Am I really that bad of a photographer?

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Keith.....sometimes I think there is a bit of the 'beauty queen' aspect to PN. It can be a popularity contest to some extent. That doesn't bother me though. The people who socialize more and go to the effort of making comments are of course going to receive more feedback in return. But I agree with you that the ratings don't necessarily correlate to originality or creativity. Having said that, I am impressed by a lot of the creative work here on PN. </p>

[MichaelChang]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"But I do expect to learn from the critiques, which never accompany the low ratings. That is my bone of contention."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Christal, in view of your professional credentials, consider a photo rating in the same way if the same rating structure was in place during a student violin recital; not everyone critical of a performance will have constructive or even useful things to say, and those who do might have trouble summarizing it in brief short of giving a masterclass, if they're qualified and are willing to spend the time. <br>

<br>

There are quite a number of members who are extremely thoughtful in their critiques and are more than willing to help, but you have to ask for it as I have in the past, unless they happen to come across your photos and feel inclined to comment voluntarily. </p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Christal,</p>

<p>One thing I find appealing when I look at a portfolio and it's something I do with my own portfolio is periodic editing. I keep a lot of stuff in hidden folders, especially if they've already been commented on, but I try to keep my portfolio edited down to about 50-60 photos. That way, the presentation shows some structure and care. It also makes each individual photo more visible. It shows what you think is significant in your work at a particular time. A lot of portfolios with over a hundred photos, some in the thousands, just feel like a photo dump. I understand that's how many folks use PN and that's fine, just less interesting to me. With 50 or under photos, it comes across a little more like a gallery show and, for me, shows a degree of intentionality and is more likely to invite comment. </p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Anders......yes, Lex is very insightful and clearly articulates the strengths and flaws of the system. As far as being seen 'outside' of the PN community, I'm not sure I would want that. I don't intend to sell my images, so the marketing of my portfolio is of no interest to me. I recently started tagging my images, not being exactly sure what purpose that serves. From what you're saying, I guess that means people from other sites could access my images. And I'm not sure I would want my images out there in cyberspace. I've heard of so many instances in which people have had their work stolen or 'borrowed'. </p>

<p>Your assessment of my portfolio is spot on. And your very comment inspires me to pare down my portfolio. Thanks for that! There are images loaded on there from when I was virtually just beginning with digital, and when I was using a free online editing program. I've often thought I should take some images off and re-edit some of the better ones. It's exactly this kind of feedback I wish there was more of. Thanks so much!</p>

<p>And as for you comment 'suffering from her passion for photography'......again, spot on. I'm the kind of person who has SO many interests. That transfers to my photography. I would get bored with always shooting the same kind of thing. But that's more of less what I'm doing now because of the opportunities that present themselves. But hopefully as I continue (I'm nearing retirement and hope to devote more time to photography), I'll find that 'voice'. Not to say there is anything wrong with shooting everything. Sometimes I'm amazed by someone who shoots only birds, for instance. That would drive me crazy, but if someone is passionate about birds and finds their niche and are great at it, then more power to them. But then there are other photographers who can (and do) shoot everything, and do it well. That's what I'd like to strive toward.</p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Wouter.....nor will I ever have top-rated photos (well, I can hope I'll improve... :-) But I looked at your portfolio and you have a distinct style and do quite good work......the kind of work I'd like to do more of. And I love your entire last paragraph, but particularly: <br>

<em>But well, for me, this is mostly in the spirit of sharing - sharing thoughts, ideas, impressions. And, in the end, a written critique of any kind tops a single digit value.</em></p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Alan....thanks for your humorous response. You obviously don't take yourself too seriously, which is a good thing. BTW, I left a comment on one of your images, and I know you weren't 'fishing' for that. Yes, what Anders said below is true......and I probably need to contribute more myself. </p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Dan......Yes, critiquing can be a tricky and sensitive thing. Some people can't accept any criticism, no matter how tactfully and gently it is offered. I think I've stepped on a few toes occasionally. But I sense quickly what I can or can't say with that person, and I quickly adapt. However, the people who have interacted with me know (hopefully) that they can offer criticism, and I can take it well. Probably a result of my profession......I wouldn't have gotten very far without LOTS of negative criticism. That doesn't mean I'll always agree, but that's okay too. If the criticism is offered in the right spirit, I always appreciate someone taking the time to help.</p>

