Is exposure to and study of good photography a bad thing?

[pixmedic]

what I find interesting about photography forums, is that so very very VERY often, the people that are barking loudest about the lack of "quality" on the site are often producing mostly "shoes" themselves.
whats wrong with shoes anyway? just because you are not an artist producing museum quality pieces doesn't mean that you are not working to improve. maybe some of the people that are producing this so-called mediocre work are already doing as good as they are ever going to. should they quit photography then? I don't see how insulting them adds any practicality to the situation, other than making one person feel superior by virtue of pointing out the flaws of another.

 

[bribrius]

what I find interesting about photography forums, is that so very very VERY often, the people that are barking loudest about the lack of "quality" on the site are often producing mostly "shoes" themselves.
whats wrong with shoes anyway? just because you are not an artist producing museum quality pieces doesn't mean that you are not working to improve. maybe some of the people that are producing this so-called mediocre work are already doing as good as they are ever going to. should they quit photography then? I don't see how insulting them adds any practicality to the situation, other than making one person feel superior by virtue of pointing out the flaws of another.

still looking for the real slim shady. I may not find him online though. Too bad, i about given up. Maybe some day i will find him and take a photo walk so i can learn what real art and photography is. I know he is out there somewhere, shooting. somewhere....

 

[Gary A.]

I agree with both pixmedic and sashbar. There is much truth in both their perpectives. Which is possibly the overriding truth here in this forum ... perspective. The perspective here is wide, a full spectrum of prespectives and desires and needs and implementation. Not all are looking to be photojournalists or artists or hobbyists or great or bad ... but ... conversely some are here hopping to be the photojournalist, artist, hobbyist ... great. Sashbar's perspecitive reflects a person with some passion about photography and pixmedic speaks to those where photography is more hobby. Both perspectives are accurate and both target an audience of participants on the forum.

With a a broad spectrum forum, it is hard to provide negative feedback which is relevant and appreciated by all.

But, what I don't get are those posters who are much more negative than positive, who post just to be contary as oppsed to constructive. Sure, we all have bad days ... but to be consistanctly negative for no reason than to stir up an arguement or put people down, is more a reflection of their needy personality than anything photographic. As pixmedic pointed out, a lot of this negativity come form those who rarely post their own photos.

Gary

PS- Remember sashbar, that the camera is a tool. As a tool, its instrinstic use is documentation. Hence the overwelming documentation images. While news is fleeting and poetry timeless ... there is a greater need for news in our daily lives than poetry. Poetry effects the individual and news affects the collective. Poetry brings tears and smiles ... news can start and end wars. Poetry for the soul ... news is for life.

PPS- As it is easy to use a hammer to hit something ... it is easy to use a camera for documentation purposes. It takes an artist to use a hammer for something more, something beyond pounding.
G

 

[The_Traveler]

what I find interesting about photography forums, is that so very very VERY often, the people that are barking loudest about the lack of "quality" on the site are often producing mostly "shoes" themselves.
whats wrong with shoes anyway? just because you are not an artist producing museum quality pieces doesn't mean that you are not working to improve. maybe some of the people that are producing this so-called mediocre work are already doing as good as they are ever going to. should they quit photography then? I don't see how insulting them adds any practicality to the situation, other than making one person feel superior by virtue of pointing out the flaws of another.

I sure don't get your point.

what I find interesting about photography forums, is that so very very VERY often, the people that are barking loudest about the lack of "quality" on the site are often producing mostly "shoes" themselves.

First you are insulting people who are posting here about quality saying their work isn't special. Since I was one of those, I assume you are saying this about me too. Insulting my work without saying it to my face and naming me is a kind of passive aggressive behavior, hostile but trying to hide it.

Then you are saying that non special work is OK

whats wrong with shoes anyway? just because you are not an artist producing museum quality pieces doesn't mean that you are not working to improve. maybe some of the people that are producing this so-called mediocre work are already doing as good as they are ever going to

Then you go ahead and say that critiquing work is wrong because:

I don't see how insulting them adds any practicality to the situation, other than making one person feel superior by virtue of pointing out the flaws of another

Well you just insulted me, and others, in a way to make you feel better.
I don't get your point here.

