View Full Version : Self Censorship: Our Worst Enemy
Fresh morning of first weekend day, I asked my 16 old daugther if she has ever seen my RFF gallery and what she thinks about. "Dadddy you have become a sloppy photographer. Long ago you cared, but now your pics look as if you don't care at all and just shoot from the hip".
Wow, wow, wow. What a shower at early morning !
I immediately started to defend myself, arguing about the genre of Street Photography, in contrast to Portraiture. But she led me to a certain picture in my gallery and asked if I would puplish such a pic in a magazine. I thought twice and had no clear answer to myself. My daughter pointed to the shortcommings of the pic, while I explained my technical problems in having catched a better one.
The most interesting thing is that for that specific pic I got at RFF a single comment, positive of course.
This kept me thinking. A lot.
Do I care for getting positive comments ? Yes, I do want them, I do need them, and I know this explicitely since some time ago.
Do I want to improve my skills ? Here there is a hidden problem. If I answer yes, I am also implying I have a lot to learn and at the present stage I should regard the positive comments I get, as 'meanwhile'. Not a very comfortable place to seat.
BUT HOW THE HELL AM I SUPPOSED TO IMPROVE IF I DO NOT ADMIT I AM STILL LEARNING, AND THEREFORE OPEN MY ATTENTION TO HARD CRITICISM, OR REAL CRITICISM ?
HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO IMPROVE IF NO ONE POINTS CRYSTAL CLEAR MY WEAK POINT AT THE PICS I DISPLAY ?
========
Now allow me to review the issue from the other side: Me as a commentary writer.
Recently our member Alexz posted more than a hundred images at the Leica gallery site, about Tel Aviv city. I was the first to answer him here at RFF pages stating I am very pleased by the images.
BUT I DIDN'T WRITE ALL THE TRUTH. ALL OF MY TRUTH, MY OPINION. I didn't write at the thread, that in my opinion he should start to edit, or improving his editing, and instead of posting a mix of 90 regular and below images together with 10 excellent ones, he has to show those 10 only.
HOW IS ALEXZ SUPPOSED TO KNOW THAT SUCH AN OPINION ABOUT HIS WORK EVEN EXISTS, IF I DON'T DARE TO WRITE IT ?
There is another classical example comming to my mind about one of our photographers, not particularly active here lately, which photographed a girl three times. 2 nudes, and 1 very original portrait like. The nudes looked to me a real disaster, while his portraiture work in general was of high quality to me.
Again I didn't say it.
NONE OF US IS SAYING "IT". 'I didn't liked this because..." Right ?
Therefore, in my opinion, in all what refers to image commentary we basically have three choices:
a) To be a self-supporting sect aftraid or real criticism.
b) To be a self destructing sect plagued with negative criticism and personal account settling.
c) To change into an open thinking community, pointing both to the positive sides and negative ones when we write a commentary. This demmands a more serious and dedicated approach. A responsible approach. And this has nothing to do with Stephen or the moderators.
==========
How can we put this in practice ?
First we have to change our basic attitude.
Then it would be a very good help if each of us clearly points to which cathegory of photographer he belongs now: Beginner, Advanced, High Quality.
If each of us do it, commentaries will be possible to do accordingly.
I myself am in the street stuff, and here I am a beginner. Therefore you should help me critizing my images accordingly to the needs of a beginner.
Sitemistic, for example, belongs to the High Quality. If he accepts this, his pics will be criticized accordingly.
If I and sitemistic get two enthusiast commentaries, as the situation is now, I may prompt to confuse myself and think what I am not. Nor I will be getting the help I really need.
But if instead of that we write what we should write, the day I see and feel I am getting too good and too much good commentaries at the "Beginners" cathegory, I myself will move to the "Advanced" cathegory, requesting different and higher levels to measure my images.
It all should be out of oneself initiative and choice.
But if we continue silencing ourselves about what we see and don't like, we are all going together downwards.
Cheers,
Ruben
ClaremontPhoto
11-23-2007, 06:20
We have a forum here 'Critiques' which has fallen into disuse and (I think) needs reviving.
As we're currently in a spirit of making the whole site more image centric I wonder if you, Ruben, would think about running a critique next week?
Just look at one of the old threads in the forum and copy and paste the instructions into a new thread and you're up and running...
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 06:27
The view count is a pretty good indicator of public acceptance of your work.
Of course, a photo of a naked woman will rack up thousands of views, no matter what the quality.
With the rise of the internet, we have tens of millions of daily self-published images, blogs, writing, etc etc.
Most of it is increasingly illiterate and incompetent.
What the internet sorely lacks is a strong cadre of editors. I'm not so sure that the ability of the hoi-polloi to freely express and publish itself is a good thing.
Murray Kelly
11-23-2007, 06:30
But if we continue silencing ourselves about what we see and don't like, we are all going together downwards.
Cheers,
Ruben
Ruben, why do you ask so many interesting questions? :-)
Murray
We have a forum here 'Critiques' which has fallen into disuse and (I think) needs reviving.
As we're currently in a spirit of making the whole site more image centric I wonder if you, Ruben, would think about running a critique next week?
Just look at one of the old threads in the forum and copy and paste the instructions into a new thread and you're up and running...
No Jon, you seem to hide from the basic issues I formulated.
Of course, no need to say, I appreciate you a lot.
Cheers,
Ruben
Hi Sitemistic,
you have praised some of my pics. But why you have kept silent about the others you have not liked ? Had you been afraid I will suicide ? Don't you think perhaps I could learn something new ? Do you think that if you point to the weak sides of the pictures you review, perhaps others may disagree with you and a wonderfull discussion may follow ?
The strongest asset we have here is team thinking. Team thinking is not Stalin sole thinking, but disagreement and discussion. Only upon the clash of views each of us can arrive to his own conclusion and grow.
What I foresee, is that if we start to tell the whole we think and feel, and upon liking a pic of member X and wanting to post a good commentary, I will find another commentary in which the writer says "I didn't like it because...." and I will argue with him.
As the situation is now, we have images enjoying a chorus wellcome, and images enjoying a silent void. Fine, but why we don't enable the photographer to understand the "why" of such void ?
Cheers,
Ruben
Ruben, thenks for noting me by PM to that thread were my person has been mentioned.
Just responded to your PM.
Well, in general, I'm quite open to a constructive cirticism, I believe it helps tremendously to improve the skills and bring up better results.
I got your point and frankly, cannot disagree with it. I personally still find it difficult for me to bring up enough courage to cut off some 80-90% of the stuff in order to make the choice of those best 10-20% that worth showing in public, this is probably something I need to work on....
I would encourage anyone (and you Ruben, of course) to check out my Tel Aviv/Jerusalem series I posted in the related threads (as mentioned by Ruben) few days back and make a selection of those images you personally would be proud to show in public (under street photography topic, of course)...
Thank you, Alex
Murray Kelly
11-23-2007, 07:05
It's true, I think, that we all hate criticism. Our own is Ok but others - well - not so acceptible. I have never been game to post pictures. I know already that they are poor.
If you post, then any criticisms may or may not be congratulatory. Anyone who posts is really asking for praise of their work, I believe.
Rather than disappointing them we either shut up or say something quite bland.
OTOH I am can be really impressed by posted pictures but say nothing. Human nature I guess. Posted pictures sometimes inspire me to try harder with similar equipment and film but ultimately the reason I try is never acknowleged to the person who stimulates the thinking - it is part of the passing parade that is RFF. We're all here to learn, yes?
Murray
I've tried to do constructive critique on photosig site. I've pointed out things which I didn't like, but this turned out against me as the photographer couldn't stand it. Since then I'm only commenting photos I like and sometimes I add notes on things I think have been done better. I also agree with Sitemistic on Noctilux photos, because especially in this case it always ends with opinion fights and the form is being set above the content.
I personally still find it difficult for me to bring up enough courage to cut off some 80-90% of the stuff in order to make the choice of those best 10-20% that worth showing in public, this is probably something I need to work on....
Sorry for singling you out here, Alex, and I'm only doing this because your quote so clearly demonstrates my point, but you summarized one of my main criticism of digital photography work in general, and that's the ability to edit. We all remember the horrible vacation slide shows of the past (Johnny in front of the bridge, and Johny behind the bridge -- oh sorry, that photo is a bit fuzzy) and we all vowed to never do that ourselves. For many years, at least those of us (amateurs!) that were semi-serious about our photography, were quite good about that -- be it because we had to pay for prints, or because we had to work hard on each print ourselves.
Fast forward a decade or two -- taking digital pictures is (almost) free (as is scanning our film work, if that's how we get our photos digitized), and as a result we all forgot to edit our pictures. I must say, I am quite tired of getting CDs with photos from friends that have 10 great photos mixed in with 300 photos that are complete (inapproriate term) -- including such classics as mis-focused shots, or three versions of the same photo, all with a slightly crooked horizon.
/EndRant ;)
Anyway, maybe we need to be more honest, but in a nice way, and also use more self-control before we put out work...
Cheers,
Gabriel M.A.
11-23-2007, 07:34
The view count is a pretty good indicator of public acceptance of your work.
Yep. And seeing some pretty awful photos getting a high count tells you there's a buddy system gallery viewing, not on purely based-on-the-image viewing.
It is bad manners, to say the least though, to go up and critique or criticize a photo from someone who hasn't explicitly asked for a critique. There are many people who don't understand the difference.
Good, Rubén, that you're moving in the right direction. The question now is: will you have the stomach for those who just critique negatively, without ever giving you positive or constructive feedback to help you? It's tough...
robbiechad
11-23-2007, 07:42
Hi Ruben, As Sitemistic says beauty is in the eye of the beholder, last night on TV (BBC 4) there was a Programme about Photography, and giving examplea of world famous photographers from earlier times 50s,60s,70s etc. I thought a lot of the stuff was snapshot and mundane but the presenter was seeing in these images something that I was obviously missing!! I dont like to be critical about pictures people post because they obviously like them, who am I to argue differently.
