Why are Photographers (artists whatever..) , so serious?

[bds1]

you'll all have to speak up, I've just cut my ear off.

[EricM]

The other side of the coin, I feel that a lot of us here don�t hand out compliments enough. If you view something that tickles you, give a pat on the back instead of just scrolling on by�

[hans_beckert]

I do not care what others think of my work. Too many photographers, especially pros, are insufferably egotistical.

[ray .]

It's not a matter of being artists. I looked at a consumer mattress forum recently, of all things, and people were sniping at each other! That kind of woke me up. (hee hee)

[george_conboy1]

I am a serious artist, dammit!<div></div>

[andrew_somerset1]

<i>"I do not care what others think of my work. Too many photographers, especially pros, are insufferably egotistical."</i><p>

 

That's interesting in light of your recent antics. Could you comment on your decision to have the moderator remove a link to your photography when it came under criticism recently?<p>

 

Skipping lightly over that, the answer to the question is quite simple. People invest their egos in their photos. So naturally, they take it personally when their work is criticised.<p>

 

It helps to consider the source. But it also helps to remember that everyone has critics. I can't think of a single photographer who hasn't come in for criticism on this forum, with the possible exceptions of Erwitt and the high holy HCB. Successful photographers working today such as McCurry and Bruce Gilden (to cite a current example) tend to come in for particularly vicious criticism.<p>

 

So that helps me put things in perspective when everyone tells me my photos suck.

[andrew_somerset1]

And dammit, people, it's "Artist" or "artiste," never the simple "artist." If you're going to be pretentious, you gotta do it right. ;-)

[sprouty]

A couple of thoughts:

<P>

First, for those of you that think this forum is tough you should spend a few days on some of the usenet sites. Ask a question covered by the FAQ or post something open to the slightest interpretation and the flames will curl your short-hairs before you have a chance to blink. Sorry folks but the occasional cat fights that go around here are pretty bush league. So like it or not you�re all going to have to face up to the fact that you�re, well, for the lack of a better word�<I>civilized</I>.

<P>

Second Bob wrote: <I>�I like to think the average person 'likes' an image of mine enough to hang it on thier wall (which is what's most important)...�</I>

<P>

Personally I can�t think of a better compliment either. But a quick trip around my office tells me that based on what people have tacked on the cubicle walls, the criteria we use on this forum goes right out the window with the average person. I would even venture to say that for the vast majority of people who press a shutter release the only thing that matters is capturing a record of where they are and who they are with. In fact just yesterday I was over a (relatively new) friend�s house. We got talking and the subject came up about the last trip she had made. Out came the albums and you should have seen her face light up. It was great to hear her talk about her trip.

<P>

Really, for the average person it�s leica-Shmeica, they could give a damn about anything but memories. Composition, perspective, tungsten balanced film, ah, forgeddaboudit.

<P>But then again is that so bad? Maybe that's photography's greatest gift?

[hans_beckert]

I have no interest in my work being criticized, one way or another, and especially not here. The images there were simply to satisfy those who demanded to see them there. The link was posted without my consent, and that was why I asked to have it removed, not because I am afraid of criticism. I am also not satisfied with the scans, so evaluations are pointless in any event.

 

I do not participate in critiques on this site, either giving or receiving. I am not interested.

[octavio bustard]

"If I wanted an authoritative, respectable critique of my work I'd submit it to a gallery, photo editor or maybe even a pro whose work I admire. I wouldn't bring a gourmet meal into a McDonalds for the patrons to evaluate and I wouldn't post my images to an internet forum to be critiqued by every Tom, Dick and Harry with an ISP--including a few Dicks with a personal agenda against me because I stuck the needle of truth into their fantasy bubbles at one time or another."

 

Not meaning to "call out" a denizen of this esteemed board, but its precisely this sort of attitude that engenders the defensive responses you are inquiring about. Jay, a dentist, will not post his pictures on the net so they can be critiqued by every "Tom Dick and Harry" (obviously meant to be perjorative) yet reserves the right to critique others' work, including the right to disabuse people of the notion they might produce something of some value ( bursting some "Dick's" "fantasy bubble").

 

My guess is that "Dick" probably wouldnt "get all worked up" over Jay the Dentist's criticisms if he ("Dick") was able to judge the standards Jay lives up to, and the only way to do that is to look at Jay's work. "Dick" could then make an informed decision about whether he found Jay the Dentist's criticisms credible or just the byproduct of Jay working out some personal issues over the internet. Instead, "Dick" only has Jay's bald assertion that his work is "gourmet" while "Dick's" is best served at McDonalds. I don't blame the "Dicks" of the world for being offended.