<p>Overall, I also think PN does a remarkable job of managing the site and responding to concerns. It's not perfect....but there is no such thing. It's a comprehensive website, and I learn so much about all things photographic. For instance, currently there is an article listing the best photo books for 2013. Some great choices there. So perhaps for me it's best to pull out of the ratings, which is the part that frustrates me most. I'll probably wait until the new website changes are implemented and see if I still feel the same way. </p>

<p>Does anyone know when the new website changes will take effect?</p>

 

[AlanKlein]

Thanks for critiquing one of my photos. Now I won't

have to take up the saxophone.

[Two23]

<p>I'm skipping several pages of comments and will just offer a few of my own observations. First, I think you might be taking the ratings deal way too seriously. It's not unbiased opinions from professionals after all. I haven't put any of my own photos in that forum and don't follow it. I do regularly put a few images in the discussion forums, such as Nikon, Classic Cameras, and so on. I don't really feel the need for approval from strangers, but do enjoy feedback from those I feel I know on the forums I haunt. I also know I have somewhat "eccentric" taste and not everyone is going to like I what I do. This doesn't bother me--I'm mainly trying to entertain myself.</p>

<p>I did take a look at some of your photos. Since I live in the Dakotas, I started with those and then went to the November ones. I have some honest thoughts. First, too often you seem to take a pretty "standard" approach. You see something interesting, attach a "standard"lens, and take the shot from a standard perspective. The result is you end up taking the same shots everyone else would. Second thing I noticed is you don't seem to yet have realized the importance of Use of Light, at least not consistently. My impression is you are so mentally focused on composition that you are overlooking the single most important thing to any photo--Use of Light. When you come to a scene, the first thing you should do is study the Light. What is the direction, the color, the intensity etc.? Start studying the photos of those who have mastered Use of Light and I think you will become better. Note that I am saying "Use of Light." That means you DON'T have to just be at a place at sunrise or sunset. There is some really cool things you can do any time of day. BTW, at the Badlands there is the great south wall. It is white. If you had got there before dawn and set up on top of one of the mounds to the south, when sunrise came those white walls slowly change color as the sun rises. IT IS SPECTACULAR! Anyway, you did have some great photos when the light was working, but mostly I came away feeling you do not fully understand Use of Light. Too many of your photos are technically correct but do not transmit any sense of emotion. I too love classical music and played in the Univ. of KS Ancient Instruments ensemble. It is possible to play technically very correct--keeping time perfectly, perfect intonation, etc. but still there is no soul to the music. Photography is the same way--it can be all technically correct but you come away feeling little emotional impact. Many of your photos (certainly NOT all!) show me what you saw, but do not show me how it felt. You are having trouble translating into a photo how an interesting location FELT. (This is a big challenge for me too.) So I conclude, learn the light, learn how to see it, learn how to best use it. Use of Light is 90% of a great photo. The technical stuff, not so much</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Peter......if nothing else, my post has really taught me a lot about the way the ratings/critiques system works. It's been very enlightening. For instance, I had no idea what you were talking about when you said<br>

<em>Well, the overall rating is 5.04 and centre spot is 4, so no, they're not "bad." However, I don't know what the average/mean/median rating on PN is, so it's difficult to know whether 5.04 is good or mediocre compared with others on this site.</em><br>

<em><br /><br /></em>I didn't know I could find a compilation of all the ratings I've received. I was astonished to find so many 5's and 6's. I guess that's because I don't see individual ratings. I only see the average, which is always much lower than that. And recently it seems that the first responders give very low scores. After my image has been up for awhile, some people must give higher ratings, because the average score starts creeping higher. </p>

<p>Thanks for the explanation and pointing me to the ratings compilations.......and for your wise words, as well.</p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>JC....I apologize for part of my response to you. The last part was really intended as an answer to John H. I never expected so many responses, and going back and forth trying to respond to these is confusing. </p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>John.....I wish you had read the comments and responses, and I think you would understand that I am indeed not looking for stroking or compliments. I'm truly frustrated by the seeming lack of effort put in by the community members. People want comments themselves, but many are not willing to contribute in return. (I don't mean to slight the wonderful members who do a remarkable job of participating). </p>