It is bad manners, to say the least though, to go up and critique or criticize a photo from someone who hasn't explicitly asked for a critique. There are many people who don't understand the difference.
Good, Rubén, that you're moving in the right direction. The question now is: will you have the stomach for those who just critique negatively, without ever giving you positive or constructive feedback to help you? It's tough...
Totally agree with that.
Ruben:
1. It's one thing that your daughter tells you "her" truth and criticize your picture, it's another one if I or someone else tell you the same.
2. Sometimes, people post constructive critique about a better crop, how to improve a composition ... I remember that FrankS wrote me that one portrait of my girlfriend (holding her Pentax) should have been framed differently; when it's said in a constructive spirit, it's welcome.
3. When you have no comment for a picture, while you have positive feedbacks for others, you can draw your own conclusion. But as Gabriel said, that doesn't mean the commented picture is good or the picture without feedback is bad. Everbody has to find his own original way ... sometimes people like your work, sometimes they don't ... trivial but there's nothing to say about that.
4. As Jon reminded us, there is a critique forum and participating in is a very interesting experience. Start a new thread, and you'll have constructive critique.
5. You can start a thread where you can post pictures which you want feedback for. I did that twice, the last one was yesterday; see here: Birth (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=684563#post684563).
Avotius, Alexz and others do that too.
Best,
Marc
Pherdinand
11-23-2007, 08:14
i 100%agree with you,except two things.
1: criticism is PERSONAL. I mean it depends on the person looking at the shots. There are really a lot of shots in the rff gallery where some people seem to be very positive, and I ask myself, what's wrong with these people? this shot says nothing to me! on in better case, i ask myself, what's wrong with me...
2: the "belongs to high quality/beginner/average/" etc classification: i don't think that is necessary. Everybody just should say what he finds of the image, in a polite but honest way, no matter who posted the image.
But many people expect only applaud, not negative criticism.
In the meantime many people are too critical (maybe me as well), and i've seen on other sites like photo.net that most of the so-called constructive criticism ends up telling the photographer where to crop the image or to increase the damn contrast. Is that rwhat we really want? or, better asked, is that something we can bear with?
The story with your daughter is nice. However, she is honest but she only says her oppinion. SO it's only a question,how important her oppinion is for your photography.
Which photo did your daughter critique?
c.poulton
11-23-2007, 08:30
I dont like to be critical about pictures people post because they obviously like them, who am I to argue differently.
I used to think along these lines as well. It's always very difficult to crit a photo that has meaning to the poster, which I may be unaware of. Also, I have to admit that I feel very self conscious giving negative crits as I feel that I am leaving myself open to criticism myself. I suppose it boils down to the fact that I do not feel 'qualified' or skilled enough to give meaninful criticism, apart from the obvious positive statements that I give.
However, having positive AND negative criticism given to you on your work IS the only way to learn and move forward towards better photography. It hurts sometimes, but I do welcome all comments and I personally do try to take on board other RFF members comments or suggestions towards my work. So, certainly in that respect, and thinking about it, I now agree with Ruben that maybe we should start to offer up better feedback on posted images, both positive and negative, to allow us all to improve.
Dektol Dan
11-23-2007, 08:33
The interaction is too slow, there are no comparisons between like work, there is no discussion of cross purposes of goals, criticisms from the inexperienced waste time rather than provide learning experience, comradere and politeness gets in the way of real discussions that can't be had without hurting someone feelings, opinionated 'know it all' SOBs such as myself teach in a terse style that can affront newbies in the huge crowd that is always coming and going on a web site, no one really knows what the others experience is other than few postings in a gallery with very limited access and quality, there can be no rules that can be adapted to accomodate the crowd of folks with a such a disparity of experience and goals (just witness the fits and failures just discussing the gallery/criticsm issues on this site)..... on and on.
As I have suggested before, the best answer is to have a criticism corner that is run as an online college class, limited in size, duration of time, and topics of criticism.
I also believe someone who has experience in the field as well in instruction should be chosen to run these on line classes. Gurdjieff maintains people take knowledge for granted unless they have to make some sacrifice for it. I concur. If it costs some admission that means the participants are serious.
I doubt that self-censorship is really our worst enemy, but I am sure that self-criticism is our best friend. No-one could critique my work more harshly than I do, and the same must be true of any serious photographer. A positive comment is not simply a gift an.d reassurance - it is a message to ourselves, because what we admire in the work of others is that which is lacking in our own. Thus such encouragement is genuinely useful to all concerned.
RFF reminds me of classical Athens - a few people of exceptional merit rise to prominence, but everyone is ultimately equal. Indeed, as in ancient Greece, those who aspire to tyranise the polis end up ruling a kingdom of one. We have no teachers, prophets or oracles. We are all learners, and from my experience in education I would argue that fraternal praise tempered by modesty and self-knowledge does more good than all the critiques on earth.
Cheers, Ian.
Which photo did your daughter critique?
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=73065&ppuser=1179
antiquark
11-23-2007, 09:17
In general, on the internet, a negative comment can be amplified in the mind of the recipient into an egregious insult. I'm not sure why that is.
So basically, it's a good idea to never leave negative comments on someone's photo.
Personally, I consider an absense of any comments to be the same as a negative comment.
People interested in giving and receiving photo critique can give it and get it in the style of post that Ray PA began. (5 participants, theme or no theme) Anyone can begin such a thread, and the first 5 people are in.
Photo criticism, unless the reviewer is tallented/trained to provide, is very "iffy" IMO. A good photo is in the eye of the beholder, rather than some objective standard. Everyone has an opinion.
photogdave
11-23-2007, 09:42
Thanks for an interesting thread Ruben. Here's a critique of your photo: it should show the scooter's wheels to be good. Otherwise we have to guess or be told it's a scooter.
I comment in the tone of old photojournalism instructor who was harsh, terse, unsympathetic and the best teacher I ever had. She would hold up our prints one by one in front of the whole class and figuratively tear them to shreds, or praise them, with brief to-the-point comments.
"This one is crap. There is nothing interesting happening here."
"This is horrible. You can't see the face!"
"This is garbage. What kind of story are you trying to tell?"
Etc. When students would try and defend their work with the old "I meant to..." or "I was trying for..." she would cut them off and say something like "keep trying until you get it. You can't hand in a try to an editor."
Of course this kind of criticism was specifically for newspaper photography but I believe it works just as well for street photography.
I wonder how many RFFers could handle this style?
I agree with many of your points Ruben. I think many members could stand to benefit from harsher self-editing and some more constructive criticism, including myself.
I don't think the categories you suggest would be of any benefit. I think it's up to the individual to decide where he/she fits in and accept any praise or criticism according to what they believe their own skill level to be.
Bottom line, I think anyone wiling to post their images in the gallery should also be willing to accept any kind of criticism in good spirit.
the problem with it is not something you had control over Ruben, the angle of the man’s arm, the girl’s arm and elbow, and the top of the triangular plastic bag all conspire to focus the viewers attention on the yellow handlebar, away from the subjects faces.
I assume you cropped from the sides to arrive at that image, it’s hard to see what else you could do given the speed you have work with that type of shot, you were just unlucky with the subject.
regards
.....Bottom line, I think anyone wiling to post their images in the gallery should also be willing to accept any kind of criticism in good spirit.
The problem is not at the picture posting level, but in us upon seeing the images and writing or not our comentaries. We avoid "trouble", we hide our feelings, we join the crowd chorus. We don't dare to express our feelings out of a false fear to hurt, and by the end account we betray ourselves and castrate our artistic potential. Not each of us is going to be an artist, but all of us can create.
Perhaps we need to learn how to be able to pin point both sides of what we see in a single pic. But how could we possible learn it if we are afraid of our own shadows ?
Yes, we have had some heavy tonged folks, but most of us are experienced and civilized members, able to orientate ourselves, but just afraid. My good fellows, this is called conservatism, aging, permature death before the physical one.
Self censorship is the worst censorship of all.
And let me be unambiguous. I am not mooving anywhere else. I trust you and myself that sooner or later we will be clever about the issues here exposed, me included.
Cheers,
Ruben
Ruben,
There is a difference between saying: "This photo is a piece of crap. Why embarass yourself here." and between offering an honest crititique that is not positive in nature. I would accept the second but not the first approach.
example from the gallery: "absolutely insignificant image of a familiar moment of autor, no composition, no care." This commenter then went on, adding an attack on the gallery as a whole by stating that only friends are cheerleading. It ended with "It is much sad and depressing".
This was not withing a critique session of a posted image.
All I could comment on this comment was "get a life".
The above illustrates a personal attack for no reason at all. The commenter could have stuck to critiquing the image and not start an attack at the way gallery photos are being commented on and then end it with "depressing". When we have a few RFF members with such insensitive and reckless attitudes onboard, I fully understand how some people become gallery shy.
The problem is how do you 'teach" a few isolated adults some basic rules of commenting so that people stay awsay from person insults and instead offer some constructive criticism.
antiquark
11-23-2007, 10:57
There's a difference between self-censorship and being polite!
There's a difference between self-censorship and being polite!
Yes, there should be.
It takes a thick skin to ignore isolated insults and continue active contributions to the gallery or certain image rich threads.
Ruben, this is a true story.
Many years ago, at school, I was very good at history and greatly encouraged by a wonderful teacher, Mr Taylor. Later Mr Taylor was replaced by Mrs Boss, another fine teacher, with a totally different approach, based on constant criticism. Her comments made me change my style, probably to my considerable advantage.
A decade later I remembered this experience when I was teaching at university. I had a student with a terrific appetite for work and enormous potential, but whose work was undermined by her approach. I praised her, but pointed out these problems as gently as I could. I was sure this would be an enormous help, but instead I will never forget her face as I spoke - her pain and sense of betrayal were agonising.
She never recovered her confidence and I have never ceased to regret that I did not pursue a different approach - one based on her needs, not my preconceptions. No one on this forum is an idiot. Everyone has instant access to the masterworks of photography. No one can be ignorant of the defects in their own pictures. Advice is one thing, but let's tear our own pictures apart before we start pointing at others, because the one thing that really does "betray ourselves and castrate our artistic potential" is the smug assumption that we know best.
