Images: Bear Creek cats, St. Lucia and Winter

[Howard Smith]

I didn't miss that at all.  You asked and I gave you an opinion.  If I had said "Great shots.  Keep it up", what do you learn?

In my opinion, what you have needs a lot of work.  If my work isn't ready for public view and comment, I don't show it or ask for opinions.  After a critique, I have thrown images away or altered them to incorporate a lesson learned, or kept them "as is" if that is what I wanted.

Two lessons I learned at my first critique were 1) neer apologize for your work, and 2) never take anything personally.

[gryffyn]

No.  I do it for myself now.

Hmmmm...that lessens the credibility of your critiques somewhat.    

....Andrzej

[Howard Smith]

gryffn,

One reason photographers are not allowed to comment during critiques is rude and ignorant comments like yours.  When a photograph is offered for critique, it no longer belongs to the photographer.  The photographer is (usually) not allowed to offer reasons or excuses, and is never allowed to attack the critic.

"Those who can, do.  Those who can't, critique."  That may be the most ignorant comment I have seen on this site.  You obviously have no knowledge of the critique process.

If you have no respect for critiques (the opinion of others), why do you offer your efforts for coment?  If you want to learn, get on with it.  If you don't want to know what someone thinks, don't ask.

[gryffyn]

Howard:

If you read my post carefully, you will note that I was referring to film and book critics with that comment and that a smiley was also included.

It seems that you should take your own advice:  Don't take things personally.

Your comments stopped being constructive advice some time ago and have tainted some of the excellent suggestions that you initially made.  Criticism also has more merit if the critic has some qualifications in that regard (this applies to film, book and photo criticism).  Though comments can have intrinsic value on their own, they do have more weight if it's backed with personal expertise (for example, criticism from Michael perks the ears up more than some unknown named Howard who is unwilling to provide any bona fides  ;-)  <--- not the smiley Howard and don't get your shorts in a knot).

As for photographers not being able to respond, that may be the case in "formal" critiques.  But is not the case in informal internet postings to the best of my knowledge. When those critics take comments clearly denoted to be humourous as personal affronts, I consider that an indication of a problem with the critic not the target of the criticism. As for providing "reasons", my only purpose in doing so was to highlight the steps I am trying to take to improve upon my images.  As for "excuses", I have already explained that I offered no such thing, and your continued allegation that I am trying to "excuse" certain facets of my photographs is insulting and inflammatory.

You want my opinion (which is worth what you paid for it, just like yours is)?  You come across as an arrogant fellow that seems to want to push my buttons till I agree 100% with your personal opinions.  I have had the impression that you have been trying to make this thread adversarial rather than helpful and constructive.

I would review your own comments objectively before throwing stones in glass houses.

Please do not expect any further responses from me to any future posts you may choose to make.  The last word is yours if you want it, but due to your recent actions/posts your opinions no longer interest me.

.....Andrzej

[Howard Smith]

Could you tell me what "fresh insight into animals in a cage" you got from the photogrphs?

And just curious, but are you Andrew Reynolds of Black Eye Photography?