<p>I do not understand what you mean by: <br /> <em>If you were really concerned about learning from ratings, you would have included all ratings, especially high ratings.</em><br /> <br /> <em><br /></em>Let me be clear.....I am not 'concerned', as you say, about the low ratings. Nor am I offended. And I don't expect to learn from the ratings per se either. But I do expect to learn from the critiques, which never accompany the low ratings. That is my bone of contention.</p>

<p>As for my 'future' in photography. I don't expect to make a cent at my photography. And I am in a career where excellence is expected, and there is not a lot of stroking. Nobody expects it. I don't 'expect' it in my photography either, though admittedly we all love it when someone likes our work. I simply want honest feedback, which I've received some of as a result of posting this question. For that I'm grateful. </p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>John.....I wish you had read the comments and responses, and I think you would understand that I am indeed not looking for stroking or compliments. I'm truly frustrated by the seeming lack of effort put in by the community members. People want comments themselves, but many are not willing to contribute in return. (I don't mean to slight the wonderful members who do a remarkable job of participating).</p>

<p>I do not understand what you mean by: <br /> <em>If you were really concerned about learning from ratings, you would have included all ratings, especially high ratings.</em><br /> <br />Let me be clear.....I am not 'concerned', as you say, about the low ratings. Nor am I offended. And I don't expect to learn from the ratings per se either. But I do expect to learn from the critiques, which never accompany the low ratings. That is my bone of contention.</p>

<p>As for my 'future' in photography. I don't expect to make a cent at my photography. And I am in a career where excellence is expected, and there is not a lot of stroking. Nobody expects it. I don't 'expect' it in my photography either, though admittedly we all love it when someone likes our work. I simply want honest feedback, which I've received some of as a result of posting this question. For that I'm grateful.</p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Michael D........I absolutely agree about the self-promotion thing. I think that's mainly why I'll probably never make a cent at photography. My photo skills hopefully will improve with time, but I can't ever see myself spending any significant time promoting my work. That's precisely why I'm questioning my participating in Photo.net. Is the time I spend here worth the investment? But every time I think about discontinuing my membership, I just can't do it. There are many wonderful things to this community, and I do learn so much (from the articles in addition to the participation). </p>

<p>I find the 'process' of taking pictures fulfilling. It gets me away from my daily stresses and gives me something positive and even spiritually uplifting to concentrate on. </p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Scott......I haven't even looked at your images yet, but you have just won an ardent fan/supporter. I also only invest my time here for the self-improvement factor. And I think your idea is brilliant: </p>

<p><em>Perhaps each user should mark a box that states they are willing and strong enough to take anthers honest opinion!</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

I realize we all have different tolerances for criticism.....that's fine. But your idea would let those of us who would like honest criticism to 'invite' it from other similarly minded members. Have you submitted your idea to the staff?</p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Robert K.....My point about the anonymity is that it's much easier for someone to dispense 3's if he knows his name isn't connected to it. If his name was connected to his rating, he may still give a '3', but perhaps he would be more inclined to leave a thoughtful critique explaining his rating. Some wouldn't, I realize, but some would. </p>

<p>Even though, as Sarah picked up on above, I was anything BUT fishing for compliments with this post, I have received some pats on the back. But more importantly, I've received some excellent and usually spot-on general observations about my work, which I find much more helpful. </p>

<p>Thanks for the links......they look very interesting!</p>

 

[Norma Desmond]

<p><em>". . . those of us who would like honest criticism to 'invite' it from other similarly minded members . . ."</em></p>

<p>Would that suggest that those who don't check the box want dishonest criticism? I don't think you can legislate to the finest detail who wants what kind of criticism. When you display your photographs for the public, you open yourself up to all kinds of criticism, from "swell" to "ugly" to everything in-between. Don't discount a simple "swell" or what's commonly referred to as a pat on the back. Think of how many folks look at our photos and don't comment at all. A "swell" tells you it was at least worth the effort of saying something to you. That says a lot in a world swirling with photo upon photo upon photo. The one that got the "swell" was at least worth a notice and a mention. So was the one that got an "ugly."</p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Michael.......Good analogy and advice. I certainly can do that......ask for specific advice when I need it. I need to be bolder in my participation. A couple of times I've had someone contact me personally for advice about an image because they happen to have liked my work (or my gentle way of participating).....or for whatever reasons, I'm not sure. But I'm always happy to oblige, and I suppose I could do the same. The worst thing that could happen is that person would not respond. :-)</p>