 

I post stuff to see what other people think of it. Invariably, I don't post things I know are good - that have hung in galleries, or been published - but work I'm currently doing for pleasure and am unsure of or just attached to and need an objective eye to sort thru. When someone critiques them I'll look at that person's work to see what they do; if its lousy I move on; if its good I'll pay attention because I dont consider alot of what I do "gourmet" and good criticism helps weed out the stuff I'm too emotionally invested in to be objective about. But if your criticisms are just a mask for some neurotic need you have to assert authority without having earned it, I am offended, because my work means more to me than to be fodder for your personal neuroseses. And the guy who takes pictures of puppys and sunsets deserves no less as well if, unlike you, he's got the cojones to post it for the world to see.

 

Tommorrow night I go to a party here in Paris to celebrate the publication of "Atelier Charles Sevard" in which 3 of my pics are published. I'd never post those or others like them here; I know they are good and I dont need a dentist to tell me. What I do need PN for is an HONEST critique of my less worthy stuff, and if you give me no means to judge your authority your opinion means nothing. And if its rude or condescending, I'll probably be offended as well.

[joshroot]

<I>"Ok, a pro may find it difficult to accept because he makes a living out of his

work. " </I>

 

<P>See, that's what's weird to me. The number of "pros" who get all bent out of

shape around here when they get bad critiques/ratings/whatever of their photos from

ignorant people. It just confuses me. I'm a pro, and I couldn't care less about what

anyone on photo.net has to say about my action sports shots. The only people who's

opinions matter are the people signing the checks. If I get some dumb comments on

a photo, I just write it off as a matter of taste. not everyone is going to like everything

in the world.

<P>

As for the kids vs no kids. Well, I've got to say that there have been a lot of crappy

boring snapshots posted recently. Should there be a rule against them? No of course

not. Nobody is forcing me to look at them. But there also should be no rule against

someone saying "this photo is out of focus and I find it boring and crappy". It's a

public forum, and you are going to get all kinds of people. Which goes back to one of

the reasons that I dislike the NW threads. I don't think that it is reasonable for

anyone, even someone as talented in his genre as Bob, to be able to expect to avoid

comments on a photo that they post in a public place. No matter how ignorant the

comments are.

<P>

What staggers me is how much importance some people (not many of the Leica

group) put into the comments/ratings of a bunch of nameless people on the internet.

There are only three groups of people who's opinions matter to me: My friends/

family, photographers/critics who's work or knowledge I respect, and my clients.

[ralph_barker]

I believe that the over-sensitivity to criticism of which you speak, Travis, stems from the same set of human failings that are the source of other forms of polarized feeling, and to a lesser degree, polarized thinking. (Polarized thinking - now there's an oxymoron for you!) Consider, for example, the strong socio-political feelings people often have, and their resistance to opposing views.

 

A critique of a photograph, whether well-phrased or not, is just an opinion - even if it comes from a person making his/her living as an art critic or photo editor. How, and whether, we react to those opinions is our choice. Thicker-skinned photographers (or, artists) learn to take even divergent opinions in stride, rather than taking them as personal insults - even if the critique was intended as a personal insult. If we are really smart, however, we add the opinions to our mental database, and then consider the trends. If the intention of our work is to communicate with people, even the opinion of the common person becomes important, because if a majority of people just don't "get it" then we have failed with our communication. If, on the other hand, our work is truly for self-expression only, then there is no need to share the work with others, and no need for the work to be relevant to others.

 

"Truth", after all, is in the mind of the beholder. But, life is more pleasant if we have a sense of humor about it.

[jay_.]

<<Not meaning to "call out" a denizen of this esteemed board, but its precisely this sort of attitude that engenders the defensive responses you are inquiring about. Jay, a dentist, will not post his pictures on the net so they can be critiqued by every "Tom Dick and Harry" (obviously meant to be perjorative) yet reserves the right to critique others' work, including the right to disabuse people of the notion they might produce something of some value ( bursting some "Dick's" "fantasy bubble"). >>

 

Please post a link to where I bashed someone's posted image on this forum. The fantasy bubbles I've bursted are all gear-related.

[joshroot]

That reminds me of another point I forgot to bring up. The idea that someone HAS to

have photos posted in order to be deemed worthy of offering an opinion.

 

Being a good critic is a skill like anything else. Having experience in what you are

trying to critique can help, but it is by no means a reliable indicator that a critic is

going to be able to offer anything of value.

 

I know plenty of good photographers who can't say anything useful about a

photograph. And I know plenty of great photo critics who think ISO means "I seek

only...."

