would love to see some images from people who appear to know a lot about photography.</p>

<p>Good advice is good advice. Anyone with half a B.S. detector can tell when someone doesn't know anything. Photos in the gallery mean nothing. After all, all they show you is that someone knows how to upload photos. What would you rather have, good advice from someone with no photos in their gallery or pointless advice from someone who swiped a dozen photos from Flickr? You gonna tell me you can somehow use your jedi powers to be sure that those gallery photos were actually taken by your master forum advice giver.</p>

<p>Above all, anyone who thinks accurate advice can only come from someone who proves that they can do what they are talking about should consider this: Tiger Woods is the greatest golfer in the world, and he has a swing coach. His swing coach is nowhere near the golfer he is (and no where near the golfer that any PGA tour player is) but he's Tiger's swing coach just the same. Why? Because you don't have to be able to do the thing you are teaching perfectly if you are a good teacher.</p>

<p>Ignoring advice from someone just because they can't shoot a photo is an ignorant way to learn about photography. My 100% absolutely greatest critique partner....he's an oil painter. Crappiest photographer you would ever want to meet. But I've growm more as a photographer because of him than any dozen photographers who have given me feedback. Only suckers ignore good advice because they don't like where it is coming from.</p>

<p>Well, I can speak for myself. First I shoot almost only slide film (the only exception is B&W film) and until last Christmas I didn't had a serious scanner. Second, point 7 raised by Tim applies to me. I don't take pictures for a living, it is my hobby, and I don't feel the need to share them with other people. I arrange slide shows on request of my friends. A good 50% of my slides have been seen by myself only. Point 4 also applies, I like my slides the way I get them, don't want to spend hours post-editing them to fit them for a website or to improve me. Sometimes I am happy with my results and sometimes not, but compared to the work of others here, mine sucks. We spoke ad nauseam about average pictures everywhere and I don't want to contribute to "visual spamming" with mines. And, last but not least, then there is time, that valuable resource that everybody in modern life misses.</p>

<p>I don't even know what's in my photo.net gallery (ok - just looked so now I do) but mostly I'm too lazy to digitize my photos for web viewing. I like reading about 6 of the photo.net forums, and since it's usually too rainy and windy to take pictures where I live, I spend quite a bit of time here. I now seem to be answering far more questions than I ask, but I don't assume I'm a better photographer than the asker - just that I have more technical knowledge. Nick Brandt didn't know what bokeh was until he asked someone on a photo.net discussion.</p>

<p>Good advice from someone with no pictures in the gallery (or anywhere else) can be a slippery slope for newer photographers - they must have a certain level of knowledge to know if the advice actually is good advice. And the fact is, for much of the good advice given by posters here, some is not so good.<br /> <br /> Tiger Woods didn't (I presume) pick up his "Swing Coach" in an internet chat room. Chances are, the coach is a Club Pro with years of training. Some of the posters here, likewise, have years of training and I value their general advice about photography. There are also rather young, inexperienced engineers who've just bought their first camera and somehow feel that grants them the power to know all things photographic, and they're very keen on giving that advice here.<br /> <br /> Yes, it is naive to discount "good" advice...even from non-photographers. (One of my mentors is a graphic designer who doesn't even own a camera, but I value her advice greatly.) The problem is discerning whether or not it's good advice because many people don't have that 'half a B.S. detector' you mentioned.</p>

<p>Christopher.....hey, hey, hey....watch it bud, you're in Plano, I am in Coppell, I might just have to pay you a visit :-). I am no longer a "rather young, inexperienced engineer", but why single us engineers out just because we are also gear-heads? For years we have been called bad communicators, but now bad photographic-advise-givers as well? No fair!</p>

<p>:-), no Shash, no offense directed at you...but I do have another specific case or two in mind from this forum...and they are both engineers.<br /> <br /> I guess another way of looking at my point is - just because I own a camera and understand the manufacturing process of how it's put together, it doesn't make me an engineer. Likewise, someone can design/assemble a camera but that doesn't make them a photographer. <br /> <br /> I have a strong bias for listening to advice that comes from actual experience rather than theoretical understanding. Is the advice coming from someone who has shot 10 images, or 100,000? As Josh mentioned, good advice is good advice...but I favor that good advice coming from those who have experienced it themself and isn't simply reciting something they've heard somewhere else.<br /> <br /> Since we're both in Texas, the "local" version - You can put your boots in the oven, but that doesn't make 'em biscuits. Or possibly even - the tried and true: "Big hat, no cattle" analogy.</p>

<p>Christopher,</p>

<p>After over a decade here I can promise you the other side of the coin is that there is a LOT of <strong>awful</strong> advice coming from people with nice galleries of images. I promise you this. We can go to almost any decent length thread on the site and find crappy incorrect advice from people with "years of experience" and pretty images in their gallery.</p>

<p>One aspect of learning anything is understanding when advice is good and when it's useless. That's just part of the process.</p>

<p>Christopher, no offense taken at all, I was just pulling your leg. I like both your Texan analogies, by the way.</p>

<p>I do agree that there are a lot of people that offer advice without themselves actually having tried what they are talking about. In that case, it always makes sense to clarify that whatever advice you are offering up is second or third hand knowledge. Having said that though, there is lot of knowledge we absorb from being around photographers and photography that maybe useful to pass on to others. What you say makes overall sense: take all advice with a grain of salt and with healthy doses of optimism as well as skepticism and weigh all options, particularly when the advice is on internet forums. But you have to judge the merits of the advice on the basis of the subject matter itself, not by some criteria like the quantity or lack of gallery images.</p>

<p>I have found that sometimes the truth is about as relevent as my capacity to comprehend, my willingness to believe, and limited by the opportunity to experience the action of physical decision. I imagine we all have experienced a wonderful shot where our luck was, we were there, had a camera, and took the shot. That being said I love the quote from Arnold Palmer where some one congratulated Arnie on a LUCKY SHOT. Arnie's response was, "How amazing, the more I practice, the luckier I get!" There are two things one can learn from examples: What to do, and what not to do. The good thing about experimantation in photography is that we are not doctors. :-) Our experiments are not life threatening, and hopefully FUN!</p>