 

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Fred......In light of some members having thousands of images, I didn't think my portfolio was all that large. But it's true, I rarely spend much time on the portfolios that have lots of images......it's just too overwhelming for me. So thanks for explaining your method. I'll give some serious consideration to paring back. I know Tony Hadley does what you do.....that is, he keeps much of his work in hidden folders and rotates his images from time to time. Good idea.</p>

 

[nodpete]

<p>Christal, I just looked through your portfolio because of your original post and I'm going to give you a rating of 6 overall. I think you have a great eye for composition, subject matter and I'm betting that you do not do a lot of post-processing. As you say, you do it for your own pleasure and that's all that matters.</p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Kent, I can't thank you enough for your lengthy response! It helps so much to hear this type of thing from someone. On some level I know everything you say is true, but I hadn't been able to formulate it in my mind. Indeed, I have asked the question before 'can you teach the non-technical side of photography?.....vision, feel, instinct, impacting someone in a visceral way, etc ' People have asked me the same about music.....I could expound forever on that subject. And I love your musical analogy. <br>

As I responded to David on the first page of this post,<br>

<em>I consider it a challenge to get an acceptable shot in less than ideal lighting conditions.</em><br>

However, having said that.....When we were in Alaska (haven't posted my images yet), it wasn't that I didn't understand the light. (Not to say that I couldn't have maximized the existing light better though. :-) It's just that I often find myself in a location for a limited amount of time and have to 'take what I can get'. Yet I'm surrounded by amazing scenery, and I have to take pictures of it.. I don't have the luxury of infinite time or being a professional photographer who can afford to wait for the ideal conditions. That is a frustration for me, for sure. </p>

<p>After some research, I believe the things you're missing in my photography can indeed be taught. I'm working toward that end, and I even plan to go to a photography school that places a great emphasis on this, as well as the technical aspects of photography. </p>

<p>And thanks for the suggestion for shooting in the Badlands. We'll definitely visit there many times in the future. We're from Indiana and we drive up to Alberta to visit my daughter and her family.<br>

<em> </em></p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Fred, I always appreciate your well-though out comments to people here on PN. And what I really like is that you not only have strong opinions, but you can substantiate those opinions, which lends much more credence to them in my view. And I think your reminder is a valid one......people are busy, and the fact that they take time to comment at all should not be belittled. </p>

<p>But I don't think Scott's comment <br>

<em>". . . those of us who would like honest criticism to 'invite' it from other similarly minded members . . ."</em> <br>

would require 'legisation to the finest detail'. It would simply be a tool (just like the check box indicating if a comment is helpful) for those who want more detailed and instructive comments to find other like-minded participants. I think it's a brilliant idea.</p>

[Christal1664882414]

<p>Don......you're correct. I don't do much post-processing. But that's because I have limited capability or knowledge to do so, not because I wouldn't like to. I see some amazing special effects and HDR's that I would love to experiment with. I don't even have the capability to process RAW images, so I have much to learn. Thanks for visiting my portfolio!</p>

[paul_vojvodin]

<p>The answer is to get off the internet. <br /> Have a nice day. I don't expect you to like the truth. Unplug, go out in the world, work, and enjoy. A writer who has done nothing but write and read and read about writing and write about reading is worth nothing. Great writers are people who have lived. I think the same applies broadly. I haven't looked at your portfolio.<br /> I hereby challenge you to get off the internet for 30 days. </p>

<p> </p>

[scotttyrrell]

"Would that suggest that those who don't check the box want dishonest criticism?"

 

No, it's just that many people have mentioned here that they have refrained from commenting, or have not commented

honestly, as they were afraid of inciting a strangers wrath! Perhaps if they see that a photographer has essentially given

them free reign to lay it in them, they'd be more inclined to comment rather than just passing on. Would hate to think

done of my images were missing out in a panning just because someone was scared of offending me!