How can Photo.Net allow this kind of photo be posted

[actuallynoname]

I've

posted today a photo on the photo critique phorum... Obviously,

photo.net is first of all a community, and whenever you post something

you are implicitly accepting that someone could write a comment you

don't like.

<br /><br />

But...

<br /><br />

I don't accept that someone who registered in photo.net 3 days ago,

WITHOUT any photo published yet here, could write a comment like:

<br /><br />

"Look like lesbian pornorgraph - Look like lesbian pornography. How

can Photo.Net allow this kind of photo be posted"

<br /><br />

Well... I thought I should accept his opinion, so I wanted to know

which idea he as about photography... I suppose he should allow me to

see something hims. May be I could learn something... Well, I can't,

cause his portfolio is empty; I can suppose he is not even a

photographer. Who is him? Someone, almost anonymous, who simply think

that two females in an ironic photo could be contextualized into the

genre of pornography, despite nothing explicit is shown in the photo.

<br /><br />

Lesbianism? Yes, I was dealing with the idea of lesbianism,

alternative sexual practices may be, but not at all with pornography.

<br /><br />

Check it by yourself if you wish:

<br /><br />

<a

href=http://www.photo.net/photo/3838073>http://www.photo.net/photo/3838073</a>

<br /><br />

Well, just to say that this case is nothing but an example of many

similar idiot comments I found in photo.net - So, first of all, I

think that people who don't post any photo shouldn't be allowed to

comment photos of other users.

<br /><br />

Moreover, comments should be constructives... and I suppose I can

answer his comment with Oscar Wilde: "There is no such thing as a

moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written"

<br /></p>

[j.kivekas]

I agree with you. It is really frustrating to get naive and uneducated or intolerant comments from people who can not show their level of skill and understanding - to photos that have been carefully, thoughtfully, designed, built, cast, and executed.

<p>

Well, let's not forget, photo.net is a fantastic site despite some occasional unfair comments and/or ratings.

[actuallynoname]

Thanks Juha; well, I can argue that after this post a photo.net administrator saw the comment I was talking about and deleted it... thanks a lot.

[joe baker pine bush ny]

Stefano, don,t be angree, this person is as empty as his porfolio; i for one would rather see two people happy than two people angree and unhappy with each other, no matter who or what they are.

sincerly Joe B.

[actuallynoname]

Thanks Joe... I visited your portfolio, and let me tell you that I love your "steel fan 2". wow!

[grinder]

Stefano, I am some may call some what prudish and I find nothing porno about the image. They seem happy and there is not really even any nudity.

[ellis_vener_photography]

here is the critique I posted. I have nothign against lesbianism or homosexuality. I do have

beef against corny pseudo "edginess". <P><I>Looks contrived, staged and stupid with a

silly title to boot.. if there is an honest emotion or idea in this image I fail to discern it.

Don't complain: You asked for a critique and not a pat on the back.</I>

[gary_stallsworth]

Stefano-I made a comment on your photo just below the one you are discussing. I felt like making a statement about the stupid comment, but decided not to fall into the trap and did not want the discussion on your page. I'm glad you took it up here. I'm new to Photo.net and am still learning about the workings here in. Seems to be like any other community. The good thing is the creative, smart, and considerate folks far out number the stupid and mean ones. I enjoy your work.

[actuallynoname]

Thanks Gary... for both your comments, here and there

 

Now, dear Ellis:

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say... you surely can say whatever you like, and if you don't like something in my works, please let me know.

From an aesthetic point of view, what you call silly or stupid I think may also be defined kitsch, from a different point of view...

Many times, when you are in a photographic session, you are not working on any concept or idea... you simply are using something you find there (especially when you're working in another town, in a rented studio), so you feel free to try and experiment something without planning it previously; depending on the result you obtain, you can work more times over the same idea or inspiration... or maybe, the experiment only makes you understand that you're not interested on following that way any more.

 

Many of the photos I post here aren't supposed to be art works but experiments. At least, there are many other places to exhibit art than a community, in which you hardly can contextualize a concept you have in mind. Photo.net is a great place to talk about photography, a great community, and it is as a community (with its pros and contras) that you can better use the system.

 

Now, let me tell you that the photo you commented was a back stage, means it was not the photo I was working on, but a moment in which the model was talking to a friend, and I thought that moment was so natural, and (due to the strange situation of a performing, modeling, nude context) it had a very kitsch mood.

I photograph what I see and how I feel it, so I took the photo. That's it; any other reason would be artificial.

At least, I can tell you that this photo is obviously more natural than the final (more studied) result, although it is not technically perfect, but... natural, at least.

So: Contrived and Staged you said? Not really, for the reasons I mentioned, but if you think it is, OK, no problem.

 

The "silly title" of criminal beauty #2 is due to the original (well staged and absolutely contrived) work "Criminal Beauty". I don't think it's a silly title, but anyway.

 

Finally, you say: "Don't complain: You asked for a critique and not a pat on the back". I feel this final comment is completely unfair... not really for the pat on the back, but... please, let me complain anytime I want.

 

best regards,

stefano

[john falkenstine]

Nude experiments? What's new?

[shamrez]

Nice experiment. Interesting comments.

 

Shamrez

[marshall]

My opinion: posting a photo like that is fine.

 

My other opinion: there is no reason whatever that someone should have to have a portfolio of images in order to comment or for their opinion to be valid. Do you only shoot for other photographers? Do you only shoot for photographers that YOU consider good?

 

In this case, the comment wasn't deemed valid and was expunged, but I'm quite sure that the portfolio of the commenter was irrelevant in the decision.

