I agree for the most part. But the problem with the Shel critique that put a damper on things is that he chose to criticize the photographer rather than the photo. I believe he said that the photographer should be embarrassed for having posted the photo. That crossed the line. Peersonal attacks are never fruitful in any discussion. Paul
On Jun 29, 2010, at 8:58 PM, William Robb wrote: > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Doug Brewer" > Subject: Re: Feed Us Your Photoblog--The Solution > > >> That was the big issue with Shel. It wasn't that he was harsh, but that he >> thought his way was the only way. > > Whatever one thinks of Shel (and I'm pretty sure that most know what I > think), he is/was a pretty talented photographer within the genres that he > pursued. I recall the critique that he gave that had everyone up in arms. > He was, IIRC, commenting on a very bland photo that was well below the level > that the photographer was capable of, and Shel told him that, almost to the > letter. > > And all of a sudden people started throwing poo at him. > Unfortunately, it put a real chill on the list regarding honest critique. > And that is too bad, because people do often want honest comments about the > pictures they present to the list, and not just get told that the turd they > dropped on the sidewalk looks remarkably like the golden egg. > > I appreciate the kind words that my images earn, but I also appreciate when > the flaws get picked out, as this is how I improve as a photographer and as > an image editor. > > When I joined this list back in 1998 or so, it was almost entirely gear > driven. That was what the technology of the day allowed. Image files were big > and importing them into a computer was not especially easy, and so people > chose carefully when they elected to show an image. > I don't think we take the same care any more, and I think it shows. > Well, I guess that probably is pretty harsh, but I do look at a lot of the > images that get presented. > Is this an elitist attitude? > I don't know. > Am I full of shit? > Probably, at least in the eyes of some. > Do I really give a damn? > Well, no, I don't. > > What I do care about is photography. It's been the major driving force in my > life for almost all of my life. > What pisses me off is when I make a suggestion about how to improve a > photograph and get told that the picture is what it is, and that I should > judge it on it's own merits, and not the merits of a picture that could have > been. > I mean really, if I was judging it on it's own merits, I'd just say it was a > shit picture. > > But because I care, I'll try to tell the photographer what I would have tried > to get, were it my picture. > And sometimes, that involves telling someone that I wouldn't have pushed the > button. > And why I wouldn't have. > And if that is harsh, it is because I am a man of few carefully chosen words. > > It's too bad that real critiques got shot down, though the list is a > friendlier place for it, I suppose. > > William Robb > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