Cheers, Ian
Well said, Ian.
I recall falling into the trap of being "too smart" in critiqueing someone's photo in a critique session, and she/he was very clear in expressing her/his dismay about my crtiqueing approach. Basically, I said that "I don't like it" or something similar to this phrase. I really did not like the image, but it was the wrong thing to say. I should have taken a different route to express my view. [sorry Ms. X/Mr. X]
I learned a lesson. This is what life is about. We learn and make use of the new knowledge [hopefully].
I think it depends on your POV. If you're talking personal photography, which I think you are Ruben, then you should always shoot to please yourself first and foremost. Applause and positive commenting, while a nice thing can also be misleading, and lead you astray from shooting to please yourself (for yourself). If we trust the applause of the general mass that show up on places like Flickr, and we let that aesthetic steer us, we would all end up making the same photograph.
Critiquing is a whole other issue. Regarding Gabriel's statement about buddy-system critiquing, I think this is really what you want to establish. You want a group of individuals who are willing to look at your work and comment honestly, very much like a classroom or photo-group setting. These should be people you "know" and whose opinion and aesthetic you know. I value the critique and comments of many of the photographers on RFF, because I see their work, know their work and know where they are coming from.
Probably some of the worst buddy-system critiquing can be found on Flickr, where commenting becomes almost a competition. It can be downright ridiculous to see how some photographers can accrue almost 100 comments before the photo is a day old.
Perhaps the approach or mentality when posting photos should be "this is what I'm doing right now. this is where I'm at photographically/artistically," instead of "here's a photo do you like it?"
.
The view count is a pretty good indicator of public acceptance of your work.
Of course, a photo of a naked woman will rack up thousands of views, no matter what the quality.
With the rise of the internet, we have tens of millions of daily self-published images, blogs, writing, etc etc.
Most of it is increasingly illiterate and incompetent.
What the internet sorely lacks is a strong cadre of editors. I'm not so sure that the ability of the hoi-polloi to freely express and publish itself is a good thing.
so true
so true
so true
so true
so true
foto_fool
11-23-2007, 11:22
I doubt that self-censorship is really our worst enemy, but I am sure that self-criticism is our best friend. No-one could critique my work more harshly than I do, and the same must be true of any serious photographer. A positive comment is not simply a gift an.d reassurance - it is a message to ourselves, because what we admire in the work of others is that which is lacking in our own. Thus such encouragement is genuinely useful to all concerned.
RFF reminds me of classical Athens - a few people of exceptional merit rise to prominence, but everyone is ultimately equal. Indeed, as in ancient Greece, those who aspire to tyranise the polis end up ruling a kingdom of one. We have no teachers, prophets or oracles. We are all learners, and from my experience in education I would argue that fraternal praise tempered by modesty and self-knowledge does more good than all the critiques on earth.
Cheers, Ian.
Extraordinarily well said, Ian!
When I started lurking on RFF it was for technical information. Then I went out and practiced, practiced, practiced. And I continue to practice. When I post a photo it is to say "here is what I can do with this lens/film/subject today." You can be sure that what you see was what I intended - even if you don't see it the way I did. The focus (or lack thereof), composition/cropping, contrast (or lack thereof), even that annoying flare from the light source - all were deliberate. My choices, whether you agree with them or not. I am capable of reasonably informed criticism of others' work, but it is only meaningful in the context of my own development. To share this criticism would serve no purpose for the person whose work is being criticized - at best it would be "sound and fury, signifying nothing"; at worst it might be self-aggrandizement.
I contribute to the forum simply to share my journey with others making a similar trip. Many here are ahead of me, and I will never catch up, but the occasional "attaboy" is welcome.
- John
gyuribacsi
11-23-2007, 11:26
Hi Ruben,
thank you for this thread! I apologize in advance for my very poor english language.
Self-criticism and self-censorship at my personal (foto-) work is the reason why you can`t find a single shot from me in the gallery.
There are some fotos I am proud to have shot them. The issue is that they are telling little stories. How can you crit one of them without any knowledge about the background. But I can not write an article to each of them.
As sitemistic mentioned above, some are taken under very very poor light conditions, they have motion blur or flare from frontlights. So technically these pics are bad, but together with the whole story they are really good. But you don`t know the story.
My way to get critiques is to ask a very honest friend, a former newspaper fotog about his opinions. If he don`t say "that`s crap" in his very harsh way, I know the picture is good.
I agree with the most of your points, but it is really hard to crit someones fotos without any information about his intents.
Cheers
George
Ruben,
There is a difference between saying: "This photo is a piece of crap. Why embarass yourself here." and between offering an honest crititique that is not positive in nature. I would accept the second but not the first approach.
example from the gallery: "absolutely insignificant image of a familiar moment of autor, no composition, no care." This commenter then went on, adding an attack on the gallery as a whole by stating that only friends are cheerleading. It ended with "It is much sad and depressing".
This was not withing a critique session of a posted image.
All I could comment on this comment was "get a life".
The above illustrates a personal attack for no reason at all. The commenter could have stuck to critiquing the image and not start an attack at the way gallery photos are being commented on and then end it with "depressing". When we have a few RFF members with such insensitive and reckless attitudes onboard, I fully understand how some people become gallery shy.
The problem is how do you 'teach" a few isolated adults some basic rules of commenting so that people stay awsay from person insults and instead offer some constructive criticism.
Hi RAID,
I truly thank you for the great example you provided. Such kind of offense is not only a personal one on you, but through you an offense and attack towards RFF as a whole.
Any attack at RFF taking abuse of our freedom of speech is to be pinpointed publicly enabling us all to deliver our strongest "get a life", this time in a chorus.
Kindly follow the next:
Hi JOCKO,
I can understand YOU, after having such a bad experience. I too, after a road accident stopped driving at all.
But I have here to distinguish between my unfortunate experience at the road, and the question of weather am I going to forbid my children to drive. As you understand I will do my best for making them the best possible drivers. Simultaneously I reserve for myself my own right to respect my own feelings and not drive anymore.
If you follow on this thread some commentaries made about my mentioned picture - this is exactly what I am talking about we all need more of.
Instead of that, we seem to sleep and are indifferent when we see an image of other member we feel it doesn't merit our "hurrah". We are sleeping and sleeping. We just awake at the stadium when we hear the "hurrah" of the crowd.
There is no need to remind we all MUST be polite. Furthermore, I have sent here and there, some PMs to other members explaining them whay their words my be hurting. This mutual help should be overtaken by all of us, before moderators find the need to intervene.
So what do we want ? do we want RFF to be a warm bed to sleep after work ?
Or do we want RFF to be an unprecedent tool of open heart speech, learning, discussion, mutual help and respect, and progress ?
Cheers,
Ruben
You always express, succinctly, the essence, J.
I dared to post an image to one of Ray PA's (excellent) critique threads several months ago, and was devastated by one persons reaction in particular. I won't deign again. Ever.
I am my own worst critic at the best of times - sharing one picture out of every fifty I carefully scan - and negativity cripples my confidence and my creativity.
example from the gallery: "absolutely insignificant image of a familiar moment of autor, no composition, no care." This commenter then went on, adding an attack on the gallery as a whole by stating that only friends are cheerleading. It ended with "It is much sad and depressing".
This was not withing a critique session of a posted image.
All I could comment on this comment was "get a life".
The above illustrates a personal attack for no reason at all. The commenter could have stuck to critiquing the image and not start an attack at the way gallery photos are being commented on and then end it with "depressing". When we have a few RFF members with such insensitive and reckless attitudes onboard, I fully understand how some people become gallery shy.
i wouldn't take such an attack personally. his frustration was clearly directed at the gallery commenting culture at large, which is saturated with vapid, tranquilizing praise. rude attacks like that are the other side of the same coin. my guess is that if he saw a photo he liked, he wouldn't be able to say anything intelligent about it either.
i agree with the idea that we should be able to indicate what kind of photographer we are and what kind of comments we'd like on a certain photo. it's not just a matter of skill level, but also ambition.
it's not just a matter of skill level, but also ambition.
It is also, more than anything else, a matter of vision, and who are we - REALLY - to criticise the way another perceives his world?
we're all people?
first and foremost, good criticism is based on good understanding. who doesn't want to be understood?
back alley
11-23-2007, 11:56
lots of soul searching, good discusson.
one idea...set up a flickr group with a limited number of people. set all uploads for friends and only allow your small group of trusted folks to see the pics and make comments. there would be some control of at least 'who' that way. there could be as many small groups established as there are folks who would like to join.
just a thought.
i've said before that i do not feel qualified to comment but i still try to add a 'nice shot' when i can. i too am not comfortable to suggest how to change a photo for 'my' liking.
i do think that criticism needs to be asked for and not just assumed that because a photo is posted that the poster wants to hear what i think.
it's complicated, so many photos, so many words, so many disagreeable people and too sensitive people.
joe
photogdave
11-23-2007, 12:03
The problem is not at the picture posting level, but in us upon seeing the images and writing or not our comentaries. We avoid "trouble", we hide our feelings, we join the crowd chorus. We don't dare to express our feelings out of a false fear to hurt, and by the end account we betray ourselves and castrate our artistic potential. Not each of us is going to be an artist, but all of us can create.
Perhaps we need to learn how to be able to pin point both sides of what we see in a single pic. But how could we possible learn it if we are afraid of our own shadows ?
Yes, we have had some heavy tonged folks, but most of us are experienced and civilized members, able to orientate ourselves, but just afraid. My good fellows, this is called conservatism, aging, permature death before the physical one.
Self censorship is the worst censorship of all.
And let me be unambiguous. I am not mooving anywhere else. I trust you and myself that sooner or later we will be clever about the issues here exposed, me included.
Cheers,
Ruben
I agree that sometimes we may be wary of posting a genuine criticism for fear of insulting the photographer. Hence my comment about willingness to accept criticism.
