A plan to end the pointless squabbling about who is right.

[The_Traveler]

It seems that there is a lot of extended arguing about subjects sort of tangential to the issue of photography.
And the reason this goes on is because the authority of some people to speak on specific subjects is just not easily recognized.
I thought to enable simple identification when an expert joins in any discussion, TPF could enact a system like the merit badges that boy scouts use or medals like the military to designate that someone has achieved a certain level of knowledge, skill and experience and is the expert.

The may look a bit bulky to fit in a signature so we could either use ribbons or an alternative display.

or like

That way, if a recognized and designated expert steps into a discussion and makes a pronouncement, arguements will stop.
We could think of him or her, not as having an opinion, but as a vessel that will transmit truth and fact.

I would like to be considered as an expert in cropping, independent travel in Asia and disaster management (yes, I know disasters don't come up often but we would be prepared.)

We may need a committee to examine credentials and qualifications befoire establishing the cadre of experts but that's just an administrative matter.

Any suggestions or nominations?

 

[jaomul]

Which ones would you have?

 

[pixmedic]

I nominate @Derrel for...pretty much everything
@runnah for comedy relief.
@Buckster for copyright issues
@tirediron for portraiture and lighting
@Vtec44 and @Robin Usagani for weddings
@coastalconn for wildlife (there's actually a few fantastic wildlife guys here, but i don't keep up on that as much)
and @pixmedic for cardiac defibrillation, ventilator support, and critical care transports.

 

[medic2230]

I think we should add a purple heart for the one who loses the argument and is proven wrong. That should help weed out the self proclaimed experts.

 

[jsecordphoto]

I think that's a great idea. I'd love one for landscape astrophotography so I can squash the advice that surely comes up "just shoot at like iso400 f22 for 1/100"

 

[baturn]

Can I be Master of Bulls--t Recognition?

 

[sm4him]

Well, I must admit, when I worked with Boy Scouts and mentored Scouts working their way toward Eagle, I was always just a teensy little bit jealous that *I* was the one with all the actual knowledge and THEY were the ones getting the merit badges...
Since I taught the Photography merit badge, I think that would give me an edge on all the TPF competition, right?
Of course, I also taught Environmental Science, Nature, Insects, and at least a dozen other merit badges, so I'm pretty much just the Grand Poobah of Things Worth Earning a Merit Badge In.
I'm also a top authority on Bird ID. Unless they're shorebirds. Or sparrows. Or birds from outside the Southeastern U.S.

Okay, never mind any of that^^
I just want to be the Grand TPF Matriarch of Truth, Civility and Sarcastic Wit.

 

[waday]

We'll also need peer review of all comments made by the experts, so we should have at least two people per category.

We'll also need someone to bring all these people back to Earth when their head expands to a point where it has it's own gravitational field.

This seems like so much work. Can I have the laziness badge?

 

[The_Traveler]

I nominate @Derrel for...pretty much everything
@runnah for comedy relief.
@Buckster for copyright issues
@tirediron for portraiture and lighting
@Vtec44 and @Robin Usagani for weddings
@coastalconn for wildlife (there's actually a few fantastic wildlife guys here, but i don't keep up on that as much)
and @pixmedic for cardiac defibrillation, ventilator support, and critical care transports.

Perhaps we should set criteria that the medals should be for actual demonstrated skills not just what the person thinks of themselves.

For my sake, I am really tired of the constant 'I know more than you because blah, blah, blah' and, in my extensive experience which is unfortunately invisible and unknowable to you'.
Beyond tiring and offputting to the readers, it just makes the people involved look bad to others.

There are just too, too many people who spout reams of bullcrap, never post pictures that add to the level of the site and just sit around waiting to look smart or educated.
Spouting facts or factoids, that could be better gotten from real authorities, doesn't make the site any better.
Posting images that provide great examples does.
Giving critique on images does.

Yes, yes, we get lots of things from different kinds of members.
I've heard that from the mods before.
But we have a superfluity of words from people who post little or nothing, no matter what they claim.
And that doesn't help the site at all.

 

[pixmedic]

I nominate @Derrel for...pretty much everything
@runnah for comedy relief.
@Buckster for copyright issues
@tirediron for portraiture and lighting
@Vtec44 and @Robin Usagani for weddings
@coastalconn for wildlife (there's actually a few fantastic wildlife guys here, but i don't keep up on that as much)
and @pixmedic for cardiac defibrillation, ventilator support, and critical care transports.

Perhaps we should set criteria that the medals should be for actual demonstrated skills not just what the person thinks of themselves.

For my sake, I am really tired of the constant 'I know more than you because blah, blah, blah' and, in my extensive experience which is unfortunately invisible and unknowable to you'.
Beyond tiring and offputting to the readers, it just makes the people involved look bad to others.

There are just too, too many people who spout reams of bullcrap, never post pictures that add to the level of the site and just sit around waiting to look smart or educated.
Spouting facts or factoids, that could be better gotten from real authorities, doesn't make the site any better.
Posting images that provide great examples does.
Giving critique on images does.

Yes, yes, we get lots of things from different kinds of members.
I've heard that from the mods before.
But we have a superfluity of words from people who post little or nothing, no matter what they claim.
And that doesn't help the site at all.

I was just trying to give my answer to the inevitable question of who we would personally recommend.
which, except for cropping, travel, and disasters, you haven't made any other suggestions.

this leads to another problem as well.
who are the judges?
the official committee would obviously be the admins/moderators...which begs the question...do most people trust our judgement on who is qualified?
slippery slope naming someone "expert" in a field that is often subjective.
what happens if we name someone an "expert oon cropping" and a large portion of the forum disagrees?
do we drop their title? does it just become a popularity contest then?
does the forum vote on who they think is "best of show"? how often do we do re-elections?

 

[waday]

does the forum vote on who they think is "best of show"?

I'll vote, assuming they are paraded around on a leash. Pictures required. Otherwise, I abstain.

 

[pixmedic]

I think in the end, it just comes down to people having to do a little of their own research.
if you take something your read from a random person on the internet at face value and do no further research on your own....well...your taking your chances, expert or not.

if i critique portraits and you arent sure if i know anything at all about it...you can look at my work and decide for yourself.
some people like my work, some don't, but i rarely "critique" anything that isn't people because I feel I have little to offer critique wise outside of portrait work.
if someone critiques my work, I look at that persons body of work whenever possible. Is that persons work something that i want to learn from? if they have no work to show, then I just have to take their critique into account based on other peoples remarks along with my own research.

 

[Derrel]

I think that's a great idea. I'd love one for landscape astrophotography so I can squash the advice that surely comes up "just shoot at like iso400 f22 for 1/100"

Hey--why you knockin my secret sauce for nighttime landscape shots!? I like 'em realllllllllllllllllllly dark, so that is the best exposure triangle setting--eva!

 

[jaomul]

I learn from this site. There are a few who post a lot so I think names get recognised, and with time I find there are some posters who I really think their posts are worth reading, some who regurgitate internet dribble or copy and paste with a twist that makes it look like their own.

With regard to actually critique on a photo- I (and maybe others??) consider myself an enthusiast who likes tech, photos and the discussion here. I think i have a few thousand posts since I started but I'd bet 1% of them critique on others photos. I don't think I'm good enough to give anything other than basic guidance to something that can be easily fixed, or is obviously wrong. When I read some of the critique from others they seem to have a very big knowledge of how to see flaws on a photograph. For me its mostly "thats good" except maybe crop this way, others see a small spec of sensor dust i would miss, others are very artistic.

Recently I did critique a few photos , only to get a smart arse defence back, which could have turned into keyboard warrior type stuff if I decided to reciprocate. Maybe, just maybe that's why there isn't a massive amount of people who do critique, relative to the amount of members here

 

[robbins.photo]

I think that's a great idea. I'd love one for landscape astrophotography so I can squash the advice that surely comes up "just shoot at like iso400 f22 for 1/100"

Hey--why you knockin my secret sauce for nighttime landscape shots!? I like 'em realllllllllllllllllllly dark, so that is the best exposure triangle setting--eva!

So would ISO 400, F22, 1/8000 work? Some of us just don't have the attention span needed to stand around for a whole 1/100 of a second.