Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New Forum Rule !  (Read 6216 times)
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6779


« Reply #20 on: August 08, 2012, 10:59:51 AM »
ReplyReply


…PS Japanese cats definitely have character this one was in Kansai

Agree 100%. I must visit Japan, I didn't expect cats to be something special there!

 Smiley
Logged

Francois
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 08, 2012, 11:37:55 AM »
ReplyReply

There are innumerable curmudgeonly hacks in the world (particularly on the web), and when you look at their work, you realize they aren't really achieving any sort of excellence and their opinion isn't very valuable. 

When I read a commentary or critique from someone I don't know (virtually), the first thing I do is look at their website.  If I don't think their work is good, I substantially discount their opinion.  If they don't have a website that shows something of their work (even a flickr site) I substantially discount their work even more.  This method applies whether the person has 2 posts or 2,000 posts at LuLa or DPR or wherever.

The same goes for gear reviews.  When I look at a gear review, I look at the person's portfolio to see if the operate their gear at a high level. 

This is my version of put up or shut up.
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7854



WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 08, 2012, 04:58:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Excellent shot, Bernard. But you do realize, I hope, that you must call it a "hamster" and not a "cat," since Michael doesn't like Cat photos on the forum.  Wink

Cheers,

Eric

P.S. When you have a Private Forum for posting photos of your daughter, please let us, your closest friends, see it.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2067


« Reply #23 on: August 08, 2012, 07:00:01 PM »
ReplyReply

There are innumerable curmudgeonly hacks in the world (particularly on the web), and when you look at their work, you realize they aren't really achieving any sort of excellence and their opinion isn't very valuable. 

When I read a commentary or critique from someone I don't know (virtually), the first thing I do is look at their website.  If I don't think their work is good, I substantially discount their opinion.  If they don't have a website that shows something of their work (even a flickr site) I substantially discount their work even more.  This method applies whether the person has 2 posts or 2,000 posts at LuLa or DPR or wherever.

The same goes for gear reviews.  When I look at a gear review, I look at the person's portfolio to see if the operate their gear at a high level. 

This is my version of put up or shut up.

Gee whizz.
Woe is me - no website.
"Obviously" zero credibility.

Actually an opinion (critique) is just that - an opinion. Whether it is worth anything or has any credibility at all lies in the ability of the recipient to recognize the said worth in the critique - not some arbitrary external value test such as - does the author have a website themselves.

Bernie Madoff had a website as well and apparent credibilty - suckered a large number of apparently financially sophisticated individuals to sacrifice themselves to his greed.
Storm Financial (an Australian investment company) also had very good websites and a similar ponze scheme to old Bernie there and also went belly up taking countless millions of Dollars in investments with them.

Truth is truth, credibility is credibility, opinion is opinion, no matter what form it takes.

For me personally I am in no hurry to set up a website or even post images onto Flickr and Marc's post is definately no inducement.
If and when I see value in doing these things I will do them.

On a slightly different tack recently I posted in response to a question about LuLa forums that the great strength of this forum lay in the incredible diversity of individuals who were members. With regard to their potential value-adding contributions to the forum any "cookie-cutter" type approach to their contributions would run the risk of disregarding anyone who doesn't think the same as the one applying the cookie-cutter.

I really don't find it very difficult to appraise the comments about my image posts. I don't care whether those individuals post images themselves or not (although most do). I often try out the suggestions - some work and some do not. In one case a suggestion indirectly helped me solve a problem with an image that I had been battling with for about two years.
Occasionally, someone will just "bag" an image post with no attempt at being constructive. It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to work this out.

I think balance should be the watchword here.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
RobbieV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 261


« Reply #24 on: August 08, 2012, 09:16:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Well said Tony. I applaud your approach on here.

To stay within the topic of this thread, I'd like to add my own rule in an attempt at humour. This comes after many hours spent reading various threads, and is to be taken lightly. ;-)

Rule #4: Indeed, the use of the word indeed shall not exceed one use per three posts.
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7854



WWW
« Reply #25 on: August 08, 2012, 10:49:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Rule #4: Indeed, the use of the word indeed shall not exceed one use per three posts.
Yes, indeed!
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #26 on: August 08, 2012, 11:40:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I guess some like to share their images others like to share their opinions
Horses for courses!
Marc Smiley
Logged

Marc McCalmont
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #27 on: August 09, 2012, 02:49:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Well said Tony. I applaud your approach on here.

To stay within the topic of this thread, I'd like to add my own rule in an attempt at humour. This comes after many hours spent reading various threads, and is to be taken lightly. ;-)

Rule #4: Indeed, the use of the word indeed shall not exceed one use per three posts.




One could go further, deeper and even better: ban the use of the personal pronoun I as well as the abstract noun, art.

