._._z Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 <i><blockquote> i have never in my life seen so may poorly conceived, and poorly executed photographs getting high marks and the mandatory round of "atta-boys" from everyone on this forum </blockquote> </i><p> You must not surf other photo websites much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cappoldt Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 NO kiddin'. I saw one that got tons of traffic yesterday. Mostly dead animals, genitals, and snapshots. Thing was, too - and note to the moderators on-topic - ? You had to give constructive criticism to earn points to post your own pic. So, you had twenty people telling someone how interesting the decapitated mouse photo was, and why...Let's not go to that system here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen_w. Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Ellis, Ain't Rice Nice? I live four blocks away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
claudia__ Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 gosh, David Neville. nobody is forcing you to be here. or, perhaps you are being held hostage by a "mediocrity promo cult" and forced to click on pix against your will. don't let the door hit your &&s on the way out. (that wasn't very lady-like was it?)<p>(~_-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beepy Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 Ellis, I can no longer "Remember the Alamo" without immediately thinking of "Pee-Wee's Big Adventure." and I just lose it. <p> Sorry:-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas semesky Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 You couldn't have said it any better David. I agree with you 100% Crap is crap! To give a high rating to a bad photo can only diminish the photos that truly deserve to be rated highly. I know of some photographers who purposely send in a bad photo to test the reactions of the critics. On one hand it lets them know who is really trying to give a honest critque but on the other hand it also exposes the village idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobertChura Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 Ellis, I meant if people with your talent would participate more it would be a better place. It was not a request that you do more, rather if others would do more as well the bad raters would be insignificant.<p> I have seen many good photographers get discouraged with the system that they give up and we are left with new participatnts giving unusual ratings too high or low because they have a novice approach to photography and are usually biased. Once a new member gave me a very bad rating for an image and sent me an email stating my image was so unoriginal, I looked at his and replied that I considered his a Fad of the teachers he had been learning from and should get a wider scope of images to view. He later apololgized and agreed that he was biased. I can say that when I first came here I was like that. I have learned to appreciate the art of criticism without malice. Veterans of this site are usually fairer in their ratings and comments.<p> FWIW I also and from Texas (Fort Worth), I remember the Alamo and the people you mentioned are Heroes because they stuck to their principles and ,yes paid a price, and I respect them for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaghetti_western Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 claudia is 100% right. by the flight of its creator at the very first challenge to his thread thesis, it might have been better titled 'mediocrity runneth away'. or with a 'forc' in it now, 'mediocrity runneth for cover' :-) the only ratings problem with the gallery is that those who whine most about mate raters, bandwagon raters, and clandestine low raters and such are the ones most responsible for not doing anything about it. for if these so-called critics actually rated the pics they decry about in the TRPs then very likely those pics would not be as dominantly visible and before anyone points a finger at me for calling the kettle black, well, i aint whining about the ratings or the state of the gallery. so there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 Sorry spaghetti, that just won't fly. The system should be able to work for everyone who is willing to particpate fully, ie images posted, critiques offered, and ratings posted. It is impossible to both give and receive honest rates and critiques of a wide variety of images under the current system. Every one of us who have actually tried it and given up aren't particulary interested in opinions of people looking in from the outside who want to chastise us from their theoretical vantage point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike dixon Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 I'm a lot more annoyed by the mediocrity of my own work than of what I see on photo.net (and at least I can do something about that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis1 Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 why is being a good photographer so important? It's just a hobby for many here, including me. People have day jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roy_zoellner Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 true the photos I like I comment on, but the photos I think are crap I can't bring myself to submit that to the author of the photo, because who am I do judge their creative expression? then again maybe I should comment on those photos that are crap that way as mentioned before, they can learn from their mistake/crap... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knicki____ Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 I'm going to have to agree with Mike Dixon's sentiments on this one. Spag- whats wrong with liking a shot of a cow in the middle of the road? David, you will find some places on pn are ass kissing venues while others are not. It's all in what you select to view, delve a little deeper and you might find some salt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_daalder Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 I thought that <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009rlr"> Jeremy Stein </a> already posted a definitive answer to the question at the top of this thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knicki____ Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 I love it when I'm reminded why I like you Peter...please close your eyes cause here comes some ass kissing. smooch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramon_garciapara Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 "i have never in my life seen so many poorly conceived, and poorly executed photographs" David you might want to look at your own photos and the ones you have given out high ratings to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_neville Posted December 12, 2004 Author Share Posted December 12, 2004 ramon - i'm not saying that the few photos i've uploaded are the be-all and end-all of photography. they're just 5 shots that i happen to like. now, i think you might be angry about something, because my photos, while certainly not perfect, are "good" photographs in some sense. obviously not in every sense, but they are good. i've been shooting for a long time, and chose these 5 to upload for a reason - wanted to see what people think because they're not your standard faire. maybe one needs a crop, maybe one was well conceived but didn't work quite as well as planned, but please, those 5 photos are AT LEAST average of the work we see here - please don't lump me in with the bottom... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Mike, you refer to your own mediocrity, yet even to photographers like myself who have very little experience and understanding of what makes a good street shot, it's pretty clear that if you think you're mediocre, then you must be setting very high standards for your own work. Apropos this thread, I'm sure you could teach a lot of people how to shoot better. One could argue that you're depriving the rest of us of your insight by offering only eight comments in the gallery. Travis, I've had several hobbies in my life that became all-consuming to the point where I got paid to do them. Trying to become as accomplished as possible without having to consider market value is, however, one of the greatest benefits of a hobby, but taking a rather casual approach to techniques only compromises your ability to communicate with images, which is the whole point, I would think. I hope you'll become more consumed by your hobby . . . or go find another one that has the potential to become an obsession. RE Jeremy's post . . . . we are all on different points on this photographic path, and it's not always easy to tell who's where. This goes straight to the issue of critique vs adulation. Some advanced photographers are receptive to constructive feedback, and some beginners are very resistant, so it isn't just about some objective level of accomplishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_neville Posted December 12, 2004 Author Share Posted December 12, 2004 one more thing - ramon, i checked out your space. i see that you like nature and nudes... so that's not what i shoot. maybe we just have different taste in photography. but do you really think that my "out" shot is really "very bad" in any way? i can admit to average, perhaps even below average for the originality since, afterall, it is just a wall, and people have been shooting urban scenes like that for a while. now, i also admit that i started this thread because i was frustrated by overly high ratings and crappy photos, but now i see that some people are personally offended by my comments and have decided to get on my case for my photos and my ratings, and therefore make me justify higher ratings - thus appearing to contradict my argument. however, the photos pointed out are not the bottom of the barrel here, and my comment was about the bottom getting treated like the top, or even the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaghetti_western Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 "...my comment was about the bottom getting treated like the top, or even the middle...." seems we all have a pair of eyes that can see. no need to check our pages to confirm that. seems my eyes see that consistently the bulk of images making their way to the top TRPs are better as a group than ones residing on successive pages. could it be a matter of both quality and behavioral chumminess that many of the better photographers flock together and skew the outcome? and if that bothers you, well then sufficient numbers of you only have to rate those pics fairly and honestly as david says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 spaghetti western: no images six gallery comments no rates If the rates weren't anonymous, I'd suggest that YOU pick a day and rate the top 40 of the 24-hour list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaghetti_western Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 actually I was thinking about fishing for bargains, perhaps 24-hour pics not so highly rated that I think deserve much better. thats about the only rating activity that would interest me. then i could do something at least about a few underrated pics. btw, that was part of my earlier idea for 'IMAGE THIS' but like i said, i aint the one(s) complaining about over rated pics and not doing anything about it. hard to believe that photos rating 6/7 that you would effortlessly rate 5/5 would end up causing you grief. if those photos got enough deserved 5/6s then the over rating problem would all but disappear, no? those who complain and dont practice what they preach for fear of receiving essentially harmless cyber shots really ought to know better or to at least think better. perhaps it takes someone with an outsiders more detached view to be able to help insiders too intimately involved to consider fresh ideas they might not otherwise bring to mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Everything you've said makes sense from the perspective of someone on the outside looking in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_neville Posted December 12, 2004 Author Share Posted December 12, 2004 thank you carl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_neville Posted December 13, 2004 Author Share Posted December 13, 2004 mr. western: are you a guns n' roses fan? or are you a primus fan? trust me, it makes a difference. 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