 

[pixmedic]

what I find interesting about photography forums, is that so very very VERY often, the people that are barking loudest about the lack of "quality" on the site are often producing mostly "shoes" themselves.
whats wrong with shoes anyway? just because you are not an artist producing museum quality pieces doesn't mean that you are not working to improve. maybe some of the people that are producing this so-called mediocre work are already doing as good as they are ever going to. should they quit photography then? I don't see how insulting them adds any practicality to the situation, other than making one person feel superior by virtue of pointing out the flaws of another.

I sure don't get your point.

what I find interesting about photography forums, is that so very very VERY often, the people that are barking loudest about the lack of "quality" on the site are often producing mostly "shoes" themselves.

First you are insulting people who are posting here about quality saying their work isn't special. Since I was one of those, I assume you are saying this about me too. Insulting my work without saying it to my face and naming me is a kind of passive aggressive behavior, hostile but trying to hide it.

Then you are saying that non special work is OK

whats wrong with shoes anyway? just because you are not an artist producing museum quality pieces doesn't mean that you are not working to improve. maybe some of the people that are producing this so-called mediocre work are already doing as good as they are ever going to

Then you go ahead and say that critiquing work is wrong because:

I don't see how insulting them adds any practicality to the situation, other than making one person feel superior by virtue of pointing out the flaws of another

Well you just insulted me, and others, in a way to make you feel better.
I don't get your point here.

you assume too much, and understand too little.
im not surprised.

 

[The_Traveler]

you assume too much, and understand too little.
im not surprised.

You know, I've always thought I was a fairly intelligent and perceptive person.
Maybe you are just too subtle for me.
Rather than pass this off with just a sly insinuation, why don't you just explain to me where I was wrong.

So you weren't saying that people who posted about quality actually did mediocre work?
It really did sound like that.

And you didn't say that criticizing people was being done to make the giver feel superior?
Damn, it sounded like that too.

Why don't you walk this cat back and be real clear so that unsophisticated people like me can really understand your position?

 

[pixmedic]

you assume too much, and understand too little.
im not surprised.

You know, I've always thought I was a fairly intelligent and perceptive person.
Maybe you are just too subtle for me.
Rather than pass this off with just a sly insinuation, why don't you just explain to me where I was wrong.

So you weren't saying that people who posted about quality actually did mediocre work?
It really did sound like that.

And you didn't say that criticizing people was being done to make the giver feel superior?
Damn, it sounded like that too.

Why don't you walk this cat back and be real clear so that unsophisticated people like me can really understand your position?

firstly, you seem to assume everything is about you. contrary to your popular belief, the forum does not revolve around you...usually.
secondly, you are the king of sly insinuations and under-the-table insults. (for latest example, see my wedding thread posted today)
I apologize if subtlety is not your forte.

 

[The_Traveler]

firstly, you seem to assume everything is about you. contrary to your popular belief, the forum does not revolve around you...usually.
secondly, you are the king of sly insinuations and under-the-table insults. (for latest example, see my wedding thread posted today)
I apologize if subtlety is not your forte.

In regards to the sly insinuations in your casual wedding thread.
You may not have noticed but that was posted in the people forum where c/c is allowed and, even if you are a moderator, you really should not take offense at someone's critiquing your posting.
I said they all looked tilted to me.
And you decided that they were OK with you.

Now your response, you deny that you were insulting me and in the process, take the occasion to insult me directly.
Well, you were referring to someone, weren't you?
Who was it?
Shouldn't the person you were insulting indirectly know it?

 

[pixmedic]

firstly, you seem to assume everything is about you. contrary to your popular belief, the forum does not revolve around you...usually.
secondly, you are the king of sly insinuations and under-the-table insults. (for latest example, see my wedding thread posted today)
I apologize if subtlety is not your forte.

In regards to the sly insinuations in your casual wedding thread.
You may not have noticed but that was posted in the people forum where c/c is allowed and, even if you are a moderator, you really should not take offense at someone's critiquing your posting.
I said they all looked tilted to me.
And you decided that they were OK with you.