[actuallynoname]

"Do you only shoot for other photographers?" good point! No, I don't, obviously... but I also think that there should be a control over people who seem to be interested in writing one or two stupid comments... so, I assume that someone posting photos should be considered as someone whom at least has some interest in photography. On the other hand, I surely agree: it's not a panacea... not at all.

[GerrySiegel]

You say .."comments should be constructive." I rather think you are only comfortable Stefano with affirmation. And you are one of many who feel that way,if it is so. Having said that, there are innappropriate and "off the wall" reprehensible and fatuous comments that are well to be complained of and purged from the critiques. Not many, but some. (I remember when one model shot,with lady the heft of a younger Kate Moss garnered remarks like this " Get that gal something to eat,fast!.") Out of order in a high class joint like this,friend,trust you agree. Inapropriate and veiled insulting and not what any serious person would call critique.<p> The offense taken in your example about the implication of lesbianism in this snapshot sidesteps the more important question of what is serious critique and what is a joke or a slight or an attack on the member.<p> I tend to agree with Ellis that this is a mediocre image. I checked your other, better work. GS

[leorossi]

I don't particularly like that image, Stefano, but it most certainly doesn't look offensive to me. It may not even be pure kitsch though. Looks more like a behind-the-scenes shot from "Oh! Calcutta!".

[j.kivekas]

"Do you shoot for other photographers?"<p>

Shooting for somebosy and getting critique and comments from somebody are two different things: I don't shoot only for other photogs but I want critique and comments from other photogs, the more experienced and skillfull the better, the more I learn from the comments.

[GerrySiegel]

Sorry Stefano, the votes seem to be against your arguments. No, one can critique an invited critique photo submission without displaying "credentials" such as an online portfolio. Yes, the comments ought to be nice,constructive (as you care to define it) yet are a catch-can tossed salad. (If you get one or two ideas for free out of a hundred ratings, bravo.) And there are surely offensive photos posted or slipped in which demean the standards of the gallery moderators and deserve to be surveilled and flushed.<p> And no, your picture does not fit into the porno category, so no longer on that issue as you point out. Why not do this. Just let the whole incident be past event and allow it to slip away. Forgive the bruiser that made the lame or thoughtless remark... And,well, just let it go.<p> It is hard when one puts their talent on the line. I know,I know. Good luck and hang in there. The best work of most of us all is " next project, next novel, next painting,next scenic,next portrait,next macro."<p> There is so much to learn,- as I get older,- one has less and less time for the "umbrage thing."<p> I am learning this for myself and offer it as a thought to contemplate. (Shucks,even Le Corbusier is taking a hit lately for some of his buildings and their social unintended effects on gang misbehavior, I mean what next?. Le C. can't press a delete button!:-() "Seemed like a good idea at the time". True story,even if way OT.

[j.kivekas]

Gerry, I can't see from where you count the votes. I for one would not like to get any ratings nor comments from those who do not submit photos - period. In most cases those comments are naive, unconstructive and I constantly wonder the motivation behind them. Nothing to do with photography. A portfolio is the best proof of ones level to crit. It's pure bullshit to say that people who do not photograph are capaable of critiqueing photos. They may like them or not, but they do not possses the knowledge to critique. Heck, it is already so difficult to for a keen specialist to critique over a genre line let alone critique without any experience how photography is done in practise. Talk is cheap, actions hard.

[GerrySiegel]

I started to respond,Dear Juha, then deleted it because the logical outcome of forcing quid pro quo sharing is worse than permitting the present system. (Of course, I am my worst critic, and believe that free comments meet the percentage estimate I quoted.Me, I will let Paul Hayashi- portraitist from Wahiawa who knows his stuff, perhaps offer me a face to face dialogue of opinion with specifics de rigeur,but I will PAY him for his time. That is me,the on line portfs are a small lesser substitute) It is all moot, since the runners of the place decide. And they decided ages ago. Anecdote: I once suggested that only people who constituted a panel of experts with some background, there are a few here who merit that badge ought to be invited to critique and Bob reminded me that might just be a little elitist. It is a democracy. Even arses get to vote. On that note and on that three legged stool, I rest my case.<p> Be well,eat prunes or bran/brown rice is actually delicious :-). Keeps the colon open and the mind free to create... Aloha, Gerry. PS.Do take time to search and check back to some really long fascinating threads on this very historical, arguably the oldest feedback argument issue of any issue ever. GS

[j.kivekas]

Gerry,you are right. The people who made this place have naturally the right to decide. I treat this more like an academic question, but it still is my ideal: only portfolio ualified photogs would comment and critique. But yes, this is not so important.

[snakecharmer]

This is a pretty ancient forum, but I feel the need to respond to it anyway, having just stumbled across it.

I don't think that the votes are against Stefano, only that the voting population of this particular forum seems to support mean and nasty critiques which seem more personal in nature and do not attempt to be helpful. "Your photo is stupid" is not a critique by any stretch of the imagination. I am not saying that anyone should kiss ass. I am just saying that, if you come across as a fair, reasonable, and thinking person in your critiques, the pnet community will be a better place for it. You might not think that encouragement plays a role in artistic development, but it can be even more powerful than criticism for some. Also, keep in mind that many of us are beginners. If someone you knew in the "real world" decided to take up photography and solicited your input on their work, would you call their photograph contrived and stupid? That kind of behavior is just rude and ugly and childish, not to mention pointless and counter-productive, and those who engage in it should be hanging their heads right now.

It is very cowardly how so many people think it is okay to be rude so long as they can hide behind the anonymity of the internet.

Stefano, please keep on creating photos, and just as valuable to this community, being nice. It is appreciated by many.