charles_h2

Fred,
I did make a comment about the photo. First sentence, second paragraph. Everytime I make a point about something you've written, you respond with all the other things you've said. I don't follow you around from forum to forum, picking fights with you. My last correspondence with you was in private. My question was, where do such enlightened discussions exist on the internet? Here on PN, I don't believe it's because of bad selections, that some claim, are the reasons for poor discussions here.

Most of the discussion on any of these selections, comes from the differences in how we define art , not the photograph itself. Points have been made here about a recognized/educated photographer giving their critique/opinion on an image carrying more weight, however without a strong body of work and/or a reputation to back it up, how much weight would their opinion carry? I have several coffee table books of the works of Avedon, Penn, Ritts, Weston, and Adams, but none of these great photographers have published any critique books. I wonder why?

End of Days,
I don't mean to come off as pompous, but, how many times would someone have to post on PN, before their point would qualify as valid?

First, I'd like to applaud those who actually have made comments on the present POTW.

Second, I agree with most of the comments on the technical aspects of this image. My problem with the discussion is the line between what is a photograph and what isn't. This argument seems to be gathering steam, and it reminds me of a similar argument, at the turn of the last century, about how photography was diminishing the quality of painted art. The digital bell has been rung. It will only evolve, and take us to places no one may even imagine. It has not decreased the value of paintings, or the desire to paint. For me, it adds another tool to use or not use. Wow, we actually have choices!

Fred wrote, " There is much to discuss intelligently and artistically and technically and photographically when it comes to Adams's work and whether one likes it or not there could be a great discussion about his approach, his vision, his technique, his use of the camera, his darkroom work, his relationship to his environment, and many other things. Someone with depth could discuss Adams for days without even mentioning whether they like him or think he's "good" or "swell" or not. POTW discussions can have many layers." Please point me in the direction where such discussions exist on the internet? I'll gladly join that group. You've addressed Edward Weston and Ansel Adams, but not one comment on the vision, technique, use of camera, or relationship of environment of the present POTW. I guess it's easier to tell people what should be done, that showing them how it should be done.

Fred G. wrote: <<<The "posed to look natural" feel of it is how the photo looks>>>>

I find it interesting your use of the word "natural" here in this thread. On Dec. 8, 2011 you wrote:

I never ever thought of photos as natural and tend to avoid that kind of vocabulary in relating to the subjects of photos. Photos are artificial, they don't occur in nature. They are man made. Subjects of photos are seen and transmitted, unnaturally, mechanistically, plastically. So I've always thought of photographed subjects as telling a story, conveying a message, fulfilling a perspective, representing something, symbolizing something, showing something, reflecting something. I never confused the subjects of photos with the things themselves and always realized the fabricated quality about it all. Even the most heart-wrenching and moving photos of war are not wars. If they were, I'd run away from them just like I would a war. My fascination with or draw to a photo of a hurricane or tornado does not mean I'd want to be in the eye of one or actually experience one. A photo of a beautiful, sexy woman is not a beautiful sexy woman. Never has been. Filtered, gauzed, lit, frozen in time, captured in flattering or unflattering light. Remember the old saying, "the camera adds ten pounds." We knew long ago never to trust a photo.
Distance. Artificial. Not real. Photo.

For me, It doesn't matter about the posing or how natural it looks. The skill of the photographer and the message are present. They could indeed be best friends. I question the blur effect from a technical standpoint , but not from the photographer's vision, which I cannot know without more info. As others have stated, I prefer the sepia toned version. Thank you Durr, for a wonderful image.....

John,
Great question, Why don't more members contribute? From my own viewpoint, from the few who do post, it seems as though they're grandstanding. Writing more about themselves and their views, and very little about the image itself. Playing the role of teacher or moderator, feeling the need to answer every post, and not just giving their critique.....

Brutal honesty is mostly accepted from children. When adults engage in this, there's a backlash that can even lead to violence. Even if someone verbally seems to take the criticism well, it doesn't mean they take it to heart. I'm not suggesting that people shoudn't be honest, but is there anything wrong with it being mixed with compassion?

Lannie
There are times that being brutally honest is welcomed and necessary, however in most of those cases, it's not going to be pastered on the bulletin board for everyone to see. In a world filled with landmines, we have to be careful where we step. Our critiques have to take into account that in most cases, we don't know the person whom we're evaluating, and that it is only our opinion, not the LAW. Granted, some are going to react to any criticism, but in the end, we are responsible for our words, and are those words to the recipient or the forum itself......

Sorry if I took your statement out of context.....

John,
Thanks. I have been exposed to critiques by instructors, etc. They were never like this. I dare say, if someone were in my face (as many who have helped me have been) the context of what they said would be different, even if it were harsh....and there is a difference between someone telling me how to improve and someone who just doesn't like my work. People are different John. Some have natural ability and others need to be trained. There are as many famous quotes against the need for critiques, as there are for them. I have found my niche in photography complete with it's own set of standards, not just a fan base...

