Are we all hypocrits or what?

[boinkphoto]

<p>Thank you Ton for starting a very interesting thread!</p>

[mikeoday]

<p >Pnina, I can understand the comments of those who apparently feel mild frustration at seeing behaviours that detract from their view of the common good. But I agree with you; at times some of these comments do risk being seen as, well, a little elitist.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >As an example, and please forgive me Matt if I may pick on you for a moment, consider the following rather mild statements:</p>

<p > </p>

<p >“You regularly see some pretty low quality work that gets all these "nice job"s on them.” </p>

<p > </p>

<p >“…positive praise applied to bad photos ultimately deminishes the value of all praise.”</p>

<p > </p>

<p >“If people are saying how great some badly done photos are…”</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Running as a common thread through these types of comments is the idea of a ‘bad’ photograph as apparently drawn from some belief in a universal vision or concept of truth. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I would content that there is no such thing as a universal concept of a ‘bad’ photograph. Judgements of this type need to be quantified by a set of objective and agreed metrics and no such metrics exist on this site or in relation to art in general.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >It would appear that for some, the frustration they feel may come from a belief that others are knowingly giving glowing comments on images that all must agree are ‘bad’. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >But for me this belief is largely misplaced. A far more likely explanation for the vast majority of comments is that most people on this site simply give pleasant comments on images they like and ignore the images that they do not.</p>

[jgalyon]

<p><em>As an example, and please forgive me Matt if I may pick on you for a moment, consider the following rather mild statements:</em><br /><em></em><br /><em>“You regularly see some pretty low quality work that gets all these "nice job"s on them.” </em><br /><em></em><br /><em>“…positive praise applied to bad photos ultimately deminishes the value of all praise.”</em><br /><em></em><br /><em>“If people are saying how great some badly done photos are…”</em><br /><em></em><br /><em>Running as a common thread through these types of comments is the idea of a ‘bad’ photograph as apparently drawn from some belief in a universal vision or concept of truth. </em></p>

<p>As to whether Matt subscribes to this assertion or not...I have no idea...and it's not my business. But I don't mind to say that although I've never attempted to put this belief on paper...I believe that there is indeed such a thing as a "bad" photograph. I see it as falling into the category of , "I can't define pornography...but I know it when I see it ". If we could put aside the need to be politically correct...and be confident enough in our thinking to withstand the onslaught of critics who would most certainly jump at the chance to call us small-minded, intolerant bumpkins who don't understand the nature of art...most all of us would admit that some photographs simply "suck"...and we all know them when we see them. These photos are bad for an infinite number of reasons and to varying degrees...but bottom line, they're just bad. If a thousand people view the same photograph and all but one describe it as "bad"....theoritically we could certainly argue that the shear numbers of people who see it as bad carries no more weight in making a determination of its worth..than does the one person who sees it as "good". But I just don't buy it.<br /><em></em><br /><em>A far more likely explanation for the vast majority of comments is that most people on this site simply give pleasant comments on images they like and ignore the images that they do not.</em></p>

<p>I agree...to a degree. Some people do just that. But whatever the motivation....just as Matt said....<br /><em>“…positive praise applied to bad photos ultimately deminishes the value of all praise.”</em></p>

<p>Some people may just be trying to be nice...but praise that isn't deserved is just a form of deception...that helps no one.<br />The "praise" that I depise most is the person who indiscriminantly gives out thousands of 1-4 word "positive comments" on any photograph he can find...all in an incredibly transparent attempt to get people to visit his portfolio...so that they can in turn, give him the same meaningless and insincere comments...and high ratings. I could name names...but I won't, but I did send an e-mail to one such person earlier tonight...telling him that I don't need or want his comments.</p>

<p> </p>

[revonda]

<p>It took me two years to work up enough nerve to post on this site and yes I would love all the help and meaningful critiques I can get. However I feel I should not expect critiques because I really feel I dont know enough to give a meaningful critiques in return.</p>

[jgalyon]

 

<p><em>It took me two years to work up enough nerve to post on this site and yes I would love all the help and meaningful critiques I can get. However I feel I should not expect critiques because I really feel I dont know enough to give a meaningful critiques in return.</em><br>

R Gentry...after looking through your portfolio, I understand just how you feel...but not for the same reason! I'm sure your humility is sincere...but I am just as sincere in saying that most of the photographers on PN would give a right arm or two...to know as much about photography as you apparently do! I don't know what areas of the craft that you feel you have deficiencies in...but one thing is certain ...you know how to take some wonderful photographs...and as far as I'm concerned, that's all that really matters in the end.</p>

 

<em></em>

 

<h2><em></em></h2>

 

[revonda]

<p>Thank you very much John and I just guess at anything regarding photography. I am self taught like many but I am a horrible teacher! lol And I guess I would feel silly giving a critique to someone who may be a pro or shooting for years and years. So I mainly feel like a taker without giving much in return here:(</p>