To go even further I have to admit that I self-censor almost every post I make on RFF for fear that a moderator or the owner will misinterpret what I have written and accuse me of trolling. Despite my best intentions this has already happened.
......negativity cripples my confidence and my creativity.
Hi LYNN,
You are the charming lady that helped my good fellow Ian at his hour of great distress. We had not the chance to meet our thinking at other threads, being this our first time.
I cannot but remind that in my first opening post, I proposed to give the posting picture members the option of not getting negative criticism.
As a matter of fact a few times in my photographic history, I got terrible blows, hurting me a lot. With the pass of time, I understood that those bitter "criticisms" had nothing to do with my images, no matter how bad they were, but with the poor state of mind of the speakers.
A critique is not to be confused with the inquisition. It should be performed with tact and love for photography. It should start by pinpointing the strong sides of the image and standing on the positive grounds of the photographer making that image, to continue by showing how his/her intentions could have been enhanced if....
You seem to be a very sensible person. I would like a person like you to comment on my images. You can add elements that probably other folks cannot. What are you going to with this ?\
Such is our world, our life, the only one we can live. Are we going to live or to hide and say thanks we still breath ?
Cheers,
Ruben
There have been some good comments on this subject, and Ruben I too thank you for this thread. I feel that the gallery is a place to share what we are doing. Most of us are hobbiest, not professional. Eventhough I have seen some work by several hobbiest that could be professional if they chose to. I think most of us know what a good photograph should look like, and if your pretty new to RF photography like me you have quite a long way to go. But I do strive to get there, and I think I can do that by reading & contuining to look at others positive work here at RFF. One thing I have learned around here is you have to be careful what you say to others. You can say something to some one and upset them pretty easy. You read their post and think you know someone & make a jokinkly comment and your into trouble. Like Raid stated there are some that don't need to comment at all. I have commented on ocasion on a photo I liked, but I'm not qualified to give a positive negative type of critique of ones photograph.(unless you use daylight film indoors and your photos look like mud) Yuck:D Besides on a lighter note I am my own worse critique. I think all my photos suck! and sometimes I even wonder why I posted them at all. And on that, i'm not joking.
Happy shooting
gb
.......
i've said before that i do not feel qualified to comment but i still try to add a 'nice shot' when i can. i too am not comfortable to suggest how to change a photo for 'my' liking. ..........
joe
Hi JOE,
I don't know your habits, your working schedules, your other obligations, etc.
But if I did, I would propose you that every morning before starting work, pick random images and write a commentary from your heart.
You see, an photograph is a complex conglomerate of many things, including technique, aesthetics and emotions. Who knows, perhaps by writing from your heart you may be addressing the most important of all.
Cheers,
Ruben
It is also, more than anything else, a matter of vision, and who are we - REALLY - to criticise the way another perceives his world?
Hmmm... No!
The way you are talking, everybody is a Picasso but the world is too stupid to realize it. ;)
Execution, talent and vision must work together. Aesthetics, the elements and composition must dance together.
Recall the fine words of Socrates:
I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think.
It's morally indefensible to try and bind minds with sterile photographic dogma by "correcting" them.
It is a generous gift to encourage them work out what great pictures are for themselves and them help them find their way to making them.
...........Besides on a lighter note I am my own worse critique. I think all my photos suck! and sometimes I even wonder why I posted them at all. And on that, i'm not joking....
gb
I may be wrong, but if I am not missing your angle, you post because you want to live your life the best you can and have the courage to go forwards. It is not about reaching an absolute goal, but about fighting your way.
Or in the words of a great modern Spanish poet, "Caminante, no hay camino. Se hace camino al andar". Perhaps Gabriel can translate this.
Cheers,
Ruben
Hmmm... No!
The way you are talking, everybody is a Picasso but the world is too stupid to realize it. ;)
Execution, talent and vision must work together. Aesthetics, the elements and composition must dance together.
My point is: these are all a matter of personal insight.
Are we talking knuckle-rapping for breaking rules? My aesthetics are my aesthetics, and I compose my images the way I experience them. My pictures will please some, and - apparantly - depress others. I am delighted by appreciation, and grateful for technical suggestions should they be necessary, but in the end it's still about my perception, and my conviction that I have translated my vision to the best of my ability.
If I'm my own choreographer - and I AM, thank heavens - who's to say I danced wrong?
My point is: these are all a matter of personal insight.
Are we talking knuckle-rapping for breaking rules? My aesthetics are my aesthetics, and I compose my images the way I experience them. My pictures will please some, and - apparantly - depress others. I am delighted by appreciation, and grateful for technical suggestions should they be necessary, but in the end it's still about my perception, and my conviction that I have translated my vision to the best of my ability.
YOUR photography making YOU feel good doesn't necessarily mean it's good.
If I'm my own choreographer - and I AM, thank heavens - who's to say I danced wrong?[/
If you're alone in your room, then nobody. Like playing air guitar in front of a mirror. Way cool when you're alone.
However, Classic Ballet is defined as such because of its strict rules. Same for Tango. Now if a Clown comes in jumping and kicking in the air, making turns and farts all over the place, can we agree it's not ballet, or will you still think it's Ballet with a personal twist?
photogdave
11-23-2007, 13:12
My point is: these are all a matter of personal insight.
Are we talking knuckle-rapping for breaking rules? My aesthetics are my aesthetics, and I compose my images the way I experience them. My pictures will please some, and - apparantly - depress others. I am delighted by appreciation, and grateful for technical suggestions should they be necessary, but in the end it's still about my perception, and my conviction that I have translated my vision to the best of my ability.
If I'm my own choreographer - and I AM, thank heavens - who's to say I danced wrong?
You have some nice photos in your gallery Lynn!
RFF reminds me of classical Athens - a few people of exceptional merit rise to prominence, but everyone is ultimately equal. Indeed, as in ancient Greece, those who aspire to tyranise the polis end up ruling a kingdom of one. We have no teachers, prophets or oracles. We are all learners, and from my experience in education I would argue that fraternal praise tempered by modesty and self-knowledge does more good than all the critiques on earth.
Recall the fine words of Socrates:I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think.
I contribute to the forum simply to share my journey with others making a similar trip. Many here are ahead of me, and I will never catch up, but the occasional "attaboy" is welcome.
This could have been said by Dante.
Plato, Socrates, Dante? Philosophical forum? What does happen to RFF?
I like this place more and more day after day :)
My point is: these are all a matter of personal insight.
Are we talking knuckle-rapping for breaking rules? My aesthetics are my aesthetics, and I compose my images the way I experience them. My pictures will please some, and - apparantly - depress others. I am delighted by appreciation, and grateful for technical suggestions should they be necessary, but in the end it's still about my perception, and my conviction that I have translated my vision to the best of my ability.
If I'm my own choreographer - and I AM, thank heavens - who's to say I danced wrong?
Hi Lynn,
Kindly excuss me for entering in between, but after this above quoted post, if I wrote that I would like that a person like you comment my images, now I want it even more.
It seems that behind the once "devastated" Lynn, there is a tiger, or rather a self confident one quite able to stand on her ground and defend them when necessary.
Besides, your "I am what I am" concerning images, goes along mine.
Cheers,
Ruben
PS
Now, you can ask, if "I am what I am", why do I want to get critique ? Because if I dare to expose myself I may achieve to be "what I am" even better.
foto_fool
11-23-2007, 13:20
Ned - Whose vision? Whose aesthetic?
- John
relativism can easily turn to close-mindedness if the participants don't accept their different subjectivities. don't forget, things can be right and wrong at the same time.
Hmmm... No!
The way you are talking, everybody is a Picasso but the world is too stupid to realize it. ;)
Execution, talent and vision must work together. Aesthetics, the elements and composition must dance together.
But when a Picasso does come along, the world - by which we mean those "qualified" to judge - usually is too stupid.
As far as I can recall, every significant movement in art and thought has begun by challenging the accepted standards of aesthetics, taste, decency, composition et al. Flatulent clowns are pretty much what the know-all critics saw in "The Rites of Spring". But the last laugh goes to the Stravinskys.
Cheers, Ian
Ruben, this is a true story.
Many years ago, at school, I was very good at history and greatly encouraged by a wonderful teacher, Mr Taylor. Later Mr Taylor was replaced by Mrs Boss, another fine teacher, with a totally different approach, based on constant criticism. Her comments made me change my style, probably to my considerable advantage.
A decade later I remembered this experience when I was teaching at university. I had a student with a terrific appetite for work and enormous potential, but whose work was undermined by her approach. I praised her, but pointed out these problems as gently as I could. I was sure this would be an enormous help, but instead I will never forget her face as I spoke - her pain and sense of betrayal were agonising.
She never recovered her confidence and I have never ceased to regret that I did not pursue a different approach - one based on her needs, not my preconceptions. No one on this forum is an idiot. Everyone has instant access to the masterworks of photography. No one can be ignorant of the defects in their own pictures. Advice is one thing, but let's tear our own pictures apart before we start pointing at others, because the one thing that really does "betray ourselves and castrate our artistic potential" is the smug assumption that we know best.
Cheers, Ian
Same story here, but with a worse end: two of my students stopped their studies and left the university last year ... I deeply regret my approach to say the least; although this approach worked for 99% of my students, the 1% left is too much.
Ned - Whose vision? Whose aesthetic?
- John
Seasoned and experienced photographers and editors. The same that choose who is and who is NOT a, let's say, Magnum photographer.
I undersdtand this is only a converssation but photography rules do exist and not everybody sees and use them effectively (the rules include breaking the ruls in an aesthetic way).
YOUR photography making YOU feel good doesn't necessarily mean it's good.
Then who DOES deem it GOOD? And should I care if they do?
I think not. :)
ClaremontPhoto
11-23-2007, 13:39
We all have to make the images we do for the reasons we do it.
I like to hear your opinion, although I may not change my style.
Van Gogh was not successful in his own time.
(Off topic: I once almost bought a house where Van Gogh had lived, but preferred another nearby where Karl Marx had lived. Blue English Heritage plaque on the wall at both places.)
