Well put, Tom.. Nice summing up of the whole bit ann
On 11/28/2011 13:21, Tom C wrote:
Been out and about at Bryce and Zion National Parks over the weekend. I may have one or two shots to display. :-) Here's my thoughts on this semi-annual topic: 1. If a person posts a picture they're inviting a response. Usually they're expecting a positive response I believe, otherwise they likely wouldn't have posted it. 2. Having invited a response a poster must be prepared for a response they did not expect, i.e., negative feedback or tips for improvement. 3. There's nothing wrong with posting an image and getting an "ego massage" out of it, especially if it's a praiseworthy image. We all like to feel good about our photography. That being said: 4. Many images are offered for viewing that were intended more as a show& tell and sharing, a form of communication as opposed to an example of photographic craft. 5. It seems kudos are often given for these images and they often receive the same adulation as images that meet a higher standard. That's unfortunate because it, in essence lumps great shots and otherwise into the same bucket. It's akin to pooling tips for waiters/waitresses. Excellent service and poor service are rewarded equally. That can have the tendency to make some with mediocre shots believe they have a great image and it tends to have a diluting effect on praise given to worthy images, especially if the same person is giving the feedback. 6. For criticism and critique to have validity one must take into account the credentials of the one giving feedback, be it here, or any of the numerous photo sharing sites. But credentials alone is not the end all, because personal subjectivity always enters in. I've found on other sites, that it appears some individuals have the tendency to downgrade others images as a means to inflate their own egos. Likewise, a beginner in photography can easily get excited about an image that has little merit - or not realizing how little they know, give negative feedback and advice. 7. A negative critique that attacks the photographer as opposed to the photograph serves no use. It's that kind of negative attack I've seen from time to time on the list, that I find onerous whether it occurs to myself or someone else. It's pointless, rude, and serves no purpose other than to elevate the one giving the critique - in their own mind. Personally: 7. I generally give only positive feedback and feel that praising the positive is the best way of promoting improvement and continued excellence. The photographer can learn the basics from a book and with practice, so I feel no need to give instruction. 8. Take a 'no comment' as either negative feedback or lack of interest on my part. If not that, then it means I was simply too busy too look or respond. Tom C.
-- 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.