I offered my critique of this image and my understanding of how Gerry must feel. I'm intelligent enough to know the difference between critique and attack. The tough love concept is chickenshit when you're not face to face (I've never seen someone ruin so many images.... quote from Lannie). That was a wonderful comment, wouldn't you say? No, it was in the spirit of helping him become a better photographer, right? I was not attacking this forum, just certain comments

Gerry
Happy Thanksgiving and congrats on your photo being selected. My observation of your work is that you're an environmental shooter with emphasis on sharpness and rich tones. With many of your images you have done this. The exception is this one. This is rather important with portraits to separate (distinguish) your subject from the rest of the image. This can be done with depth-of-field, darkening the background from the foreground (or subject), etc... My eyes usually go to the things that are brightest in the image, and then to the in focus areas. If the sharpest and brightness are all on the same level, then the image creates a bit of visual chaos.....

I personally don't think the HDR processing is an issue. I've read the comments about over-processing but that is a bit deceiving, since over and under are measured in different degrees for most. I also believe that calling it over processed is a bit negative without an explanation or example of what normal or balanced processing is to the individual making the statement. As far as the title, if a photograph speaks a thousand words, then it's got to be hard to condense that into just two or three words. So I tend to make up my own titles when I see an image....

Gerry, I understand and share your reaction to many of these comments. Many here think that everyone should react the same to their so called critiques. That in itself is a bit idealistic. They applaud those who can take the punches like a man, and criticize those who don't take these critiques as gospel. How dare you react negative when the first comment to your work was that is was prejudicial to the elderly, as if this person has his finger on the pulse of every elderly person, to know how they feel about aging. The beauty of it all is that the majority of successful (commercial and fine art) photographers have not been subjected to this type of forum.... stay true to your vision

This photo caught my eye. The lighting, the composition, and the post technique, make this an image I would hang on my wall..Bravo

First let me state that I admire Marc's work. I truly like the fact that it takes me to a place I would never find on my own. I will not go into the technical aspects, as they have been sited and discussed in detail. Since this image is consistent with his body of work, I can only conclude that he is very skilled and clear about his vision...One of the goals many of us strive for.

I believe that an essential part of our evolution as photographers is to find an audience and a market for our work. Whether this makes one an artist is way beyond my understanding. However, becoming successful is an important part for most of us, if not just being appreciated. Digital images are and will continue to be the evolution of photography, with all the tools that go along with it....

I agree with many points made in this thread. I can definitely see Kah Kit Young's points.
Fred stated earlier: "I'd rather look, respond, learn, and move on"
Almost everyone here knows that you look Fred. You are highly intelligent, articulate, etc. Respond, boy do you respond. You respond to such a point that you will not allow anyone to have legs. You have told us that Kincade's work is crap. Ansel Adam is a technician and not so much an artist, you watched Bonanza as a child, and oh yeah, Marc's work doesn't do it for you. I'm not sure about what you learn, but the move on part is where I sense if you really respect the opinions of others.

Martin
Please understand, I'm not pointing the finger at any individual. This is not a right or wrong issue. It is a matter of ethics. Most of us learn from work, techniques, points of interest, and people we admire. Not from someone showing us a different version of our own ideas...

My point about stealing was a joke. I believe Fred addressed that point very well. I'm not concerned what you think about the revised version. That wasn't my point. How does the photographer feel, is the ethical point I was getting at. You have made it very clear that you think this practice is fine. I agree, as long as the artist is involved in this process. Some photographers are very accomplished with their vision and techniques and don't need affirmation. While others are novice and seek help and feedback. We need to use wisdom based on circumstances.

Again, I respect you and Alberta's ability, so please don't take this personally. I'm sure this practice will continue, but I doubt you will get many thumbs up from the original photographers in question...

Alberta:
There are forums where the photographer ask for help, both visual and technical. So, as Fred pointed out, the downloading and manipulation is a practice done on PN. My comments were about the POW forum, where the photographer doesn't ask or choose the image selected. I admitted that I'm of another mindset, and that this practice seems dis-respectful to the efforts and vision of a photographer, regardless of how subjectively good or bad the image is....

Most of us, who have been shooting for a number of years , know the changes we would make or wish we could make to our own work, but who else would know? In reading several post of the past recipients, I don't get the feeling that photographers are grateful for another version of their work. I sense that the people doing the critiques are Ok with it because it gives them more to talk about. Ironically, the most talked about aspect is whether it's been manipulated, and post processing...Honestly, did you learn photography by someone manipulating your photo and presenting it back to you for the whole world to see?

I don't feeling you, or any of the others, have any ill intent. As you stated, "You're having fun", and PN should be fun for all, although some don't play well with others. I am a commercial photographer, and in my world, we don't touch each others work...we steal their ideas :)

Fred, thank you for pointing out the terms for this practice. I wasn't aware of this.
I have read many comments and feedbacks, on this site, but have never read from a POW recipient that they thought an altered version of their vision was an improvement. PN is a wonderful site, and I have no beef here. I'm just from a different school of thought. "You can look, you can comment, you can even throw eggs at it, but don't touch".