[alvinyap]

<p>I rarely crit, and if I do its because I like the particular picture and would like to encourage the photog to keep it up.<br>

Alvin</p>

[stamos]

<p>I would like to say few words.<br />Not all members of PN can write English with fluency. This may explain some comments with 1-4 words (yes, positive comments). Please a little tolerance (from native English sreakers) in this subject.<br />Photography is art, a very, very new art (comparatively to other arts). This may explain why some photographers are absolute in their positions (good-bad). They may learn many thing from painters (and art history).<br />To teach art and everything it is not enough to say "hey you burned the highlights" or just to write "this is not low key it is bad exposure". To teach is great talent and it envoles (a lot of) psychology. Some people who spent all their life with students of fine art schools may know this better.<br />For me Mike O'Day has a very harmonic and balanced position.</p>

[mikeoday]

<p >Ah, for a balanced view…</p>

<p > </p>

<p >There are obviously some consequences to drawing attention. </p>

<p > </p>

<p ><strong>“very poor portrayal</strong></p>

<p ><strong></strong>don't pay attention to weak people, they will adore you, but..! <br />this portrait is really very bad.. light/ pose/ background/ idea/ emotion/ simplicity/ moment.. anything relevant is either missing, or wrong”</p><div></div>

[stamos]

<p>Ah, Mike. I try to respect all opinions (when not anonymous).<br />It would be nice not to be divided (in this great community) in weak and brave.<br />I am not "delicate blossom" in my personal life (the opposite I would say) but in internet all people are brave.<br>

Some people believe they are brave if they have rated many photos with 1/1, 2/2, 3/3 anonymously.<br>

Lately I have temptation to be broutally honest but I will do it (if I do it) not anonymously.</p>

[gordonjb]

Mike;

 

I went to the original page to read the other comments and also went and took a look at the work of the person whose words you have quoted above.

 

Reading the other comments on your photo they seemed quite typical of PN. an abundance of smoke blown up your arse. Most of the comments are on the " beauty " of the model rather than your overdone softening or the awkward and unflattering pose or the dazed expression or the flat tonality or the unbalanced crop or .....

 

" anything relevant is either missing or wrong " is the most useful statement you received or your photo. A bit of elaboration and some suggestions for next time would have been nice, however the honesty itself is so refreshing I could overlook that small point.

 

A " balanced view" is needed if learning actually is a goal. My compliments to the person who left that comment on you upload, both for bucking a trend and pointing out that the photo does not succeed and for cautioning you regarding the lopsided responses you had previously garnered on that photo. If those previous raters and posters let you walk away believing that your portrait is a 7/7 they did you a great disservice.

[mikeoday]

<p >Thank you Gordon I believe you could not have better demonstrated my point. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >We each bring to this site our diverse life experience, cultural background and artistic taste; and our community is richer for it.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >When we share our opinions with gentleness and respect we give of ourselves to build up and contribute to the growth of our fellows and the community as a whole. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >When we do not, we do not. </p>

[mikeoday]

<p >John I fully agree with you when you say that “… I know it when I see it”. I too have quite immediate responses to an image; be they positive or negative. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I guess my point is that in a community as diverse as ours, any opinion about an image is just that, an opinion. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Certainly, a vote as to the merits of image will result in a consensus; and the larger the number of votes, the stronger that consensus. But even a consensus simply means that ‘the majority opinion is that an image is good or bad’ it does not mean that it is good or bad by reference to some objective reference. From this it follows that dissenting views are neither wrong nor misguided; they are simply different.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >For me an image may be wonderful and romantic and evoke a strong emotional response; I may rate such an image highly and give glowing praise. Another on the site may feel it is full of technical faults and lacks originality and thus rate it lowly and point out these perceived failings. Why need either of us be wrong?</p>

[boinkphoto]

<p>Mike, first of all whoever posted those comments as seeming retribution was being petty and I'm sorry it happened. That is not the spirit of community we ought to pursue.</p>

<p>Personally I did not take offense at your critique of my statements and I actually hear where you're coming from. However I still stand by the basic idea of them, albeit perhaps intending more nuance than you've taken. While yes, I used words like "bad", that was more out of trying to keep an already bloated post within reason than anything. I suspected that it might be taken more strongly than I meant, and perhaps I should have gone with that instinct.</p>

<p>My point is mostly about "flawed" photos, though I admit I believe photos can be so flawed as to be "bad". However most are just "flawed" - let's say the focus is off, the horizon slightly cocked, the lighting too harsh, overexposed, underexposed, overmanipulated, whatever. Yes, sometimes, like in "overmanipulation" the judgment can be pretty subjective, but more often than not it's pretty clear what the author was intending and where they missed. For instance when it's portraiture and the eyes are out of focus or in landscapes where the horizon is a distracting 1 degree off. These are not subjective - we can see what they were intending and where they failed.</p>