 

Talent does not equal the ability to teach. They are very different skills.

[h._p.]

One man's art is another man's crap. It's really as simple as that. If you're the sort of prat who has a real problem with someone saying they don't like your stuff, well, tough. As long as they say it politely, they have a perfect right to voice their opinion. The real rudeness comes in when certain sad little laddies react violently to even the most gentle criticism and prattle on about how successful they are (naming no names, of course) <grin>.

 

In the meantime here's a piece of art which I give full permission for anyone to use on this forum if they dislike a comment. I like to think of it as a smiley with attitude...<div></div>

[hans_beckert]

Josh:

 

Quite correct. In several cases 'over there' my person was savaged because I did not have anything up against which it was possible to retaliate. Now I have satisfied their urge to have some kind of target for their wrath in response to my critiques of their waterfalls and sunsets.

 

Just pitiful.

 

I have found pros to be more sensitive than amateurs. I find this quite puzzling. Why should pros care one whit what the people on a public forum like this think?

[bobtodrick]

Josh I actually agree with everything you say...I'll just add one thing. I fully expect that if I post something on a public forum, people will comment, and not all will like a photo. If their reasons are even somewhat intelligent I'll cut them some slack. But from a recent personal example, if someone is going to bitch because an image has 'compressed tones' on his monitor, something that is dependent on a slew of things that may not be representitive of the original work...well, just as they have a right to make the comment I have the right to call them an idiot.

[h._p.]

No Bob, you don't have the right to call people an idiot. It says so in the forum rules, somewhere.

 

But never mind, I know your little hearty warty's in the right place, wherever that is...

 

<grin>

[doug herr]

Josh Root wrote: <I>... The idea that someone HAS to have photos posted in order to be deemed worthy of offering an opinion... </I><P>

I agree - however the opinions offered mean more if the critic's relevant background, training and skill level are known, and one way to evaluate the critic's background is through his own photos.

[andrew_somerset1]

<i>"The link was posted without my consent, and that was why I asked to have it removed, not because I am afraid of criticism."</i><p>

 

Ah, well, that makes a good deal of sense. Nothing worse than someone looking at your work without your consent! My three-year-old daughter is going through a similar thing right now -- she gets upset when people smile at her without permission.<p>

[Allen Herbert]

W/nw's are simply about folk sharing their photos on a common theme,and are very successful. They are not posted for crit. Josh, even in a public place, is it too much to ask for a general level of decency? and respect folks wishes?

 

 

Generally w/nw's work well, with very few problems. However,photo posted in other threads,are generally thought to be are open for crit, and if there are problems, that is where they usually come from.

 

You are spending too much time on the Canon forum, which is just a Q&A as they state, Josh.

[EricM]

Hans.

 

"I do not participate in critiques on this site, either giving or receiving. I am not interested."

 

You are full of it. Actually, you�re right. You just insult harshly, both published pro�s and newbies (Mike in available light by Carla, is typical) and start more flame throwing than any other I know. You post opinions then argue until you're blue in the face about techniques you've never done, ie. pushing C41, cross processing...You're one of those that enriches your life by arguing safely behind a keyboard.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006q71

[joshroot]

Allen,

 

What? Wow, you are weird. Every time I bring up the W/NW threads you seem to go off

on the subject. Canon forum? Where does that come from?

 

Rest your worried head, I don't have the power to take away your precious W/NW

threads. Nor do I care enough to do it if I did. I'm just stating my opinion as part of an

example in the context of the current discussion.

[tom h.]

Photography, (like all creative expression) requires you to give of

yourself. This is not easy. It's also a medium with almost no

parameters (anything goes, right?) both of which which make

comparisons of photographers and their work virtually pointless.

One mans William Wegman is anothers Brett Weston. Recently

I've had a rotten dry patch (writers block for photographers) and

have been posting here just to show stuff, no other reason. This

helped. If someone whose work I know and respect suggests

something I've posted (or some aspect of it) ain't working, I'm

definitely going to take a second look -chances are, I knew it

wasn't right in the first place, and just needed to hear it. The

creative impulse is a fragile thing, all wrapped up with self-

doubt, ability, and ego - you have to be careful of it.

 

Tom

 

P.S. as stroppy as he gets,I've NEVER seen Jay attack anyone,

or their work.

[Allen Herbert]

Every time I bring up the W/NW threads you seem to go off

 

 

Oh stop being so touchy, Josh. We are not even talking about your photos(only kidding).Now i know why you've got a twitch in your in your right eye. Promise i'll try to resist, honest.