I'm planning tomorrow's Saturday Shoot Out and the photos may be great, or may be awful, but they're my photos. They'll be here on Monday and you may like them, or may not.
.... when a Picasso does come along, the world - by which we mean those "qualified" to judge - usually is too stupid.
As far as I can recall, every significant movement in art and thought has begun by challenging the accepted standards of aesthetics, taste, decency, composition et al. ..........
Cheers, Ian
These words merit to be encrypted in stone.
Fortunately here at RFF we are all equals, and grown, and we should not underestimated the capabilities of each one of us to give critique its propper proportions. "Does this help me ? Fine, let's try. Is this just negative injuring ? Fine, get a life", as Raid said.
Cheers,
Ruben
Hmmm Jocko, you are recovering quite fast. Are you dancing already ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NB23
Hmmm... No!
The way you are talking, everybody is a Picasso but the world is too stupid to realize it.
Execution, talent and vision must work together. Aesthetics, the elements and composition must dance together.
Lynn:
My point is: these are all a matter of personal insight.
Are we talking knuckle-rapping for breaking rules? My aesthetics are my aesthetics, and I compose my images the way I experience them. My pictures will please some, and - apparantly - depress others. I am delighted by appreciation, and grateful for technical suggestions should they be necessary, but in the end it's still about my perception, and my conviction that I have translated my vision to the best of my ability.
If I'm my own choreographer - and I AM, thank heavens - who's to say I danced wrong?
and:
Quote:
Originally Posted by NB23
Hmmm... No!
The way you are talking, everybody is a Picasso but the world is too stupid to realize it.
Execution, talent and vision must work together. Aesthetics, the elements and composition must dance together.
Ian:
But when a Picasso does come along, the world - by which we mean those "qualified" to judge - usually is too stupid.
As far as I can recall, every significant movement in art and thought has begun by challenging the accepted standards of aesthetics, taste, decency, composition et al. Flatulent clowns are pretty much what the know-all critics saw in "The Rites of Spring". But the last laugh goes to the Stravinskys.
Cheers, Ian
I'm totally with Lynn and Ian here! Most of us have the luxury of being amateurs and doing photography to please ourselves. This is what art is about. Then there is the commercial side of photography where one has to please paying clients. This is not so lofty an endeavour!
Not everyone is a Picasso, but then Picasso and all the great artists didn't become who they became by following the rules imposed by the mediocre masses! Most of us have little hope of becoming a Picasso, but if all we do with our photography is try and please others, then there is no hope of doing so. We must be ourselves and find our own path, where ever that path leads.
You can teach a student the technical aspects of photography, but if you try to teach someone (your) asthetics, the best a student can become is an imitator of his teacher.
foto_fool
11-23-2007, 14:11
Seasoned and experienced photographers and editors. The same that choose who is and who is NOT a, let's say, Magnum photographer.
Marketability is not the same thing as aesthetics. If I was trying to sell my photos to the editors of Magnum then I would learn to make images to appeal to their sensibilities. Of course, I don't actually posses the talent to do so :o.
I undersdtand this is only a converssation but photography rules do exist and not everybody sees and use them effectively (the rules include breaking the ruls in an aesthetic way).
Agreed, not everyone is equally skilful or talented. And that there are some very basic principles of design and composition that one risks the ridicule of one's peers and betters by violating.
And that gets to the heart of Reuben's original post. Who are our "peers and betters" here? Are they self-identified? Are they invited? I can't decide what I find more astounding about Reuben's original story: that his 16 year old is such an accomplished critic, or that his 16 year old will talk to him about his photos at all.
Unless explicitly asked to provide criticism I believe we should all self-censor.
- John
pesphoto
11-23-2007, 14:16
During the day time hours I have a job where I need to please art directors and such. And I feel I do my job well. When Im on my own time I shoot what I please, print what I please and I dont ask for anyone's opinions. If I shoot something I like I print it and either hang it on my wall or it goes in one of my many many boxes of old prints. If someone happens to want to comment on my work I enjoy that but I dont need it to enjoy doing my personal work.
Hmmm Jocko, you are recovering quite fast. Are you dancing already ?
Alas dear Ruben, my tutu hangs limply on the peg :( There will be no Nutcracker this year :(
But.... I totally agree that "you can ask, if "I am what I am", why do I want to get critique ? Because if I dare to expose myself I may achieve to be "what I am" even better".
Now assuming that a bad photograph is one which fails to reflect the intentions of the photographer - the expression of his or her self - I suggest a self-criticism thread, in which each of us takes one of our best and most popular pictures and explains why it is an abject failure. That will expose our hearts and help define what we aspire too. I would happily start this process - but not tonight - it's getting late! :)
Cheers, Ian
....
Unless explicitly asked to provide criticism I believe we should all self-censor.
- John
Hi John,
What I am trying to convince ourselves is not a new "golden rule" to be imposed.
I am calling us to change our own attitude, by our own will, towards photo commentaries we post, and mainly about commentaries we don't post, not because the photographer asked not to post, but because of our own self censorship attitude.
We are afraid to be unpolite, we are afraid to hurt, we are afraid of retaliation, WE ARE AFRAID. Too much fear, too much irrationality, too much rationalization of our fear, too much hidding below our beds. This is not the life we deserve.
We deserve to strive towards opening our hearts and be able to sense our brother RFF members needs. We deserve to get a big influx of ideas and emotions in exchange. We deserve to be free from our fears, imprisoning our minds and creativity. We deserve to go forwards.
Cheers,
Ruben
...........Now assuming that a bad photograph is one which fails to reflect the intentions of the photographer - the expression of his or her self - I suggest a self-criticism thread, in which each of us takes one of our best and most popular pictures and explains why it is an abject failure. That will expose our hearts and help define what we aspire too. I would happily start this process - but not tonight - it's getting late! :)
Cheers, Ian
This can be part of the process or a good start. Are you ready to hear detailed explanations about why a picture you consider a failure is in other's opinions a great one ?
Are you ready to confront the possibility that little Ian has a great potential ?
It is not as rosy as it sounds, as there are some implications involved, and for sure some shake.
Cheers,
Ruben
PS
Now let's see if you go to bed.
nikonhswebmaster
11-23-2007, 14:42
I was visiting an artist's studio yesterday. I know her through friends, but like everyone on the RFF she was a stranger, to me, certainly as far as her work went.
I admired a particular painting out loud, she asked me specifically what it was I liked about it. I told her, she compared that statement to other paintings in the studio, giving me her take on why it was slightly different and the process that had taken her this slight change.
I would never have ventured in the first place to have said anything negative to her, after all I did not know her work.
Amateurs always seem to want criticism, rules, juries, prizes -- it is so bizarre, like most artists "just show me your money," or leave me alone to get back to work.
Tell me where to buy equipment, how to work it, how to repair it, which galleries are accepting new photographers, who is offering grants, how to apply for a residency, where to rent cheap studio space. And yes we can make fun of the artists we don't like over dinner or coffee. Studio visits are not about making each other feel bad... you can take that to the art bank.
.
While we are all still learning, people are at different stages. Beginners seek more external validation, while those well on the way are their own best critics. Camera clubs are great for learning photography, but can then quickly become stifling. After learning the "rules", creativity comes from manipulating, bending, and braking them.
Like in that old martial arts TV show: Kung Fu, when the student is finally capable of snatching the pebble from the master's hand, the master says, "It is time for you to go, grasshopper." After a certain point, the best teacher is simply experience and following your own heart.
antiquark
11-23-2007, 14:49
We are afraid to be unpolite, we are afraid to hurt, we are afraid of retaliation, WE ARE AFRAID. Too much fear, too much irrationality, too much rationalization of our fear, too much hidding below our beds. This is not the life we deserve.
They're only photographs, and not really important in the grand scheme of things.
nikonhswebmaster
11-23-2007, 14:50
Well said frank, it is just a way to pass the time till the end of days.
Fred,
You are an anarchist.
I am not, and still feel a great symphaty towards you.
Cheers,
Ruben
They're only photographs, and not really important in the grand scheme of things.
Derek,
Perhaps it is because of the late hour here, perhaps not. But I don't start to begin understanding what you say. Kindly help me.
Cheers,
Ruben
antiquark
11-23-2007, 15:07
Perhaps it is because of the late hour here, perhaps not. But I don't start to begin understanding what you say. Kindly help me.
Well, yes I'm afraid of insulting someone based on a picture they took. It seems to be too minor of an issue to take the risk that my criticism will be interpreted as an insult.
On the other hand, if I'm confronted with an issue that is important to society, then it's worth it to insult people to get my point across. To make an example up, if someone from the KKK started posting here, I wouldn't be afraid of letting them know my opinion.
foto_fool
11-23-2007, 15:12
Ruben - You describe an existential angst that I do not share. I am polite not out of fear but because I choose to be polite. I don't criticise because I am not an expert. However, I am qualified to say "I like/don't like this picture because..." And here is where I will register a fear: "better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt" - no?
In real life I grow grapes, make and sell wine. I am enough of an expert to be paid - and very well-paid, thank you - to stick my nose in another winemaker's glass and say something like "sulfide problem, volatile acidity too high, you are buying cheap grapes and expecting to make a First Growth, and your barrel care regime is a total failure - here's how to fix it". If I am not being paid, I smile and say nothing more then "nice job" when someone sticks a glass under my nose.
When Famous Wine Writer X reviews my wine it matters. When Joe Blow Self-Styled Wine Expert comes through my door and renders an opinion, it does not - except to the extent that I make a sale or not. Like Fred says.
- John
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 15:12
I'm absolutely sure that if I completely and freely expressed my thoughts/critiques pertaining to the images and posts of many people here, it would not be well received.
If I didn't censor myself, I would offer high praise for some, and ridicule for many. Many are self-delusional about their abilities, some are true maestros.
Unchecked expression of my thoughts would QUICKLY lead to my getting banned. It has happened to others here who spoke what was on their minds.
Often the truth is interpreted as "trolling" by lesser minds and petty martinets.
They're only photographs, and not really important in the grand scheme of things.