<p>Now maybe the artist is trying to create a new school of portraiture where out of focus eyes are the rage or cocked landscapes are cool. Usually however you can tell that though - the difference between an attempt to create something new versus trying to succeed at a specific end. The former yes, perhaps you should leave to itself, but the later can use some constructive criticism.</p>

<p>It's a bit like music. Maybe I don't like country and I would agree that it would be unfair to call it "bad music" or "not art". However, even though I don't like country and I don't know it very well, I can usually tell when it's done badly. A bad note, is a bad note. No rhythm, is no rhythm. It's almost instinctual to us, or as John quoted, "I can't define pornography...but I know it when I see it." </p>

<p>Now if I was learning to play country music (god save us all), it wouldn't be particularly useful when I'm trashing all the notes and flailing with my rhythm, for everyone around me to go, "That's great - good job!" That sort of stuff is for young children and in adults it becomes sort of sycophantic. No, I need someone one to kindly and positively set me straight, to give me the hard facts, albeit ideally with a soft touch. That doesn't mean to say, "You suck, stop playing music," but rather, "The notes are a bit off, you should concentrate on that."</p>

<p>Now, if I'm playing in my own house with the windows closed and someone listens at more door, barges in, and gives me their critique, well they should go stuff themselves. However, if I'm sitting on a busy sidewalk trying to show off my stuff because I think I'm playing good country music, which is to some degree the equivalent to posting on in public forums in PN, DPReview, flickr, etc., then I ought to expect that people are going to have opinions on what I'm doing. Frankly by posting here I'm asking for their opinions and it's not fair to expect the people I'm asking to simply give all sugar and no spice. Granted if I'm playing country and they prefer Jazz, they should perhaps stick to the stuff that is in common, like focus and horizons.</p>

<p>I mean, after all, is the point of these places just to get kudos? Do these kudos mean anything if we know we never risk the flip side of the coin? Is it fair to just expect people to only be positive and hold their tongue on all minuses? After all, if we get to define "art" in every photo we create, doesn't our viewer also get to define what <strong>isn't</strong> art? Why even call it "critique" if there's no "critiquing"? And most of all, how is this really helping us improve our craft if all we hear is how good we did and no reference to potential improvements (which to note, are not always specifically related to flaws - perhaps we made a very good photo, but it could still be improved).<br>

In regards to:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It would appear that for some, the frustration they feel may come from a belief that others are knowingly giving glowing comments on images that all must agree are ‘bad’.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't know, that just doesn't seem to ring true for me at least. I think what I'm saying is the comments on a global level don't really reflect reality. That is, there is so little criticism as opposed to sometimes almost sucking up positivism, that it doesn't match the reality that many photos are flawed, if only at a technical level. Sure, that doesn't mean we shouldn't praise the positive aspects of the photos at the same time (in fact I would suggest it), but we clearly aren't giving the full picture.</p>

<p>As far as whether people lavish praise <strong>mostly</strong> out of sincerity, I can't say. Again, I do feel I see a divergence from reality, and at least 3 of us have admitted to some cooking of the books as it were. In fact one could argue this post wouldn't have hit a nerve if there wasn't some truth to the idea that many of us know we're not being perfectly honest.</p>

<p>Finally, again, I really do believe if you're going put your stuff up purposefully in a public forum, particularly one dedicated to the improvement of the craft, you should expect and be open to <strong>postitive</strong> criticism. While it is unfair to question the basic art and/or to be non-constructive or attacking, it is also unfair to expect others not to have their own opinions about things that might not be entirely positive. And if we allow that, and have a thick enough skin about it, we may all learn something that helps us become better photographers.</p>

[tonmestrom]

<p>@ R Gentry. John is absolutely right about your photos.</p>

<p>I like the turn this thread made and I want to thank all of you for being so sincere. I didn't put this up out of frustration however, I merely made a observation of something I notice regularly.</p>

<p>What hasn't been mentioned so far is the paradox we all face time and again. When we are editing our own work we see all the flaws that are there and most of us are hardly ever completely satisfied with the endresult because there is more often than not the nagging feeling that it's still unfinished i.e. could and should be better. And yet, if someone point out those very same flaws it stings.</p>

<p>I consider that a good thing because it keeps us on our toes. Thinking back of Starvy's post I think it's a shame that he and many like him no longer write what they really think although I understand and appreciate his motive. Honesty outlives superesized ego's after all. On that score Mike you need to be applauded.</p>

<p>Feedback, of any kind, can only be usefull when it's considered and sincere.</p>

[gordonjb]

<p>Mike; You likewise do a fine job of making my point. Your posting of the comment you received yesterday was very clearly not done out of " gentleness " or "respect " You were miffed that someone did not gush praise over your photo and you cut and pasted their comment here, hoping that subjecting that person to ridicule would cool the sting.<br>

That one single critical comment on your photo was certainly more blunt than was needed and not in a style I would ever use, nonetheless it was the only comment you received which included anything other than praise. Your posting it here could not have made my point any better.</p>

<p>Ton; I did not think I would ever say this, but I miss the brutally honest you. Politics are best left to politicians.</p>

 

[tonmestrom]

<p>You're right Gordon. About time I tear some people a new one ;-)))</p>

<p>I do think however that this site would improve further if more people would be less circumspect. I'm rather direct and as you once told me it took you some time getting used to my way of providing feedback. One doesn't have to be "brutal" nor is it about right or wrong but sincerity goes a long way and is far better to evoke likewise comments than anything else.</p>

<p>And to sum it all up in the words of a former fellow European: "I'll be back"</p>

[boinkphoto]

<p>I'm relatively new to posting on PN (I've mostly hit up DPReview), however I'm always "circumspect" after years of working in business and having to carefully craft emails because you could almost always guarantee someone would get their boxers in a bunch even about the most inane issue requiring tortured logic to turn negative, and yet they would.</p>

<p>I'm not sure I'm even capable of non-circumspect writing anymore, to which I apologize in advance since I tend to be long winded in order to cover all the bases.</p>

[gordonjb]

Ton;

 

You are correct that it did take me some time to adjust to your frankness. Your no BS directness is considerably different to my respectful, gentle, well mannered and so much more diplomatic style :-)

 

The issue you originally raised was not one of style or presentation but rather about truth and hypocrisy. On that level you and I have never differed. Personally I don't care much if someone wants to sugar coat the truth or just put it out there. I'm equally disinterested in splitting hairs about ultimate truths in the arts. Call it truth or call it subjective opinion the important point is bothering to contribute and doing so with the motivation of trying to offer the person something of use, rather than trading inane compliments.

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Mike, the fellow who critiqued your portrait left his rather pithy critique on another photo:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><a href="../photo/9195810"><strong>(-;</strong> </a></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Considered in context, some things are enlightening and some are merely amusing.</p>

<p>I welcome feedback from everyone. But I invest interest only in those whose body of criticism, taken in context, reveals valuable insight. In this case, I wouldn't put too much stock in the opinion of someone whose critiques occasionally are nothing more than an emoticon.</p>

[mikeoday]

<p>I agree with you Lex and far from being concerned about the comments I posted I in fact found them on point and amusing; certainly, perhaps more of the dark variety than the ha ha funny kind :).</p>

<p>During this interesting conversation I have been considering the nature of truth and opinion and the good will we all share in supporting our community. I believe we all project our own beliefs, experience and motivations when we attempt to interpret the actions of others. My tendency to a belief that most people only comment on the images they like and ignore the rest comes from a projection of my usual behaviour. And Matt, you are of course right that for many a view that some are intentionally holding back is valid because you draw on your own personal experience.</p>

<p>In taking the contrary position in this discussion I have tried to express the proposition that all opinions on an image are equally valid and an assumption of ‘poor behaviour’ simply because a view differs from ours, or is perhaps a little ‘shallow’, is a little unfair on those who choose to share their thoughts with others.</p>

<p>On the other hand, the reason the comments on my photo were on point is that for some the opinions of others seem to somehow cause offence; not to the owner of the image but to some other reviewer.</p>

<p>Critics giving critiques of other critics on a third party’s image has to be funny!</p>

[mikeoday]

<p >Stamoulis I have the greatest respect and admiration for people such as yourself who contribute to PN in a language that is not your native tongue. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I love the diversity on this site and one of the great joys is to receive a comment in another language and by copying it to a translator see the meaning bubble up to surface.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Whilst having many good things where I grew up one of our misfortunes is that almost no one spoke anything but English and the few lessons at school we had were limited to naming a few objects and counting to ten. What is more, with the nearest non-English nation many thousands of miles away we almost never encountered a person who spoke a different language to could count to ten at. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Now after travelling for work a little I know enough French to say “Hello, please excuse me but I do not speak French, do you speak English?” I have practiced this so many times that I now do so with a passingly good accent and thus often get a laugh :).</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Anyway, all the best and please excuse me tendency to go on a bit.</p>

[gordonjb]

<p>Mike;<br>

 <br>

You are 100% correct and my reaction was truly laughable. I had no business giving you grief about  cutting and pasting those comments. They were made on your photo and what you did with them should not have been  any  concern of mine.   I am going to swear off of these forums as my opinions and my poor manners are best kept to myself. Being a social pariah is a pathetic hobby.  My apologies to all.</p>

[mikeoday]

<p >No problem Gordon.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >All the best,</p>

<p >Mike</p>

[bernie moore]

I am a hypocrite. I hold you all to much higher standards than I am willing to sustain.