Indeed, then we'd have nothing left about which to moan. Or, for that matter, about which to write.

Rob C
Logged

opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #28 on: August 09, 2012, 03:22:47 AM »
ReplyReply

One could go further, deeper and even better: ban the use of the personal pronoun I as well as the abstract noun, art.

Indeed, then we'd have nothing left about which to moan. Or, for that matter, about which to write.

Rob C

You'd be wrong, since the use of language seems to be a highly common and consistent theme within this forum, as even this thread may serve to exemplify, and which could be considered rather peculiar given the nature of this website.
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #29 on: August 09, 2012, 07:25:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Gee whizz.
Woe is me - no website.
"Obviously" zero credibility.
...
I think balance should be the watchword here.

Regards

Tony Jay

Tony, When I read something on the web from someone I have never met, what else do I have to go on?  I don't see a website for you, but I did a quick search on LuLa and came up with one photo you recently posted...it was a great shot of a lit-up bridge.  For me this photo is the only proxy I have to judge your talent.  I would be happier if I could have found more. 

What would you prefer I use to judge your credibility? ...use of sarcasm, perhaps. 

I agree that balance is a good guide, and I think there are probably cases where someone without a website would be okay...say they have published a readily available (to me) book that I think reflects well on them.  Perhaps they have had gallery exhibitions I thought were notable. 

Another consideration for balance is that everyone's opinion should be heard and used as a guide. What I am saying is that I don't weight every opinion equally.  If someone says they are an iPhone photographer and they are specializing in cat photos, I may weight them a bit less in my efforts to look for suggestions to advance my craft. 

Furthermore, the website thing goes both ways.  There is  notorious photo hack on the web (he shall remain nameless) who pollutes the web with crazy nonsense (initials are KR). His photo work ranges from poor to pedestrian....indeed!! ;-)  Before I wasted the time evaluating his erratic and unreadable writing, I was able to decide his opinion meant little to me based on his work samples.  Taking that a bit further, even when I hire people, I like to see samples of their work.

I don't highly value your opinion of things until I see your competence demonstrated to me in a product. 
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
david loble
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 30


« Reply #30 on: August 09, 2012, 08:46:53 AM »
ReplyReply

If I were Tony Jay I would be insulted by your comment about being happier if you could see more of his work. But I'm not Tony and I'm insulted. Or perhaps confused might be a better description. Why should the absolute absence of any of my pictures on the web matter? It seems to me that what matters is what I write.

Look, I'm a doddering old man in my late seventies who adores photography and who doesn't have the need to "publish" regardless of whether I'm talented or not. I read about it. I collect books. I study with a photographic artist. I form opinions. I don't foist them on others unless asked or I do, rarely, in fora such as LuLa. I don't pretend to be a blogger or a KR.

So, why can't you accept what I write as having potential relevance without knowing what I do with a camera?

You youngsters. I just don't understand these kids today (:>)

David
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #31 on: August 09, 2012, 09:32:12 AM »
ReplyReply

You'd be wrong, since the use of language seems to be a highly common and consistent theme within this forum, as even this thread may serve to exemplify, and which could be considered rather peculiar given the nature of this website.



Umm... I think that if you reread my post, you'll find I was just extending the logic (intentionally humorous lack of) that I found within the RobbieV post; I think he was being funny, and so I continued along the path. Or were you, too, being funny and it zoomed over my head? I wouldn't be at all surprised - perpetual lack of enough wine does that to me a lot. Combined with the current lack of chilled agua-con-gas in the fridge, I sweat out more than I currently put in; better that I repair the situation and go shopping.

Hasta la vista, I hope I'll be back!

Rob C
Logged

opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #32 on: August 09, 2012, 09:37:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Hasta la vista, I hope I'll be back!

So do we!
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #33 on: August 09, 2012, 09:42:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Visual Presence

As one who, for ages, didn't have any website because I both lacked the skills to make one and, worse, was afraid to use images that had copyright/model release questions hanging over them, I understand that there are valid reasons why folks don't go online with their work. It's frustrating for anyone who does have quite nice stuff, and also for anyone else wondering if they are dealing with a lot of mouth sans trousers.

In the end, I think that over a few posts one can conclude quite accurately about another's place in the scheme of things.

But, in the final analysis, this site is about pictures, and I'm fairly sure most of us are here to enjoy some that are not our own, so posting a few is good for the entire readership. Long may it continue to be a font of interesting imagery, quirky or otherwise.

Rob C
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7854



WWW
« Reply #34 on: August 09, 2012, 09:43:18 AM »
ReplyReply

If I were Tony Jay I would be insulted by your comment about being happier if you could see more of his work. But I'm not Tony and I'm insulted. Or perhaps confused might be a better description. Why should the absolute absence of any of my pictures on the web matter? It seems to me that what matters is what I write.