David
I think your image is full of beauty. I'm not a nature photographer, so I applaud your effort, for the patience and technical skill....

On another note, I love the original version better. I have noticed this growing trend to download and manipulate another photographer's work. I believe this is wrong without permission from the photographer. It's called "copyright" , for those who have forgotten why we need it.....

Ian:

Big "thumbs" up. This is an awesome photograph. One I would proudly display. A myriad of emotions, all leading to the joy and wonder of childhood. As far as a critique, there is nothing wrong with this photograph, that what's right about it doesn't overshadow.

Wouter

"But a critique that discuss how an image does not work, how a composition maybe doesn't work, there is a lot to be gained from that". I don't think for one minute that you or anyone else knows what a person will gain from at any given moment of their lives. When I first became a photographer struggling to find a career, I won an International competition that gave me the encouragement to continue my career, and I heard, "great photo" from many of the people present. That was what I needed at that time to continue and improve. When you defend your position, more often than not, it becomes a debate, or as you stated earlier, a pissing contest...not a discussion. I, like Richard, didn't get much from this discussion. It doesn't mean I didn't get something from other POW discussions, or won't in the future.......... I do respect your point of view, but please don't tell me I might be selling myself short.. it's condescending

I find myself agreeing with Richard and Michael on their posts..

We each choose who will be our influences, and who we gain knowledge from. Washington Allston (painter) wrote, "Never judge a work of art by it's defects". Ansel Adams wrote, "No man has the right to dictate what other men should perceive, create or produce, but all should be encouraged to reveal themselves, their perceptions and emotions, and to build confidence in the creative spirit". I find it hard to build my confidence or creative spirit by listening to the critiques of people who's work doesn't equal or surpass the tone of their critiques. A person who I sense works as hard as I do to create an image, a piece of art, a mudpie, will gain my respect and attention, over those just giving their viewpoint....Everyone has an opinion. Should I listen to them all?
As I stated earlier in this forum, there are too many difinitive statements made as facts and conclusions, when in fact, they are subjective evaluations..."Nobody ever got wiser from "great work, I love it". I'm really amazed any photographer ever became great without being a member of photo.net. I learn many things from some of the other forums, where questions are asked and answered, but not very much in this "room". This has more to do with my discipline as a photographer than the value of what's being said. It doesn't help me if the photo "screams" to someone else, and there's nothing for me to discuss based on that comment. Negative critiques ( feedback) are not always given with growth in mind. What we think, say, and do, are not always consistent.

Merry Christmas to all

First, I want to congratulate Floriana on a wonderful image. I see myself walking into uncharted territory everytime I post a comment on photo.net...

There are already too many comments to respond to. I don't feel like it's a pissing contest as much as it is matter of the "Art of Communication". People make definitive statements, when in fact, it's just their opinion. It's one thing to like or dislike vanilla ice cream, but another to say that vanilla is no good. As we all know, there are some critics that are just better writers than others. They can simplify their comments, so that there's no doubt to the context of their message. The question then becomes, Is photo.net a community of photographers who support each other, or a place for "tough love". The POW recipient is in a odd position because they didn't choose the work that's being critiqued, and to have to sometimes defend or explain what they were trying to accomplish, to an unknown audience. An audience of their peers...............It's got to be tough to answer questions about an image that you yourself may or may not feel is your best work.

The hazy line between Fine art, Commercial art, and Applied art are being crossed all the time, with success by many artist. Almost every week I read a lecture on the meaning of art by someone here on PN, as if any of us has mastered the defintion...Love, Art, Ego...many songs have been written, many books, and as much as we discuss them, I don't see or read people changing their opinions because of these discussions. Very few, if any come in with an empty cup......

First, let me say to Christopher, "Awesome photo". There are many reasons why this photograph works for me. The message is loud and clear. The technical aspects are top quality, and the finish product would make almost any art director happy...

Thank you Stephen, for putting into words what I felt after reading several of the other post...
To manipulate or not to manipulate, to photoshop or not to photoshop, to create an image or to capture an image. Almost every POW has to go through this debate, and in the end the tools to manipulate an image exist, and almost every photographer uses these tools. So for me, the critique is how well they use them, not if they use them. Very few artist every believe their work is complete. There are always changes that can be made, and will be made as we get closer to that illusive finish line called ART.

Simple and wonderful

Andris
This is a very fine photograph. As a photographer, there are three aspects that come to mind when I judge images ( my own included). Am I drawn to it? Yes. I would approach this image for a closer look. Once I get there, does it speak to me? Yes, this image would peak my curiosity with questions of sadness and isolation. And the final aspect. Will it stay with me when I walk away? No. It isn't an image (mentally) I would want to return to.