Sorry can’t agree, photography has been at the heart of communication for the last 70 years, it is clearly important.
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 15:25
What IS the grand scheme of things?
Answer that first and then I'll tell you what's important or not.
foto_fool
11-23-2007, 15:27
Often the truth is interpreted as "trolling" by lesser minds and petty martinets.
Depends on who's doing the truth telling, how they express themselves, whether one man's truth is truth for all, and whether the regime in power can tolerate that truth. Plenty of places in this world where speaking the "truth" will get you a bullet in the head.
...photography has been at the heart of communication for the last 70 years, it is clearly important.
Stewart - there's a crucial difference between my photographs and photography :D.
- John
i wouldn't take such an attack personally. his frustration was clearly directed at the gallery commenting culture at large, which is saturated with vapid, tranquilizing praise. rude attacks like that are the other side of the same coin. my guess is that if he saw a photo he liked, he wouldn't be able to say anything intelligent about it either.
i agree with the idea that we should be able to indicate what kind of photographer we are and what kind of comments we'd like on a certain photo. it's not just a matter of skill level, but also ambition.
I am willing to accept negative criticism when I post images to be critiqued. On the other hand, I view the RFF Gallery a place to load up some of my images. Period.
The quote “publish and be dammed” springs to mind, if you are an artist should you not have the confidence to present your work and accept the consequence?
IN DEFENSE OF NED (NB23)
Some things Ned has said are not along my best understanding. Nevertheless there is a point where I find that although he didn't said it, he implayed it, and seems to me to be right.
There is a kind of myth running among us that a non-pro like most of us enjoy the biggest freedom of creativity, while a pro selling his work is a kind of mercenary or slave of his master voice.
From the factual point of view this is as wrong as from the analitical one. Magazines and other bodies employing artists pay for their art. Art, as seem by them, is worth of money paying. In the long run you cannot create art under commisioning or by assignment.
But your art may be the one a Vogue or National Geographic is looking for and here the meeting point.
In other orders of life, your art may be the one the public is looking for in a kind of uncouncious state of mind, and when given the opportunity you become a great or small success.
Ned seems to be a young man with a whole life ahead. He is defending his prospective position in the food chain. Just that.
In between I would like to say that although I never had the opportunity of personally acquinting myself with them, there seems to be another cathegory of artists, whose art is built in from birth and after being acknowledged they don't need to effort themselves anymore. The ones in this group skilled with a commercial sense, are to me the most repelent beings. The magazine pays for their name, more than for their work.
In contrast to Ned many of us are middle aged or beyond. Some of us are retired, some of us still have to fill a job to substain our families and ourselves. We are in a different position at the artistic food chain. Our advantage over Ned is in our life experience, and the blows we have got along the way. Yassir Arafat said once, "each blow that doesn't kill me - makes me stronger".
What Ned cannot know even if he tryies to, is the tremendous value for us of being able to create something pleasing ourselves. We are not running for Presidency anymore. We look around our non-creative acquintances and we feel extremely lucky.
Therefore we should take Ned's words in their relative weight, and this includes the possibility he may find his way to Magnum or elsewhere, and instead of getting offended perhaps we can help him by the same way we help ourselves - enhancing and strengthening RFF.
Cheers,
Ruben
Well, yes I'm afraid of ......
No words.
Cheers,
Ruben
I am willing to accept negative criticism when I post images to be critiqued. On the other hand, I view the RFF Gallery a place to load up some of my images. Period.
Yes!
How about a dedicated critique gallery where those looking for critique can get it? Or perhaps a comment with an uploaded image stating, "critiques invited"?
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 15:34
A bullet in the head in some places or getting "banned" from a forum for daring to voice heresy according to the moderators.
Most forums on the internet expect behavior and speech within strict parameters of the existing group-think.
Letting anyone speak their mind or expressing true criticism would be suicide.
Suppose someone posted a picture of their wife or girlfriend and labelled it: "My Lovely Model"
If someone then said: "My god, that is an awfully exposed, out of focus photo of an ugly, obese broad. It has no sense of composition, and it's almost laughable that you would delude yourself into thinking she looked anything like a model"
How would that "free speech" go over?
edit
Stewart - there's a crucial difference between my photographs and photography :D.
- John
Then, John, you are an artist?
Yes!
How about a dedicated critique gallery where those looking for critique can get it? Or perhaps a comment with an uploaded image stating, "critiques invited"?
Frank,
Some people have been loading up sets of images to be critiqued within the critique Forum. The feedback is not very strong there. Maybe it needs to be revitalized.
The other issue is; can we say "I like the image" and "I do not like the image' or must we limit comments to "well done' and "WOW" and maybe "I see promise". We all like to see praises, but what if someone perceives our images are low quality photographs?
Last week, I received a negative feedback, but others cheered me up. Hurray! Was I looking for cheerleading to be satisfied? Not really, but it did "worry me". I really was happy with my results until I was told that the results lacked somehow. Now, I am happy again.
I like to post an entire roll [after correcting for obvious errors] to document a series of photos. If I did not like the results, I would not have uploaded them for others to look at.
Can we say: : "If you crop from the left the tree branch ...." or maybe say: "I would have maybe taken this image vertically ..."? Are we "insulting" the photographer?
This vagueness makes several people stay away from getting into any critique activities for the sake of avoiding any perceptions of insults or degradation of art or personal vindetta or .....
I somehow doubt it that any new rules will somehow change people around.
A bullet in the head in some places or getting "banned" from a forum for daring to voice heresy according to the moderators.
Most forums on the internet expect behavior and speech within strict parameters of the existing group-think.
Letting anyone speak their mind or expressing true criticism would be suicide.
Suppose someone posted a picture of their wife or girlfriend and labelled it: "My Lovely Model"
If someone then said: "My god, that is an awfully exposed, out of focus photo of an ugly, obese broad. It has no sense of composition, and it's almost laughable that you would delude yourself into thinking she looked anything like a model"
How would that "free speech" go over?
Criticism is not about any of that, it is a device whereby the artist may understand his audience
Sorry about the bold type but I feel it is an important point
.....
Letting anyone speak their mind or expressing true criticism would be suicide.
Suppose someone posted a picture of their wife or girlfriend and labelled it: "My Lovely Model"
If someone then said: "My god, that is an awfully exposed, out of focus photo of an ugly, obese broad. It has no sense of composition, and it's almost laughable that you would delude yourself into thinking she looked anything like a model"
How would that "free speech" go over?
In theory you may be right. Theory is just theory.
In fact, this week Ferider has posted some pics of his wife and daughter, one of them quite spectacular.
Secondly, at my opening post, and along the whole thread we are not talking about moderation at all. No one is questioning it. In fact, the day we change our minds towards less self-censorship, if at all, obviously we will need to protect the forum with stronger moderation (moderator's vigilance).
At the basis of religious thinking, man is bad by nature. To me, the gains of free expression are far beyond the losses of abuse of free expression, which can be controlled by moderators' vigilance.
Cheers,
Ruben
Now Roland, kindly don't tell they are not your wife and daughter.
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 16:13
I'm not talking about anyone's actual photos, just a hypothetical.
What if unbridled criticism was construed as cruelty? Is there a limit?
Maybe not saying anything is better.
If you're advocating stronger censorship and moderation, where is the freedom or benefit of more expression?
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 16:23
OK, well, suppose that's exactly what the audience thinks. If YOU think a photo is lovely but nobody else does, is it still lovely?
If you're a judge on Major Bowes Amateur Hour or American Idol, and you laugh someone off the stage who can't sing, is the "singer" still good because he thinks he is?
Are there any universal standards, or is every incompetent worthy of merit because he's "true unto himself"?
Ruben, Yassir Arafat??? That's a much older quote. Maybe a thousand years old or more. He's certainly not my hero.
Criticism is not about any of that, it is a device whereby the artist may understand his audience
Sorry about the bold type but I feel it is an important point
I'm not talking about anyone's actual photos, just a hypothetical.
What if unbridled criticism was construed as cruelty? Is there a limit?
Maybe not saying anything is better.
If you're advocating stronger censorship and moderation, where is the freedom or benefit of more expression?
It is the artist’s choice to exhibit
no?
antiquark
11-23-2007, 16:28
What IS the grand scheme of things?
Answer that first and then I'll tell you what's important or not.
I was thinking about things like:
- does God exist?
- are wars a good way to solve problems?
- is homosexuality evil?
- etc.
Now, on those issues, I am NOT AFRAID to voice an opinion! (and my answer to all the above is "no").
OK, well, suppose that's exactly what the audience thinks. If YOU think a photo is lovely but nobody else does, is it still lovely?
If you're a judge on Major Bowes Amateur Hour or American Idol, and you laugh someone off the stage who can't sing, is the "singer" still good because he thinks he is?
Are there any universal standards, or is every incompetent worthy of merit because he's "true unto himself"?
Ruben, Yassir Arafat??? That's a much older quote. Maybe a thousand years old or more. He's certainly not my hero.
I do not think there are universal standards, why should there be we are all individuals and each has an opinion
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 16:31
Absolutely, it's the artist's choice to exhibit.
Once he does so, he should not be offended at anything the audience expresses about his "art".
It is the artist’s choice to exhibit
no?
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 16:33
Then you will be worshipped by all the Atheist Pacifist Homosexuals. If I were you I would run for President.
I was thinking about things like:
- does God exist?
- are wars a good way to solve problems?
- is homosexuality evil?
- etc.
Now, on those issues, I am NOT AFRAID to voice an opinion! (and my answer to all the above is "no").
I was thinking about things like:
- does God exist?
- are wars a good way to solve problems?
- is homosexuality evil?
- etc.
Now, on those issues, I am NOT AFRAID to voice an opinion! (and my answer to all the above is "no").
I don’t think we have a theology forum yet, but I’m sure that will be a perfect contribution when we do
I'm not talking about anyone's actual photos, just a hypothetical.
What if unbridled criticism was construed as cruelty? Is there a limit?
Maybe not saying anything is better.