Look, I'm a doddering old man in my late seventies who adores photography and who doesn't have the need to "publish" regardless of whether I'm talented or not. I read about it. I collect books. I study with a photographic artist. I form opinions. I don't foist them on others unless asked or I do, rarely, in fora such as LuLa. I don't pretend to be a blogger or a KR.

So, why can't you accept what I write as having potential relevance without knowing what I do with a camera?

You youngsters. I just don't understand these kids today (:>)

David
+10!

(But folks can also check my cluttered website if they wish.)

David
[/quote]
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #35 on: August 09, 2012, 09:47:23 AM »
ReplyReply

So do we!


Thank you very much, but I still haven't been able to get up off the typist chair and shop! Any more sweat and I'll need another shower and that'll delay things further, and beyond the shopping for food 'n' drink I have to go see if that place making my roller blind background has done anything about it yet!

And I'm friggin' retired! What happened to the promised days of rest and calm, the chimera of security?

Rob C
Logged

david loble
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 30


« Reply #36 on: August 09, 2012, 10:50:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Rob C,

I look at LuLa more as a site about photography that naturally enough includes pictures. But more important to me was your statement that posting a few pictures is good for the entire readership. Frankly, I never looked at posting in that light and so, now, you have "converted" me.

Assuming I can figure out how to do so I'll post something next week and hope that as with bad tasting medicine my efforts will have some value to someone.

My issue with critiques I've seen on the world wide web is that the majority of them are from the POV that "This is how I would have taken it" instead of "This is what I see." There are also examples of critiquing the subject and not the photograph, which I think is an incorrect approach. Disclaimer: I'm guilty of that, too, sometimes.

David
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #37 on: August 09, 2012, 11:29:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Tony, When I read something on the web from someone I have never met, what else do I have to go on?  I don't see a website for you, but I did a quick search on LuLa and came up with one photo you recently posted...it was a great shot of a lit-up bridge.  For me this photo is the only proxy I have to judge your talent.  I would be happier if I could have found more.  

What would you prefer I use to judge your credibility? ...use of sarcasm, perhaps.  

I agree that balance is a good guide, and I think there are probably cases where someone without a website would be okay...say they have published a readily available (to me) book that I think reflects well on them.  Perhaps they have had gallery exhibitions I thought were notable.  

Another consideration for balance is that everyone's opinion should be heard and used as a guide. What I am saying is that I don't weight every opinion equally.  If someone says they are an iPhone photographer and they are specializing in cat photos, I may weight them a bit less in my efforts to look for suggestions to advance my craft.  

Furthermore, the website thing goes both ways.  There is  notorious photo hack on the web (he shall remain nameless) who pollutes the web with crazy nonsense (initials are KR). His photo work ranges from poor to pedestrian....indeed!! ;-)  Before I wasted the time evaluating his erratic and unreadable writing, I was able to decide his opinion meant little to me based on his work samples.  Taking that a bit further, even when I hire people, I like to see samples of their work.

I don't highly value your opinion of things until I see your competence demonstrated to me in a product.  

I agree with you Fike and foretold how there would be a string of exceedingly valid reasons why this would not be acceptable.

But this whole question surely boils down to one of validity, which if we think about in the following way - when we hire a tradesman, we only do so when we know how able they are, we want referrals to evaluate the quality of their workmanship. So why would this be any different in photography? Yes we want feedback, but we also want to know on what basis that feedback can be validated, isn't this simply human nature?

Perhaps we could use a symbol to denote those people who share/post by adding something like this (P) at the end of our comments.

But my breath is not on hold.. Smiley

Dave (P)
« Last Edit: August 09, 2012, 12:02:11 PM by Dave (Isle of Skye) » Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2756


« Reply #38 on: August 09, 2012, 12:10:27 PM »
ReplyReply

... we only do so when we know how able they are, we want referrals to evaluate the quality of their workmanship. We want feedback, but we also want to know on what basis that feedback can be validated...

Take care not to conflate the quality of someone's appreciation of others' photographs with your appreciation of the quality of that person's photographs.

Also, given the wish to judge someone's appreciation of others' photographs by judging that person's photographs yourself; you've already made your judgement of photographs the yardstick, so be aware that this may just create an echo chamber of the like minded.


... isn't this simply human nature?

Much mischief falls under that heading.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2012, 12:20:56 PM by Isaac » Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2756


« Reply #39 on: August 09, 2012, 12:18:07 PM »
ReplyReply

When I read something on the web from someone I have never met, what else do I have to go on?

Your commonsense:
  • Does what was written make sense to you?
  • Do you understand why what was written made sense to the writer? (People can be mistaken.)

« Last Edit: August 09, 2012, 12:45:26 PM by Isaac » Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad