I thought this was Beyond the Basics?

[kundalini]

Honesty is not always harsh.

True, however your followup....

If you were actually honest, you'd be both harsh, and sympathetic...and then you wouldn't need a disclaimer for your harshness.

....has holes large enough to drive a Mack truck through. Honesty has no prerequisites or supplementals. It just is.

I laugh at how you're actually agreeing with me...yet acting like you're correcting me. I never said honesty had prerequisites bud. My point was simple...you wouldn't have harshness as the only thing coming from you if you were honest. My post was about how you would be responding to people if you were actually an honest person. Simple...not anything to be read into, not a description of honesty. Not an end all be all statement as to everything regarding honesty.

You better park your mac truck, because the opening isn't that big, and your perception is way off.

Now you're just blowing hot air.

Oh wait, ............................

 

[SlickSalmon]

it is true that some people don't know the difference between being harsh and being honest, what I said was that being honest can be harsh, which is true. If a photo isn't good and I say it isn't good, it is my honest opinion and it is harsh. If I say a photo isn't good and offer the reasons why I think it isn't good that is still an honest opinion and it is still harsh. If I say a photo isn't good, say why and then add what I would have tired to do to fix it, it's still an honest opinion, it's harsh , but it also offers some help. It just softens the statement that it isn't a good photo.

There's a difference between honesty and candor. Honesty involves taking responsibility; candor involves plainly speaking your mind. Honesty is a virtue; candor is not. It has become fashionable these days to speak candidly and justifying it by saying, "hey, I was just being honest". Sports figures in particular use this tactic. But, there is nothing inherently honorable in candor. Generally, it's just rude.

A good critique uses the PIN principle -- say something Positive, something Interesting and something Negative. And the Negative comment should be offered in a way that is respectful of and helpful to the recipient.

 

[pgriz]

Interesting distinction. It's a bit like saying honesty is giving you the truth you can handle, while candor is giving you the truth whether or not you can handle it.

 

[PASM]

Alternative structure:

New to photography/'just bought a camera' type section:
Basically a Blog/FAQ of A-Z primers with comment & response fields beneath.
Bone questions explained in the published texts are ignored. Clarifications are addressed.

Landscape
(subsections: Novice, Intermediate, Advanced (minimum 500 post count); Equipment, Gallery, Buy & Sell),

Portrait
(subsections: Novice, Intermediate, Advanced (minimum 500 post count); Equipment, Gallery, Buy & Sell),

Documentary/Event
(subsections: Novice, Intermediate, Advanced (minimum 500 post count); Equipment, Gallery, Buy & Sell),

Nature
(subsections: Novice, Intermediate, Advanced (minimum 500 post count); Equipment, Gallery, Buy & Sell),

Close-up/Macro
(subsections: Novice, Intermediate, Advanced (minimum 500 post count); Equipment, Gallery, Buy & Sell),

Commercial Photography
(subsections: Apprentice, Intermediate, Advanced (minimum 500 post count); Equipment, Marketing, Jobs, Gallery, Buy & Sell),

Image Editing
(subsections: Novice, Intermediate, Advanced (minimum 500 post count); Equipment, Marketing, Jobs),

Printing, Matting & Framing
(subsections: Novice, Intermediate, Advanced (minimum 500 post count); Equipment, Marketing, Jobs, Buy & Sell),

Having a 'general' category invites aimless crap.
50 post count is necessary to post in any Equipment cat. 50 post count is required to post in Buy & Sell, Marketing, Jobs. Seperate buy & sell subsections solve the 'which camera/lens should I buy? - no further info' requests.

 

[pgriz]

Logical structure. You can add, under "commercial photography" the categories: "Thinking about it", then "wannabee", prior to Apprentice. I don't see the need to put the "Buy & Sell" into each section - one catch-all should suffice IMHO. Do you propose to limit access to "advanced" to those that have accumulated minimum 500 posts in "Novice" and "intermediate" categories for each section, or total for all sections? Then again, if people are here mainly to socialize and rubberneck, then having all these sections may actually work against that objective.

 

[PASM]

Just some ideas I thought about while I was drinking a coffee For the purposes of the discussion.

Logical structure. You can add, under "commercial photography" the categories: "Thinking about it", then "wannabee", prior to Apprentice. I don't see the need to put the "Buy & Sell" into each section - one catch-all should suffice IMHO. Do you propose to limit access to "advanced" to those that have accumulated minimum 500 posts in "Novice" and "intermediate" categories for each section, or total for all sections? Then again, if people are here mainly to socialize and rubberneck, then having all these sections may actually work against that objective.

 

[PASM]

I don't see the need to put the "Buy & Sell" into each section - one catch-all should suffice IMHO. Do you propose to limit access to "advanced" to those that have accumulated minimum 500 posts in "Novice" and "intermediate" categories for each section, or total for all sections? Then again, if people are here mainly to socialize and rubberneck, then having all these sections may actually work against that objective.

I thought individual buy & sells could contain those 'which camera should i get' threads as well as ads. Someone posts a 'which camera/lens should i get' thread. Someone else has to then ask what kind of photography the OP wants to do etc. Therefore if someone posts such a request e.g in portrait, they're goiing to get better suggestions than as things are now, where people weigh in with whatever they happened to own and use regardless.

500 advanced yes. If someone advanced joins, then for a while they have to help out the true intermediates with advice to gain enough posts to go up.

I know of one photoforum where you cannot even join as a full member until you've successfully submitted three images that have gained enough merit points to do so. I know TPF isn't like that but it's a good policy as that forum (amateurs as well as professional) maintains a high standard.