If you're advocating stronger censorship and moderation, where is the freedom or benefit of more expression?
Hi Valdemar,
Talking hypothetical can both be endless and lead us to crazy assumptions. If you happen to understand I am advocating stronger censorship, you have first to point where have you found censorship at RFF, and then we will be able to maintain a concrete exchange of ideas.
The widest freedom is for normative use of freedom, repression is for the cases of abuse of freedom. Normative use of freedom is the one within the framework. Abuse of freedom is the one targeted to destroy the framework. Who decide what is what are the moderators.
Above all it seems to me you should read this thread from its very begining.
Beyond all this, taking into account what you have dealt with, the only way I can get a notion of your argumentation is by assuming you feel a great fear of your own self, as if there is there some kind of danger to control.
In case you have expressed in this thread all what you think, I don't see any real indication you may mis-behave. On the contrary. You can have a rest :) You don't need self censorship, your common sense and judgement are ok.
So why all these theories and hypothesis identifying self freedom with misbehaviour ?
Cheers,
Ruben
Absolutely, it's the artist's choice to exhibit.
Once he does so, he should not be offended at anything the audience expresses about his "art".
Agreed..,,,,,
I may be wrong, but if I am not missing your angle, you post because you want to live your life the best you can and have the courage to go forwards. It is not about reaching an absolute goal, but about fighting your way
Cheers,
Ruben
It's just simply that I am not satisified with my work and eventhough I suppose I have no set goal, I do hope to improve and I don't consider myself a fighter. I think i'm too laid back to be a fighter. (not in the literal sense of course) but I do admit of getting down almost to the point of becoming depressed but I keep reminding myself to enjoy myself and just go with the flow.:)
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 16:49
You've somehow made the leap that I fear myself for my own dangerous thoughts.
Absolutely untrue.
However, by experience, one must control what one says in any group until he knows the mindset and conceptual limitations of that group.
Among like-minded, libertarian friends (for lack of a better word), one can say anything without fear, but in a group of strangers, one has to be aware of what's considered heresy.
It's a fact of human dynamics.
Ruben, you tend to get tremendously obtuse and vague when you're searching for an answer.
PS: I'm aware of MANY people who have been banned for expressing heresy on RFF, which to my mind was not trolling. One is a nutjob who set up a website to talk about other RFF members. I think he's insane, but should he have been banned? His posts were entertaining.
Hi Valdemar,
Talking hypothetical can both be endless and lead us to crazy assumptions. If you happen to understand I am advocating stronger censorship, you have first to point where have you found censorship at RFF, and then we will be able to maintain a concrete exchange of ideas.
Above all it seems to me you should read this thread from its very begining.
Beyond all this, taking into account what you have dealt with, the only way I can get a notion of your argumentation is by assuming you feel a great fear of your own self, as if there is there some kind of danger to control.
In case you have expressed in this thread all what you think, I don't see any real indication you may mis-behave. On the contrary. You can have a rest :) You don't need self censorship, your common sense and judgement are ok.
So why all these theories and hypothesis identifying self freedom with misbehaviour ?
Cheers,
Ruben
"Your image has a feeling of depression attached to it. I cannot feel happy by looking at the image. Maybe this is the message. It is a fine image."
Is this an acceptable critique? Is it kosher to express one's feelings when inspecting someone else's image? Was I wrong in stating what I did [above]?
I am still not sure why I was not allowed to sense "depression" while the photographer may have sensed "beauty". Why can't we both have our own feelings?
..............
PS: I'm aware of MANY people who have been banned for expressing heresy on RFF, which to my mind was not trolling. One is a nutjob who set up a website to talk about other RFF members. I think he's insane, but should he have been banned? His posts were entertaining.
Very few people have been banned from RFF, that's correct. But have they been banned for "expressing heressy" ???. Here you have to inform me better.
Unfortunately, and in my most honest way, I don't know the case of nutjob at all, whom you regard as "insane", but entertaining.
Can I conclude that according to you insane folks should be within RFF provided they are entertaining ?
Cheers,
Ruben
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 17:11
The insane are in the majority everywhere else, why not on RFF?
Very few people have been banned from RFF, that's correct. But have they been banned for "expressing heressy" ???. Here you have to inform me better.
Unfortunately, and in my most honest way, I don't know the case of nutjob at all, whom you regard as "insane", but entertaining.
Can I conclude that according to you insane folks should be within RFF provided they are entertaining ?
Cheers,
Ruben
"Your image has a feeling of depression attached to it. I cannot feel happy by looking at the image. Maybe this is the message. It is a fine image."
Is this an acceptable critique? Is it kosher to express one's feelings when inspecting someone else's image? Was I wrong in stating what I did [above]?
I am still not sure why I was not allowed to sense "depression" while the photographer may have sensed "beauty". Why can't we both have our own feelings?
Hi Raid
This critique is not only acceptable to me, but one of high quality keeping full respect towards the photographer.
I am not clear regarding if you actually posted it or not, but you are here being of great help to the photog in case. You have been both deeply sincere and crowned it with full respect.
Cheers,
Ruben
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 17:21
Ruben, your inbox is full or I would send you another PM.
Hi Raid
This critique is not only acceptable to me, but one of high quality keeping full respect towards the photographer.
I am not clear regarding if you actually posted it or not, but you are here being of great help to the photog in case. You have been both deeply sincere and crowned it with full respect.
Cheers,
Ruben
Ruben,
I quoted verbatim by copying from the critique session at RFF.
Cheers,
Raid
FallisPhoto
11-23-2007, 17:37
This is what I wrote in response to a similar post in another forum, Ruben:
The art of the Critique
Most of you have no doubt noticed the section under each piece of artwork in your individual galleries that is set aside for people to post comments. No doubt most of the comments you have received are things like: "Gee, this is good!" or "Very nice work!" and so on. These are comments, not critiques. While these are nice to look at and make you feel all warm and fuzzy, when it comes to helping you develop your technique and helping you to grow as a photographer, they are almost worthless. What is worse, the general effect of most of them can be to encourage complacency. There is a difference between a comment and a critique. Critiques are far more valuable. I'd trade all of my comments for one good critique.
A comment is a general statement of approval or disapproval. "Gee this is so good it makes me want to have your baby! You are a photography God!" is a comment (a somewhat disturbing comment, but a comment nevertheless). It does not mention what the person found admirable about the photo. Similarly, "This sucks. In a perfect society, real photographers would gather together in order to beat you to death." is a comment. It does not say what in particular the viewer found objectionable. Comments leave the artist wondering why the photo is good or bad and, most importantly, they don't pinpoint areas where he needs to develop his or her level of skill. I'd like to stress this, because this last is the most important aspect of a critique. If you don't find something that needs improvement, point it out, and suggest a way to improve it, you have left a worthless comment, not a valuable critique.
Now compare the comment to a critique: "I like the general effect, and, in particular, I like the detail in the foliage. However, I noticed that the bright red of the lady's fingernails draws the eye strongly, and distracts the viewer's attention from her face, which I feel should be the focal point of the composition. It seems to me to be a little overexposed, by maybe one f-stop. When photographing a model against a black background, you need to meter on her skin or use a gray card. A meter assumes that all scenes are supposed to be 18% gray and it looks at the whole scene and gives you a reading that will give you the "correct" exposure to achieve this. With this much black, the reading will be incorrect. However, most Caucasian skin is pretty close to 18% gray and if you approach the model so that her skin fills the viewfinder, you will get a good meter reading. If your model is Black, you can meter on a gray card in similar lighting. The white border is not really working either and I think it makes the photo look flat. This has potential, but isn't quite there and I'd reshoot it." A critique requires a little analysis, and it points out a photo's problem areas. This gives the artist an idea of what areas of composition he or she needs to concentrate on and aids him or her enormously in developing artistic and technical skills.
Now every artist has (or should have) a different style (and maybe a whole different interpretation of art), and so the photographer being critiqued may not agree with you. Nevertheless, the critique is still valuable - even if our hypothetical photographer rejects your opinion utterly - because it allows him or her to see how others perceive the artwork in question. If people are missing the point, the photographer can work on a way to emphasize it a bit more in the next shoot.
All this said, the purpose of a critique is to encourage the development of an artist's skill, not to rip his or her work to shreds. You start with a compliment and point out just a few problem areas, even if you think the work is a disaster and riddled with them. If you mention too much that is wrong, the general effect will be to discourage the artist from creating more work instead of to encourage him or her to create better work. This is what is meant by constructive criticism. If you are not very good about compliments (or can't find anything to compliment), then at the very least start off with something like "No offense, but..." so the artist will know that he or she is not being attacked.
ALL photographers who are at all serious, and who are worthy of being called photographers, will sincerely appreciate critiques. It is worth the effort to supply one and you will often find the favor returned if you go to the trouble. What is more, analysis of other's efforts will be of benefit to you in analyzing your own work.
Hi Raid
This critique is not only acceptable to me, but one of high quality keeping full respect towards the photographer.
I am not clear regarding if you actually posted it or not, but you are here being of great help to the photog in case. You have been both deeply sincere and crowned it with full respect.
Cheers,
Ruben
Of course the photog could ignore it, but ceirtainly in this case it would be higly unpropper by him to answer "get a life". :)
As a matter of fact long ago my wife made me a similar verbal commentary, with much less tact and respect, after I made a portrait of one of her friends. It took me many years to realize it, but she was right.
During the years in between, her reaction had a place in my mind, and despite my strong protest at the moment, it had a positive effect on me. I started to question myself why what I see white she sees black, and finnaly I got the answer. Of course it is very personal and I keep my right not to detail.
Cheers,
Ruben
I do not think there are universal standards, why should there be we are all individuals and each has an opinion
Just because there are no universal standards doesn't mean every opinion has equal merit. At worst, that's simply laughable. The best you can say about it is that it's the misapplied notion that, in a democracy, everyone is somehow 'equal,' but it's an idea that has no merit whatsoever when applied to art, or its attempt.
nikonhswebmaster
11-23-2007, 17:51
Just because there are no universal standards doesn't mean every opinion has equal merit. At worst, that's simply laughable. The best you can say about it is that it's the misapplied notion that, in a democracy, everyone is somehow 'equal,' but it's an idea that has no merit whatsoever when applied to art, or its attempt.
The only painful opinions are the ones who are writing the checks or controlling the writing of checks. What possible effect could any others have? If you have no power, feel free to stand outside and scream vitriol, won't bother any artist, unless you block the door.
nikonhswebmaster
11-23-2007, 17:58
This is what I wrote in response to a similar post in another forum, Ruben:
The art of the CritiqueAll this said, the purpose of a critique is to encourage the development of an artist's skill, not to rip his or her work to shreds.
You should write a short note to the art schools, especially mine.
.
Of course the photog could ignore it, but ceirtainly in this case it would be higly unpropper by him to answer "get a life". :)
Cheers,
Ruben
I guess, you could be right here. :D
I changed it to :"thank you"
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 18:03
I used to be a magazine editor. Many years ago.
I was daily faced with the job of rejecting the work of many photographers and writers.
There are COUNTLESS HORDES of people with absolutely no talent who believe themselves to be highly gifted.
On the other hand, I often recognized and nurtured talent when I saw it, even from complete beginners and unknowns.
I published the work of one cartoonist who had been rejected by everyone else and was about to give up. I alone felt he was good.
A couple of years ago he won the MacArthur Fellowship (the genius grant), and is one of the most recognized artists in his field today.
I don't see much of those I rejected. The capacity for self-delusion is enormous in human beings.
If you like photography for pleasure or for making family records, etc, fine. If you like keeping a diary, fine. But not everyone is Samuel Pepys or Ilse Bing., even though they fervently believe it.
It is nice to know that among us there are magazine editors. Professionals can do a lot of good here by sharing with us their work experiences. I have to admit that I do not know anything about Samuel Pepys or Ilse Bing., so maybe that's why I take photos of my family.
I am glad that I just make family records.
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 18:28
Again, I was not speaking about any one person or singling anyone out.
Just a perception.
And actually, the people who post at all are making a contribution. Looks at the THOUSANDS of people who are online here but never make a post.
How many post? 1% or 3% of the people who read RFF? Can't be much more.
The people who post are doing a good job of entertaining the lurkers and those who are afraid to put a sentence together,
It is nice to know that among us there are magazine editors. Professionals can do a lot of good here by sharing with us their work experiences. I have to admit that I do not know anything about Samuel Pepys or Ilse Bing., so maybe that's why I take photos of my family.
I am glad that I just make family records.
Ahh!! but I saw your photographs you took on your trip to Turkey! Very good! and don,t feel too bad, I haven't heard of Samuel Pepys nor Ilse Bing either but I plan to google their names later.
I used to be a magazine editor. Many years ago.......
............If you like photography for pleasure or for making family records, etc, fine. If you like keeping a diary, fine. But not everyone is Samuel Pepys or Ilse Bing., even though they fervently believe it.
I have not the slightest idea who Samuel Pepys or Ilse Bing are, or were. But I know I am not HCB, nor even half Beniliam. So?
I know I want to create, since a creative life is the best and most beautifull life I can realistically have.
I know that my past photographic history has made me highly sensitive to enjoy many different types of art, and different types of art serve as a source of inspiration for my photography.
I know that a year from now I will be making better photographs than today, provided I put effort, concentration, open mind, couriosity, and other spices.
I know many things, beyond photography, that you Valdemar have not the slightest idea about. And for that matter perhaps both Pepys and Ilse are or were in your shoes.
So? Can you kindly explain me what are you talking about ?
I started a thread aimed at improving RFF via improving ourselves. RFF is not a refugee camp of uncapable people, but the most hot and alive photography website in the world. Just read this whole thread from the begining and you will get a feeling of who and what we are.
In case you have any contribution to make, or critique as Fallisphoto explained the real meaning of the word, I am all ears.
Cheers,
Ruben
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 18:36
Well, it wouldn't hurt to know who they are:
Ilse Bing
http://www.elconfidencial.com/fotos/cultura/2006050453fotofrancesa_20060504_o.jpg
Samuel Pepys
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0679642218.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
Also, please don't personalize my remarks. I wasn't talking about you or anyone here in particular. I have no doubt you know about a wide range of subjects. Why are you offended?
Hi Fallis,
What a nice piece have you brought !
Kindly excuss me for not noticing it earlier, and just now here it is 04:39 AM.
Ceirtainly your piece deserves my fullest attention, first thing in the morning.
Just include in your attention we all are a very variyed crowd, including different aspirations, backgrounds, interests, personal wishes and approaches. This is both our Aquilles point and our strength.
Cheers,
Ruben
foto_fool
11-23-2007, 18:43
Then, John, you are an artist?
Stewart - no. I'm Ruben's example of a middle-aged guy having some fun doing something creative outside of my profession, hoping to capture images of interest to my descendents, doing my best to improve my very modest abilities, and praying I can do well enough to avoid having my funding for this hobby cut off by my significant other. I was engaging in a bit of self-deprecation.
FallisPhoto - thanks for the thorough illustration of what constitutes constructive criticism. Too bad we don't see much of that kind of careful and thoughtful analysis.
Just because there are no universal standards doesn't mean every opinion has equal merit.
Kevin - excellent point, to which I wholeheartedly agree.
In an earlier life I was a certified welder in Texas. One of the guys I worked with - a skilled craftsman - had a colorful pat comeback when someone offered unsolicited criticism: "I'm f***ing this cat, I'll kiss it if I want to."
- John
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 18:46
PS: I find it hard to believe that anyone who attended English-speaking school classes has never heard of Samuel Pepys.
OK, Ilse Bing might be a somewhat esoteric reference to those not well versed in 20th Century photographers.
But Samuel Pepys? That's an interesting bit of information. I'm 53 years old. I didn't think many my age didn't instantly understand the reference.
I think it's time for me to shut up and go back to semi-lurk mode.
nikonhswebmaster
11-23-2007, 18:52
I used to be a magazine editor.
I published the work of one cartoonist who had been rejected by everyone else and was about to give up. I alone felt he was good.
A couple of years ago he won the MacArthur Fellowship (the genius grant), and is one of the most recognized artists in his field today.
Read more about him on a site I just built with my partner.
http://www.bombsite.com/issues/88/articles/2668
.
foto_fool
11-23-2007, 18:54
Valdemar - take heart. Some of us have read Pepys. But Ilse Bing was new to me - thanks for the heads-up (makes up for your "majority is insane" comment before, where you had me thinking you might be FrankG :D).
- John
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 18:57
No, I'm not Frank G. or anyone else associated with any external website.
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 19:00
I don't fit in anywhere as editor anymore other than going for some Mondongo with him at Taza De Oro every once in a while and lamenting the closing of Hammer Kosher Diary Restaurant on 14th Street.
Read more about him on a site I just built with my partner.
http://www.bombsite.com/issues/88/articles/2668
Not sure where the "editor" actually fits in here...
In the early 1990's:
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/1447/katchorvq0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
A year ago:
http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/6259/benih7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
nikonhswebmaster
11-23-2007, 19:07
When Daytons closed on lower broadway, I starved for months. I have never eaten halibut since.
Ilse Bing, start with "Femmes, de l'enfance a la vieillesse, 1929-1955" usually available easily even on Amazon.
If you shoot Leica, she is actually more important in many ways than HCB.
.
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 19:15
These are Ben and his wife, taken with a Contax and 50mm f1.5 Sonnar about five years ago. This was at Salut restaurant in Queens, a Jewish/Uzbek place.
http://aycu29.webshots.com/image/36548/2002484902670439441_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002484902670439441)
http://aycu39.webshots.com/image/36358/2002459697817965373_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002459697817965373)
PS: I used to visit Ilse and her husband Konrad in the 1990's in their apartment on the Upper West Side. Here's a story for you. I once set up a stereo for them around 1992. She showed me a HUGE trunk full of Leicas and lenses, and accessories, some personally engraved to her from the factory.
I offered to buy them, but she didn't want to sell. She said to ask her in a few years. A few months after she died I found out the trunk and a lot of other valuables had disappeared. The same thing happened with Andy Warhol. He was a watch freak. He used to buy Pateks by the handful from a place on 45th Street. He would just throw them in a drawer. Maybe a million or more in watches in his drawer. I saw them. Hours after he died, someone cleaned out the joint.
nikonhswebmaster
11-23-2007, 19:27
No, I'm not Frank G. or anyone else associated with any external website.
I too am not Frank G. but am associated with lots and lots of external, and internal web sites.
nikonhswebmaster
11-23-2007, 19:35
But in so far as I am concerned I have learned from this discussion thread here a lot...
Cheers,
Ruben
Sadly however, you have learned that the really great kosher dairy restaurants in Manhattan are closed. The day of the punched ticket is drawing to a close, only Katzs hanging on, but they are not dairy.
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 19:40
And let's not forget the lost and lamented Dubrow's and Belmore Cafeterias.
Losing these was truly a real tragedy for humanity.
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/2696/dubrows5largemsg1146526ag2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/2696/dubrows5largemsg1146526ag2.31bcf4570b.jpg (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=513&i=dubrows5largemsg1146526ag2.jpg)
nikonhswebmaster
11-23-2007, 19:51
Sadly the only thing left downtown are the so-called Glatt Kosher eateries, selling cardboard thinly disguised as food. As a single man for 40 years in NYC, who uses his stove as place to store sweaters, it is a sad time.
M. Valdemar
11-23-2007, 20:02
The little one near J&R is absolutely disgusting.
BTW, about great masters (you are free to include Samuel Pepys or Ilse Bing), I had the opportunity to personally hear via PM the most strong criticism on HCB I can possible imagine, as being done extremely polite the contents were sword accute.
This commentary came from one of the most rightfully respected members of our neighbourhood, and as you understand in so far he doesn't make it public, I will not either.
So what ? So even being a HCB is not the zenith of the Everest. We all are humans, we all will die some day.