SEEN BETTER DAYS by GERRY GENTRY

There is, of course, another very important reason that people don't contribute to threads like this: Many photo.net participants might be interested in the subject, but don't have the time / interest to participate in the lengthy discussions / heated debates to the same extent as the regulars on these threads.

The posts by "the regulars" are typically extremely well thought out, and well written. This takes a lot of time for a person good at this, but vastly more time for a person not used to composing and writing such material. Thus, if a person had a POV contrary to say, the initial "piling on(1)" that happened in this thread, and had voiced their opinion, they would have certainly been met by a flurry of long rebuttals.

Their choice at that point is to either (a) jump into the fray and spend much more time than they had intended, or (b) say nothing and appear to have no answer to the rebuttals and hence, appear to have a weak / indefensible POV.

People with limited time/interest can easily see this as a likely outcome before they even make one post and simply decide not to bother. Even just reading the posts (now up to 218) that came before yours (ie, so you can compose a sensible message) is more time than many people can or want to devote to something that does not directly concern them. I know that this is certainly the case for me.

IMHO, there is no solution to this problem that would satisfy everyone. For example, to encourage wider participation, one could envision a rule restricting each person to some small number of posts per POTW thread. I think it's clear that our more verbose brethren would feel severely cramped by such a restriction and would argue strongly against it. OTOH, I am equally convinced that leaving the situation unchanged will hinder wider participation.

Tom M

Note (1) - For folks not familiar with American slang, "Pile on" is a phrase used in American football, where defenders throw themselves onto a pile of other defenders, under which is the ball carrier. It's a needless activity, since the ball carrier is already down and the play is over.

Look at the re-worked photograph I have uploaded, it is not HDR and has a better tonal range.

In addition to encouraging participation from non-participants, maybe it'd be equally fruitful to remind enthusiastic participants to refrain from the urge to over-participate - not every viewpoint needs to be challenged when there is no right or wrong.

We should also be mindful that an apparently isolated discussion could be read and followed by thousands, and everyone who contributes to it will in some way determine the tone of it. This in turn determines the site culture as perceived by a reader, so how we participate carries responsibilities possibly even greater than our contribution by how we express our viewpoint.

As an example, I'm still bewildered by the outcome of this thread:
http://photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00b01j

Gerry, your portfolio is not visible from your member page. Is this the reworked picture?
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=16634172

Yes, this is the single shot version

Hi everyone on Photo.net, this is Mrs Gentry, I'm affraid Gerry is no longer able to put any pictures on this site. I think in his words, he has gone to a better place

All I can say is this is much better theater than photography!

Couldn't have asked for a better finale.

Applause. Fade Out. Curtain.

Hi Fred, thanks for your comment. It happend at 5.00am. Mrs Gentry

This "theatre" ends in tragedy. In his moment of glory Gerry has chosen to delete all his photos (including the one I praised) and leave photo.net forever. Alas.

As the chorus, I have to ask if all that passed would have been different if only the title was different. Putting aside the title, the mother, Gerry's laments and the manic use of HDR, this is really an interesting photograph. I am not sure if I like it any better but I do admit that it grows on me. There is a continuity to this image: all the elements fly in your face at once. If you consider this as a theatre of the grotesque then somehow this photo works.

This "theatre" ends in tragedy. In his moment of glory Gerry has chosen to delete all his photos (including the one I praised) and leave photo.net forever. Alas.

As the chorus, I have to ask if all that passed would have been different if only the title was different. Putting aside the title, the mother, Gerry's laments and the manic use of HDR, this is really an interesting photograph. I am not sure if I like it any better but I do admit that it grows on me. There is a continuity to this image: all the elements fly in your face at once. If you consider this as a theatre of the grotesque then somehow this photo works.

All right. I'll admit it. I like this photograph. There is something revelatory about it. Perhaps it is the moment before death when suddenly everything is made starkly clear. I don't know. It is a terrifying photograph. Perhaps there is more here than the artist intended. In it own awful way it is brilliant.

It took a while to see it. Just like Ingres's paintings. He had a very thin skin too.

I miss the other version which Gerry posted and then deleted, which was taken at a slightly different angle, and without the HDR effect on both face and sky.

--Lannie

This is Mrs Gentry not Gerry. I don't know anything about photography, I just know that Gerry loved photography. He was upset that the comments were about his ability as a photographer not about his POTW. I think if he was still around he would have started to put pictures back on Photo.net. but it's too late now.

NOTHING CHANGES : POTW 2002

Aldo De Filippi ../v3graphics/member-status-icons/trophy.gif, February 20, 2002; 09:05 A.M.

When I first read that I had "self-graded" my work with a 10/10 I thought the poster was jocking. I eventually checked the ratings and sure enough, there was my name. I certainly didn't do it, and I don't know who is responsible for it. But please, please, elves: take your POW award back. Life is just too short to have to deal with sickness of this sort.

ANOTHER ONE FROM 2002. This type of stuff has been going on for too long, get it stopped. JG

Ken Thalheimer ../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif, February 20, 2002; 06:02 P.M.

This is simply a photograph. Nothing more in reality. One either likes it or doesn't. It's based on editorial. I really find the personal attacks in here ridiculous. Is there nothing better in life for you to do? Constructive criticism is fine. Personal attacks are downright childish. Get a life! I do agree that those who have 0 uploads would do very well to just be quiet and walk away. This is supposed to be a photo critique forum; not a sparring match. This thread is full of pompous garbage from some very pompous people. I'm outta here. Better things to do than read people ripping each other apart. I wonder how many would if they were face to face?

Hi! I'm a member of the Fly.com team and I thought the Fly.com photo contest would be of interest to you!

You have an opportunity to show off your favorite travel photos, and best of all, the winners will receive up to $2,500 in prizes for their next vacation!

Go to the Fly.com Facebook page and click on the competition tab.
Upload your photos, and check back to see if your photo has been selected as a finalist. Fans will be voting on the top three entries for each category from February 11 – February 28. The winners will be announced on March 4.

Good luck!