Re: C&C...maybe a good system is that gallery pictures do not receive written C&C. Only a star rating, or no rating at all. C&C should be a two way process. Posting a picture of a fence post and saying 'please c&c' is BS. Whatever meaningful dilemma someone has about composition can be phrased as a discussion topic. The photog is either skilled enough to make a great photo of a fence post or they're such a novice that the C&C just becomes an excercise in diplomatically informing them it's rubbish.

 

[SlickSalmon]

Interesting distinction. It's a bit like saying honesty is giving you the truth you can handle, while candor is giving you the truth whether or not you can handle it.

Not at all. Honesty has nothing to do with giving anyone anything. It's about owning up to your own actions. Let's put it this way -- Honesty is admitting you broke your wife's favorite family heirloom; candor is telling your wife she's fat. Which one is honorable; which one is just rude?

 

[pgriz]

Interesting distinction. It's a bit like saying honesty is giving you the truth you can handle, while candor is giving you the truth whether or not you can handle it.

Not at all. Honesty has nothing to do with giving anyone anything. It's about owning up to your own actions. Let's put it this way -- Honesty is admitting you broke your wife's favorite family heirloom; candor is telling your wife she's fat. Which one is honorable; which one is just rude?

Well, that view of "honesty" is one of several. In the context of the discussion earlier, an "honest opinion" is one where the giver of the opinion gave what you would call a candid opinion. There's enough ambiguity in the use of the English language that several meanings can be associated with the word or phrase, and they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. I am not disagreeing with your use of "Honest" in terms of admitting responsibility, but the colloquial use of "honest" also covers what you call candor. Therefore I was intrigued by your distinction between the two.

 

[pgriz]

@ PASM - the difficulty with any system which is self-classifying (ie, into beginner, intermermediate, advanced), is that people have a distorted view of when they qualify to move from one class into another. As well, in a field as varied as photography, one can be very good (ie, advanced) in one area, but be a beginner in another. So how will any classification system work if there are not objective criteria by which one could determine at which level one should be classed? And is such objective criteria can exist, who will set these up? In a different field, due to the occasional life and death consequences, the sea kayaking community has organized a number of associations which are responsible for grading kayakers. The one with the most developed program is the BCU (British Canoe Union), which has 1-star to 5-star levels of accomplishment, and in the past few years, has recognized multiple tracks and parallel training/coaching tracks. There the criteria are published, the training courses organised to meet the criteria, and the tests are given by independent assessors who verify that you can carry out all the criteria for that level. If, on the other hand, the classification system is based on informal self-assesment, then we will have continuing mixing of skill levels that some may find, ah, irritating. I don't claim to know the answer. However, it would be interesting to write a self-assessment guide to see what the advanced photographers would consider to be required at each level.

 

[PASM]

I agree with the points you make.

 

[PASM]

I'm struggling a bit to express some ideas..I think the main thing is people want a resource/environment, tailored to their needs and interests. A lot of people want some answers to what are quite basic questions and procedures in photography. Then there's the 'special interest groups' - more advanced lighting techniques, darkroom processes discussion, technical aspects of digital technologies and workflow, old cameras. The forum structure accomodates these quite well I guess.

 

[SlickSalmon]

Interesting distinction. It's a bit like saying honesty is giving you the truth you can handle, while candor is giving you the truth whether or not you can handle it.

Not at all. Honesty has nothing to do with giving anyone anything. It's about owning up to your own actions. Let's put it this way -- Honesty is admitting you broke your wife's favorite family heirloom; candor is telling your wife she's fat. Which one is honorable; which one is just rude?

Well, that view of "honesty" is one of several. In the context of the discussion earlier, an "honest opinion" is one where the giver of the opinion gave what you would call a candid opinion. There's enough ambiguity in the use of the English language that several meanings can be associated with the word or phrase, and they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. I am not disagreeing with your use of "Honest" in terms of admitting responsibility, but the colloquial use of "honest" also covers what you call candor. Therefore I was intrigued by your distinction between the two.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Yes, I agree that there are many definitions for "honesty". In fact, I just looked it up, and at least one on-line dictionary considers its use synonymous with "candor". An older, 60 year-old dictionary defines it as "refraining from lying, cheating, and stealing". I'm left to conclude that the merging of "honesty" and "candor" is a newer definition. Personally, I find this troubling. I'm seeing an increasing level of incivility in society, and that incivility is being reflected in many of the C&C comments I see on this site. I find nothing useful in telling someone "your photo sucks", or "I dunno, man, I just don't get it", or "your photo just looks like more over-processed HDR garbage". I've read all of these comments recently. To justify these kind of comments as virtuous "honesty" is crudely off target. Hence, I don't agree with the OP's comment that "being honest is harsh".

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I find nothing useful in telling someone "your photo sucks", or "I dunno, man, I just don't get it", or "your photo just looks like more over-processed HDR garbage". I've read all of these comments recently. To justify these kind of comments as virtuous "honesty" is crudely off target. Hence, I don't agree with the OP's comment that "being honest is harsh".

Can you post links to the threads that have "your photo sucks" as replies? From what I have seen, this is much less common than many claim it to be, and is certainly not a majority of the comments left.

You take the good, you take the bad,
You take them both, and there you have...

 

[Christie Photo]

I thought this was Beyond the Basics?

Wow. I just read through this entire thread.

All this coming out of... in which forum users choose to post?

Apologizing ahead of time does not give license to brutalize. Further, honesty does not equal being offensive. And certainly, there's nothing admirable about stating that you will have no regrets or offer any apology when you learn you have offended some one.

I too have worked as a professional photographer for over 35 years, but I have no illusions that it justifies being inconsiderate of people's feelings... definitely not under the guise of being helpful or honest.

-Pete