Mike, you have some fine photographs on your site. What would you like to see happen at dGrin?
ginger
Thanks Ginger...
Really, I don't think I have any expectations of what to happen at dgrin. I think it's a fine place, I'm mostly just conversing...
That said I did make a suggestion in this very thread. My point is not to change things, just add new things maybe I like how things are now, but I also like trying new things. It may or may not be a good idea, I was just throwing it out there. Think of it as a compliment to what we have rather than a replacement for any particular thing. That's all.
Y'all don't want to hear me, you just want to dance.
Wow K, thanks for starting this thread. I share your frustration with the tossing of terms like "rule of thirds", "sharpen this, sharpen that", "PS", "curves" "crop", "too much crop"... it's all a bunch of cr*p!
I'm happy to read some of the other responses too (although I find some are hypocritical)
I say... love your camera, love your craft, have fun and express yourself!
I enjoy visiting sites like www.deviantart.com where the younger, edgier crowd haven't been "conditioned" to the "rules"
I think maybe we are dissecting the terms too much. When Davinci made a painting, statue, drawing, or what have you, don't you think he primarily did so in a way that satisfied his own personal aesthetics. Only when he was satisfied did he then deliver the piece.
The point behind "shooting for you" is that you drive your creativity, the work you produce satisfies you, and you are willing to let the work stand on it's own merits confident that it does what you set out for it to do. It has nothing to do with how or where you post or display or sell your work. The point is in how it is created.
The opposite extreme of this would be what we see a lot of in forums. People shooting and producing work that *others* say they need to, a bland and uninteresting mix of work driven by the group mind "committee". The person is constantly in artistic turmoil trying to please the shifting fads and whims of the group mind. The frustration mounts as the person tries to figure out "what people like". Burn out is sure to follow as this path offers no personal satisfaction. Only when you retake control of the artistic reigns will the satisfaction come back.
Look through time at the number of artists that did great work despite the fact that their contemporaries didn't get it yet. If the artist let the group think drive the work produced, the artist would have disappeared into the sea of sameness that was surrounding the artist at the time.
And therein lies another point. How many truly great artists were recognized as such at the time they were producing their work? Some were, and some were not. But they did not let that affect their work or vision
So as the song says, you can't please everyone so you have to please yourself. And you do that by "shooting for you".
Bravo Shay, very well put. In fact DaVinci and Michaelangelo were considered renegades, often condemned by the church for the content and subjects of their work. Both artisits developed styles of trickery to fool the censoring priests.
I think maybe we are dissecting the terms too much. When Davinci made a painting, statue, drawing, or what have you, don't you think he primarily did so in a way that satisfied his own personal aesthetics. Only when he was satisfied did he then deliver the piece.
The point behind "shooting for you" is that you drive your creativity, the work you produce satisfies you, and you are willing to let the work stand on it's own merits confident that it does what you set out for it to do. It has nothing to do with how or where you post or display or sell your work. The point is in how it is created.
The opposite extreme of this would be what we see a lot of in forums. People shooting and producing work that *others* say they need to, a bland and uninteresting mix of work driven by the group mind "committee". The person is constantly in artistic turmoil trying to please the shifting fads and whims of the group mind. The frustration mounts as the person tries to figure out "what people like". Burn out is sure to follow as this path offers no personal satisfaction. Only when you retake control of the artistic reigns will the satisfaction come back.
Look through time at the number of artists that did great work despite the fact that their contemporaries didn't get it yet. If the artist let the group think drive the work produced, the artist would have disappeared into the sea of sameness that was surrounding the artist at the time.
And therein lies another point. How many truly great artists were recognized as such at the time they were producing their work? Some were, and some were not. But they did not let that affect their work or vision
So as the song says, you can't please everyone so you have to please yourself. And you do that by "shooting for you".
Shay, your viewpoint is very much like what you would find in an Ayn Rand novel. Very appealing, and also very true for artistic expression. I do want to add that not all photography is art.
I am no photography expert, but I work in a field that is very much driven by "committee". I edit movie marketing. You should hear some of the hair-brained ideas that I have to try or constraints that are put on the work that I do. These are almost always driven by a real or perceived marketing force. Sometimes they're just plain old bad creative ideas.
I also get an immense amount of constructive, positive feedback that makes what I do better.
Photography isn't always art, in fact it's usually commerce, just like the trailers and TV spots that I cut.
The thing that I've learned through years of doing this work is to find my stylistic voice in spite of the fact that I get all this feedback that alternates between useful and stupid. I do think that there is value in getting critiqued by pros, amateurs and the un-washed masses *IF* you can avoid what you described so well here:
The person is constantly in artistic turmoil trying to please the shifting fads and whims of the group mind. The frustration mounts as the person tries to figure out "what people like". Burn out is sure to follow as this path offers no personal satisfaction.
I think that what you're really saying is that relying on others to determine your artistic style is a dead end, and I agree with that completely. If you can manage to avoid that, however, through strength of character and conviction in yourself, then critique can be useful from any source, no matter how advanced in the field.
You were given assignments, told what to shoot or paint or draw or whatever to a certain extent. You were limited to the composition or the subject matter or techniques or colors or whatever. You did these things not because you weren't creative, but because you were learning.
My whole point here is not that people should follow the crowd. I most definitely agree that a personal style is the most important thing any artist (photographers, painters, sketchers, musicians, etc) can have. The fact of the matter is that I very much like finding things in art that many others do not understand or appreciate. That issue is wholly separate from the learning process however and that is what my comments have focused on.
Mike, have you thought of attending workshops somewhere, would that be an option for you?
I attended two while living in Indiana, they were held in Wisconsin. I loved them, a few things I learned still are with me. I hate to say "a few" for fear of scaring you, but that was me. The workshops were very valuable. They were held by well known photographers of the time: the 70s. I think that would be an atmosphere you would thrive in.
Others here have attended workshops and have had very good things to say.
You can choose the one (s) that you think would benefit you. I can't afford it, or I would go to one.
Plus, the more you can be around these "guys", say at their get togethers, the more you could learn almost by osmosis. I would love to do that myself, too.
Another thing is to "listen" in here. You don't need to have an assignment to "learn". However, if you want an assignment, what could be better than the challenge here. I have learned a lot by "listening" to what others write, then following up something that interests me.
I was thinking of all of these things. I thought of them in relation to your response to me. They are all good options. I think any of them would be a valuable learning experience. You may already take advantage of this group, here. dGrin has the best price tag, but any knowledge is priceless.
If you can afford it, the seminar/workshop thing is valuable in many ways you mentioned and seem to be interested in. It would be worth looking into. We belong here and enjoy each other, but that does not mean we cannot take advantage of so many opportunities that are out there, according to our individual needs and desires.
I can see, David, how your work environment could make for some cynicism. But, ahhhhh, David, who is to decide what is art.
Maya Angelou, the poet, she puts her poetry on things at Hallmark. She was roundly criticised for doing this as everyone knows that Hallmark is not truly "art" in any sense. She disagrees. Does she not have a whatever prize, I can't spell anything today.
I have seen ads, print and TV, that I thought were brilliant. Because something is commercial does not "define" whether or not it is art. Some of those old masters were businessmen, you know.
Mike, have you thought of attending workshops somewhere, would that be an option for you?
I attended two while living in Indiana, they were held in Wisconsin. I loved them, a few things I learned still are with me. I hate to say "a few" for fear of scaring you, but that was me. The workshops were very valuable. They were held by well known photographers of the time: the 70s. I think that would be an atmosphere you would thrive in.
Others here have attended workshops and have had very good things to say.
You can choose the one (s) that you think would benefit you. I can't afford it, or I would go to one.
Plus, the more you can be around these "guys", say at their get togethers, the more you could learn almost by osmosis. I would love to do that myself, too.
Another thing is to "listen" in here. You don't need to have an assignment to "learn". However, if you want an assignment, what could be better than the challenge here. I have learned a lot by "listening" to what others write, then following up something that interests me.
I was thinking of all of these things. I thought of them in relation to your response to me. They are all good options. I think any of them would be a valuable learning experience. You may already take advantage of this group, here. dGrin has the best price tag, but any knowledge is priceless.
If you can afford it, the seminar/workshop thing is valuable in many ways you mentioned and seem to be interested in. It would be worth looking into. We belong here and enjoy each other, but that does not mean we cannot take advantage of so many opportunities that are out there, according to our individual needs and desires.
Bless,
ginger
Workshops and classes are just my speed I think If I had the money I'd probably go back and get a BFA in photography and / or digital media or something.
Why, oh why did I major in math?
Y'all don't want to hear me, you just want to dance.
I take the feedback I get here, with a grain of salt. The reason being, I don't know any of you, nor you me. I expect the C&C I give to be taken the same way. It's more my opinion, my take, or my style reflecting on what you did, and giving a tip on what I would do. One can try it, or ignore it.
I often check out the photo's of those that C&C my stuff, and if they shoot the same subject matter, and do it well, or even better, then I may pay a bit more attention to what they recommended. If I see nothing that leads me to beleive the reviewer knows his f-stop from his ISO, I just move on.
All the talk about cropping, saturation, curves, and such usually has no effect on me. My "style" usually invlolves trying to get the crop when I take the picture....that's why the lens zooms in and out. I can also back up, or move up. I'm not totally against PS but I started with film, and don't enjoy spending a ton of time at the computer. I try...that's try...to get it right in camera, but if I miss, I will attempt a PS repair. I get turned off on photo's that look too sharp...almost fake. The colors should look like they looked to your eye.
I have used the whipping post, once, and have given C&C. I noted the info I got, but that doesn't mean I would have changed a thing I did with the shot. It did make me think, or open my mind a bit more. That is always good.
In the end I shoot for me, always have, always will. If I don't like the picture it's wrong. If someone else likes it, and I don't, the picture is still wrong...to me anyway.
Sometimes I laugh at the C&C given, too much clutter in the background, shadow is wrong...whatever. Sometimes when we shoot, we have no choice other than deal with the conditions we were presented with. It's not like the photographer has total control of a scene.....unless it's in the studio.
Whilst I haven't read this whole thread, just snippets, I just wanted to add my little take on the C&C/whipping etc etc ....
I've used the whipping post once, and probably won't bother again .. .and this is why. I really liked the image I posted, but wanted to see if anyone else did ... I could see that it wasn't everybodys taste .. anyway, I got "blown out bits", "not cropped right" etc etc ...
I had an exhibition just last week. The damn shot sold out of its editions (admittedly only 5 in an edition, but none-the-less). I realised that the people who might buy my shots generally know NOTHING about photography ... they don't care if there is a glary white tree, if they "feel like they've been there" or as one person thought "I feel drawn into thephotograph" others were saying "the difference between the light and the dark makes the dark seem alive and the white seem dead, whereas that isn't what it actually is - let me buy one!".......
So, as I am my own worst critic, I shall stick with that. I do like hearing what others think of my shots and I learn a hell of a lot that way, but always take it with a grain of salt. Hell, I made $500 from a single shot that no-one liked in the whipping post. Says it all me thinks
how about dedicated reviewers/critics
I'm with you-the whipping post is badly named and reviews/critiques need to be confined to those who are respected critics who can also provide constructive criticism- a few photos that I have submitted have been well and truly bagged in there but sell well-I have now sold one photo 8 times for $350AUD, which was roundly attacked in there.What does that say?
I must say that if I based my decisions on the whipping post I would not have sold anything.
How about reanaming it Gallery Critique and get some people in there who have a broad appreciation of different types of photography and the tact and language skills to critique constructively.
Appoint them as to their likes and expertise so that
a sports photographer can review sports shots,an art photographer can review abstracts etc,a landscape photogrepher,portrait specialist,nature etc.
Allow all appointed reviewers to have their say outside their area of interest as we don't want to limit their input,and just because someone is a portrait photographer does not mean that thay cant have something constructive to say on a landscape.
Limit the submissions to one a month so that the reviewers are not swamped and have some time to give considered replies and people are restricted to submitting their best photo for the month.
IIRC, there's a website that does exactly what you propose. You submit the shot, the expert panel writes up a critique of the shot & sends it to you. I cannot remember the name of the place though.
In any open photo critique fora, I always take the advice with a grain of salt & check out the shots from the more coherent posters. I haven't used the Whipping Post (yet), but usedto use the FM critique forum a lot (excellent users back then--mostly still there, but more chaff now), and photosig for a while (that got silly fast).
The satire site posted earlier is painfully accurate, funny as it is.
BTW, I think that shot is great. So there's a tiny bit of stump blown out, big deal.
In any open photo critique fora, I always take the advice with a grain of salt & check out the shots from the more coherent posters.
Yeah, I think that's the point.
Just because someone wrote it, doesn't mean it's true. I'd say if you put a shot in Whipping Post and got even one idea that you found helpful, your experience was a success.
I don't think the answer is to change the people who submit the feedback. I think the answer is to be clear about what you're hoping to get out of the submitting a shot. And to have some thick skin to let the bad advice bounce off of you.
I've learnt a lot from posting in the whipping post, but I can also filter out the valid criticism from the pedantic nonsense that is sometimes posted.
I think it's a useful resource for people like myself who are only a few months into taking their photography seriously, however I would question the merit of more experienced photographers posting, we all look for validation but I think if you're honest with yourself you know when a shot is good or not if you've been at it for a while.
The point made earlier about pixel peeping and obsession with sharpness and low noise made me think about a photograph I saw yesterday at a Costa Coffee. I first viewed it from across the room and thought, wow, that's sharp, is it a photograph or a computer generated image, it was so perfect.
When I saw the image close up however it was clearly a photograph, it was a bit noisy in places and not overly sharp on close inspection. But from the distance the pictures would usually be viewed it was perfect.
I think it's too easy to get carried away with technical details when we sit so close to our monitors and zoom around our images obsessing over every little imperfection.
...
I've used the whipping post once, and probably won't bother again .. .and this is why. I really liked the image I posted, but wanted to see if anyone else did ... I could see that it wasn't everybodys taste .. anyway, I got "blown out bits", "not cropped right" etc etc ...
I had an exhibition just last week. The damn shot sold out of its editions (admittedly only 5 in an edition, but none-the-less). I realised that the people who might buy my shots generally know NOTHING about photography ...
....
Congrats on the selling (and a very nice shot BTW).
However, I think you're mixing two things. Whipping Post is not about a commercial success. It's about people learning the ropes and trying to be at least common rules compliant. Photography - as an art - is extremely subjective and as such appeals differently to different people. In WP we do "pixel peeping" and observing such things as "blowouts" and "rules of third" simply because for many novice photographers technical aspects of their work are still the goals to master.
And this is what WP is for. I don't care if Mr. Adams or Monsieur Cartier-Besson post there - they would get the same whipping (and the famous flcker experiment with HCB photo of bicyclist shows just that).
Now, does it have anything to do with the picture's or photographer's commercial success? None at all.
WP's primary idea is that one may need to learn the rules first before starting breaking them. Geniuses break them from the start. The rest of us learn first and break away later..
If you relate commercial success to the quality of work, you would have a lot of explaining to do when it comes to the commercial success of many movies, tv shows, songs, and books. What sells and what is considered actually good are two very different things.
Here's the value of critique, and why the Whipping Post has value:
1) As a photographer, one great way to get better is to study other photographs. Ones that you like, and ones that you don't. As Shay said, inspiration. Sometimes it inspires you through positive example, and other times, it will inspire you by showing you what you do not want to shoot.
2) The act of critiquing sharpens your eye. Hopefully not just your pixel-peeping eye, but also your creative, compositional, subject oriented eye. Yeah, we get a lot of pixel peepers everywhere online. Both the internet and digital photography are a filter that leave us with the most technologically minded. The gift of photography is that it is an opportunity to stretch the creative side, while enjoying the tinkering of the technical side.
3) Any critique offers something to learn from. Some critiques you'll go, "Yeah, that's a great idea I want to incorporate into my photographical vision." Other critiques you will respond with, "No way, that is not the kind of photographer I want to be." Anything in between, it's your job to figure out which side of the fence that comment is on. If you're not sure how you feel about a critique you've received, take the time to get clear, there's value in that.
I would love to have the Whipping Post be a much less pixel-peeping experience, to increase the quality of the crit, to broaden the discussions to how the images make you feel, what the subject says to you, and WHY. Any ideas on how to improve the WP are welcome. PM me, or start a thread...or....maybe just start being the change that you want to see in the WP.
WP's primary idea is that one may need to learn the rules first before starting breaking them. Geniuses break them from the start. The rest of us learn first and break away later..
Just MHO.
I disagree. The WP's primary idea is to get away from pixel peeping and to critique an image as a photographic WHOLE. No where does the WP encourage a stick-to-the-rules approach, it's just that so many of our members (at least those on the WP) are comfortable with the rules.
If you relate commercial success to the quality of work, you would have a lot of explaining to do when it comes to the commercial success of many movies, tv shows, songs, and books. What sells and what is considered actually good are two very different things.
That's a non-sequitur, because you're using the word "good" in two different ways, with two different meanings. One meaning of good is aesthetically challenging, pleasing, artistically realized, or something along those lines. The other meaning of "good" is commercial success. Both are good. Different goods, but good nonetheless. Success is good. Trust me, I've worked on plenty of "bad" movies that do well in the box office. That's good, and it's a good movie for performing well. It just has a different set of criteria than the ones that I use for what I like to view.
Funny how the internet works. I was reading a thread here on Dgrin, that directed me to another site, where I was reading about sites with good advice. I read several, and one directed me to a link that was supposed to be required reading.
That link came back here to this older, but wiser thread. Three degrees of separation?
There's a lot of great advice on this site. I wonder how we index it so we can all continue to learn?
Z
It is the purpose of life that each of us strives to become actually what he is potentially. We should be obsessed with stretching towards that goal through the world we inhabit.
Funny how the internet works. I was reading a thread here on Dgrin, that directed me to another site, where I was reading about sites with good advice. I read several, and one directed me to a link that was supposed to be required reading.
That link came back here to this older, but wiser thread. Three degrees of separation?
There's a lot of great advice on this site. I wonder how we index it so we can all continue to learn?
My response should be taken with a grain of salt as I have only been reading the posts on this board for just over a couple months (and posting for just a week or so). But, being "new" to photography (as an art form anyway) I have to say that I agree with this completely. There have been many times that I have read critiques in the whipping section that made absolutely no sense. If you view photography as a true art form, then who are you to determine if the photographer requesting critiques should move his subject a little to the left (this is simply the last critique that stuck out in my head).
I my VERY HUMBLE opinion, shouldn't the artist be responsible for those choices and creations? We are here simply to view it, study it, and learn from it. No?
Art is incredibly subjective. That's all. I think it may be more in the delivery of the critiques, rather than the idea of critiques themselves. Just two cents from VERY fresh eyes!!
Khaos!!!! Right on! A whole wonderful thread that in which I agree with your post, Khaos, immediately.
I am sorry I missed this discussion.
Now I am noticing that everyone appears to agree with whatever you said, no counting pixels, stand back, etc..............
I am glad that they do, agree that is.
Now if at least the words, "Art is subjective" could be added to all critiques good and bad with total recognition that one's opinion is only one's opinion, well, that would be cool, IMO.
You all rock!!
ginger (of course that is just my opinion, of course, smile.)
Comments
ginger
Really, I don't think I have any expectations of what to happen at dgrin. I think it's a fine place, I'm mostly just conversing...
That said I did make a suggestion in this very thread. My point is not to change things, just add new things maybe
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
I'm happy to read some of the other responses too (although I find some are hypocritical)
I say... love your camera, love your craft, have fun and express yourself!
I enjoy visiting sites like www.deviantart.com where the younger, edgier crowd haven't been "conditioned" to the "rules"
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
Shay, your viewpoint is very much like what you would find in an Ayn Rand novel. Very appealing, and also very true for artistic expression. I do want to add that not all photography is art.
I am no photography expert, but I work in a field that is very much driven by "committee". I edit movie marketing. You should hear some of the hair-brained ideas that I have to try or constraints that are put on the work that I do. These are almost always driven by a real or perceived marketing force. Sometimes they're just plain old bad creative ideas.
I also get an immense amount of constructive, positive feedback that makes what I do better.
Photography isn't always art, in fact it's usually commerce, just like the trailers and TV spots that I cut.
The thing that I've learned through years of doing this work is to find my stylistic voice in spite of the fact that I get all this feedback that alternates between useful and stupid. I do think that there is value in getting critiqued by pros, amateurs and the un-washed masses *IF* you can avoid what you described so well here:
I think that what you're really saying is that relying on others to determine your artistic style is a dead end, and I agree with that completely. If you can manage to avoid that, however, through strength of character and conviction in yourself, then critique can be useful from any source, no matter how advanced in the field.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
I attended two while living in Indiana, they were held in Wisconsin. I loved them, a few things I learned still are with me. I hate to say "a few" for fear of scaring you, but that was me. The workshops were very valuable. They were held by well known photographers of the time: the 70s. I think that would be an atmosphere you would thrive in.
Others here have attended workshops and have had very good things to say.
You can choose the one (s) that you think would benefit you. I can't afford it, or I would go to one.
Plus, the more you can be around these "guys", say at their get togethers, the more you could learn almost by osmosis. I would love to do that myself, too.
Another thing is to "listen" in here. You don't need to have an assignment to "learn". However, if you want an assignment, what could be better than the challenge here. I have learned a lot by "listening" to what others write, then following up something that interests me.
I was thinking of all of these things. I thought of them in relation to your response to me. They are all good options. I think any of them would be a valuable learning experience. You may already take advantage of this group, here. dGrin has the best price tag, but any knowledge is priceless.
If you can afford it, the seminar/workshop thing is valuable in many ways you mentioned and seem to be interested in. It would be worth looking into. We belong here and enjoy each other, but that does not mean we cannot take advantage of so many opportunities that are out there, according to our individual needs and desires.
Bless,
ginger
Why, oh why did I major in math?
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
I think this would be kinda fun
Thanks
Fred
http://www.facebook.com/Riverbendphotos
no,that was a joke,"smugmugger critics etc"
Longitude: 145° 08'East
Canon 20d,EFS-60mm Macro,Canon 85mm/1.8. Pentax Spotmatic SP,Pentax Super Takumars 50/1.4 &135/3.5,Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumars 200/4 ,300/4,400/5.6,Sigma 600/8.
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006/06/great-photographers-on-internet.html
Its quite entertaining.
I often check out the photo's of those that C&C my stuff, and if they shoot the same subject matter, and do it well, or even better, then I may pay a bit more attention to what they recommended. If I see nothing that leads me to beleive the reviewer knows his f-stop from his ISO, I just move on.
All the talk about cropping, saturation, curves, and such usually has no effect on me. My "style" usually invlolves trying to get the crop when I take the picture....that's why the lens zooms in and out. I can also back up, or move up. I'm not totally against PS but I started with film, and don't enjoy spending a ton of time at the computer. I try...that's try...to get it right in camera, but if I miss, I will attempt a PS repair. I get turned off on photo's that look too sharp...almost fake. The colors should look like they looked to your eye.
I have used the whipping post, once, and have given C&C. I noted the info I got, but that doesn't mean I would have changed a thing I did with the shot. It did make me think, or open my mind a bit more. That is always good.
In the end I shoot for me, always have, always will. If I don't like the picture it's wrong. If someone else likes it, and I don't, the picture is still wrong...to me anyway.
Sometimes I laugh at the C&C given, too much clutter in the background, shadow is wrong...whatever. Sometimes when we shoot, we have no choice other than deal with the conditions we were presented with. It's not like the photographer has total control of a scene.....unless it's in the studio.
Now go out and shoot...for yourself.
I've used the whipping post once, and probably won't bother again .. .and this is why. I really liked the image I posted, but wanted to see if anyone else did ... I could see that it wasn't everybodys taste .. anyway, I got "blown out bits", "not cropped right" etc etc ...
I had an exhibition just last week. The damn shot sold out of its editions (admittedly only 5 in an edition, but none-the-less). I realised that the people who might buy my shots generally know NOTHING about photography ... they don't care if there is a glary white tree, if they "feel like they've been there" or as one person thought "I feel drawn into thephotograph" others were saying "the difference between the light and the dark makes the dark seem alive and the white seem dead, whereas that isn't what it actually is - let me buy one!".......
So, as I am my own worst critic, I shall stick with that. I do like hearing what others think of my shots and I learn a hell of a lot that way, but always take it with a grain of salt. Hell, I made $500 from a single shot that no-one liked in the whipping post. Says it all me thinks
if anyone cares, here is the shot:
Kate
http://www.headintheclouds.smugmug.com/
www.headinthecloudsphotography.blogspot.com
Canon EOS 30D
Sigma 10-20
Canon 75-300 f4-5.6
Canon 18-55
Canon 50 f1.8
Canon 430EX
I'm with you-the whipping post is badly named and reviews/critiques need to be confined to those who are respected critics who can also provide constructive criticism- a few photos that I have submitted have been well and truly bagged in there but sell well-I have now sold one photo 8 times for $350AUD, which was roundly attacked in there.What does that say?
I must say that if I based my decisions on the whipping post I would not have sold anything.
How about reanaming it Gallery Critique and get some people in there who have a broad appreciation of different types of photography and the tact and language skills to critique constructively.
Appoint them as to their likes and expertise so that
a sports photographer can review sports shots,an art photographer can review abstracts etc,a landscape photogrepher,portrait specialist,nature etc.
Allow all appointed reviewers to have their say outside their area of interest as we don't want to limit their input,and just because someone is a portrait photographer does not mean that thay cant have something constructive to say on a landscape.
Limit the submissions to one a month so that the reviewers are not swamped and have some time to give considered replies and people are restricted to submitting their best photo for the month.
Over to you.
Greg
Longitude: 145° 08'East
Canon 20d,EFS-60mm Macro,Canon 85mm/1.8. Pentax Spotmatic SP,Pentax Super Takumars 50/1.4 &135/3.5,Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumars 200/4 ,300/4,400/5.6,Sigma 600/8.
In any open photo critique fora, I always take the advice with a grain of salt & check out the shots from the more coherent posters. I haven't used the Whipping Post (yet), but usedto use the FM critique forum a lot (excellent users back then--mostly still there, but more chaff now), and photosig for a while (that got silly fast).
The satire site posted earlier is painfully accurate, funny as it is.
BTW, I think that shot is great. So there's a tiny bit of stump blown out, big deal.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
Just because someone wrote it, doesn't mean it's true. I'd say if you put a shot in Whipping Post and got even one idea that you found helpful, your experience was a success.
I don't think the answer is to change the people who submit the feedback. I think the answer is to be clear about what you're hoping to get out of the submitting a shot. And to have some thick skin to let the bad advice bounce off of you.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
I think it's a useful resource for people like myself who are only a few months into taking their photography seriously, however I would question the merit of more experienced photographers posting, we all look for validation but I think if you're honest with yourself you know when a shot is good or not if you've been at it for a while.
The point made earlier about pixel peeping and obsession with sharpness and low noise made me think about a photograph I saw yesterday at a Costa Coffee. I first viewed it from across the room and thought, wow, that's sharp, is it a photograph or a computer generated image, it was so perfect.
When I saw the image close up however it was clearly a photograph, it was a bit noisy in places and not overly sharp on close inspection. But from the distance the pictures would usually be viewed it was perfect.
I think it's too easy to get carried away with technical details when we sit so close to our monitors and zoom around our images obsessing over every little imperfection.
Congrats on the selling (and a very nice shot BTW).
However, I think you're mixing two things. Whipping Post is not about a commercial success. It's about people learning the ropes and trying to be at least common rules compliant. Photography - as an art - is extremely subjective and as such appeals differently to different people. In WP we do "pixel peeping" and observing such things as "blowouts" and "rules of third" simply because for many novice photographers technical aspects of their work are still the goals to master.
And this is what WP is for. I don't care if Mr. Adams or Monsieur Cartier-Besson post there - they would get the same whipping (and the famous flcker experiment with HCB photo of bicyclist shows just that).
Now, does it have anything to do with the picture's or photographer's commercial success? None at all.
WP's primary idea is that one may need to learn the rules first before starting breaking them. Geniuses break them from the start. The rest of us learn first and break away later..
Just MHO.
Here's the value of critique, and why the Whipping Post has value:
1) As a photographer, one great way to get better is to study other photographs. Ones that you like, and ones that you don't. As Shay said, inspiration. Sometimes it inspires you through positive example, and other times, it will inspire you by showing you what you do not want to shoot.
2) The act of critiquing sharpens your eye. Hopefully not just your pixel-peeping eye, but also your creative, compositional, subject oriented eye. Yeah, we get a lot of pixel peepers everywhere online. Both the internet and digital photography are a filter that leave us with the most technologically minded. The gift of photography is that it is an opportunity to stretch the creative side, while enjoying the tinkering of the technical side.
3) Any critique offers something to learn from. Some critiques you'll go, "Yeah, that's a great idea I want to incorporate into my photographical vision." Other critiques you will respond with, "No way, that is not the kind of photographer I want to be." Anything in between, it's your job to figure out which side of the fence that comment is on. If you're not sure how you feel about a critique you've received, take the time to get clear, there's value in that.
I would love to have the Whipping Post be a much less pixel-peeping experience, to increase the quality of the crit, to broaden the discussions to how the images make you feel, what the subject says to you, and WHY. Any ideas on how to improve the WP are welcome. PM me, or start a thread...or....maybe just start being the change that you want to see in the WP.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
I disagree. The WP's primary idea is to get away from pixel peeping and to critique an image as a photographic WHOLE. No where does the WP encourage a stick-to-the-rules approach, it's just that so many of our members (at least those on the WP) are comfortable with the rules.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
That's a non-sequitur, because you're using the word "good" in two different ways, with two different meanings. One meaning of good is aesthetically challenging, pleasing, artistically realized, or something along those lines. The other meaning of "good" is commercial success. Both are good. Different goods, but good nonetheless. Success is good. Trust me, I've worked on plenty of "bad" movies that do well in the box office. That's good, and it's a good movie for performing well. It just has a different set of criteria than the ones that I use for what I like to view.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
It's a lot of letters, that's for sure!
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
"Hey, I just gotta be ME!"
That link came back here to this older, but wiser thread. Three degrees of separation?
There's a lot of great advice on this site. I wonder how we index it so we can all continue to learn?
Z
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
I my VERY HUMBLE opinion, shouldn't the artist be responsible for those choices and creations? We are here simply to view it, study it, and learn from it. No?
Art is incredibly subjective. That's all. I think it may be more in the delivery of the critiques, rather than the idea of critiques themselves. Just two cents from VERY fresh eyes!!
I am sorry I missed this discussion.
Now I am noticing that everyone appears to agree with whatever you said, no counting pixels, stand back, etc..............
I am glad that they do, agree that is.
Now if at least the words, "Art is subjective" could be added to all critiques good and bad with total recognition that one's opinion is only one's opinion, well, that would be cool, IMO.
You all rock!!
ginger (of course that is just my opinion, of course, smile.)