Now your response, you deny that you were insulting me and in the process, take the occasion to insult me directly.
Well, you were referring to someone, weren't you?
Who was it?
Shouldn't the person you were insulting indirectly know it?

oh, they know.


in answer to your first part...
yes you said they all look tilted.
yes i posted in a critique area.
and yes i am OK with editing, and appreciative, of your feedback.
but...
the comment about a "dutch tilt party", when you can obviously see that i was not going for any sort of dutch tilt, is insulting, and completely unnecessary to prove your point. which I acknowledged as accurate btw.

plus...
"even if I am a moderator"
do you see what you did there?
I mean, I said you were right about the tilt. how is that offended by your critique?
i was offended by the insult you felt was necessary to throw in there at the end.

 

[pixmedic]

I suppose I should say something about the OP since im in here.

honestly, I don't think exposure to and/or study of anything that will increase your knowledge or awareness is a bad thing. I cant imagine that studying art or its history would hurt your craft, so i would think it would only help it. Even if all it does is give someone a little better appreciation of art in general, i would say its a positive gain.

 

[Derrel]

I clicked on the "Reveal Ignored Content" message in this thread. Big mistake.

 

[bribrius]

Men at Lunch A Documentary About One of the Most Iconic Photos Taken in NYC

pretty much where i stand. This, among other images that stand the test of time. About it.

 

[Forkie]

Most of us are here to learn and share. In particular, to better our photographic skill. The only/best/quickest way to improvement is by learning from those who have successfully travel down a similar photographic path. It is hard to learn from a lesser skilled person. Most of us are seeking the exceptional image ... this forum not only displays what other have captured, but also provides insight into the details of the exceptional capture.

Agree to a extent.

I posted a photo elsewhere once. It was of a construction crew. Someone commented they thought it was a excellent image. The comment beneath it said it was a good image, but it was the men on the construction crew that were excellent.
I have always had that stuck in my mind. A photo doesn't mean a damn thing until it does. And it doesn't matter how "excellent" it is. Perhaps there is a difference in defining excellent? The primary content of the photo is the time, place, subject matter. To me, that is where the excellent comes from. I love photography, but it has its place as me being the peon attempting to capture something of significance. Photographers have become self absorbed imo. They take a photo of a building and suddenly they think they equate to the guys that designed and built it. What is worse, is most copied the perspective of how to shoot the building from another photographer, who copied from another, and the building has probably been shot a thousand times. They are all worried about liking each others photos and improving "skills". I am not sure exactly what the "exceptional" image is.

I think it has more to do with subject content and meaning than any self perceived skill set from copying other photographers and how many likes one gets. something that will still have significance in fifty years. That, could be a truly exceptional image. Since most of us here will probably never pull off that once in a lifetime shot, but might manage to perfect some more worthless flower images. Perhaps we should lighten up a little. There is some great work out there, but it isn't worth anything. No matter how excellent it is. Because the subject matter is non existent. Great capture, yes. Exceptional, no. And as stated, to try to make them exceptional they are photo shopping the chit out of them.

Odds are too. If someone pulls out that "once in a life time" exceptional image. It was chit luck. Right place, right time. MIght even be someone who isn't even a photographer and snapped it with their Iphone. I mention this because the vast photos, perception, like thing, i actually feel could very well be a detriment. Most of the photos people take, will never amount to anything. This is primarily a hobby site. The commercial side is much smaller, but still doesn't promote once in a lifetime "exceptional" type images. It promotes sellable images. I only suggest, people stop concerning themselves so much and do what they want. Hate to see someone spend twenty years walking down that wrong path. sure, they will gain skills. But they would anyway following their own without so much likes concerns.

This IS a online phenomenon. I pity the people that put hours and hours (weeks and weeks maybe?) or whatever into a photo just to get likes. what a waste and mis-direction.

And if we are to claim that all this is good, then we have to make the judgement that photography has improved over the last umpteen years since before so much of the online phenomenon. Me personally, i don't think it has improved. I think the equipment has to a extent, i dont think the photographers themselves have improved at all. They have just become more reliant on equipment and less on skill.

Here is where the difference is. You are placing importance in the subject of your photo, whereas the photographers place their importance in their depiction of the subject. It's composition of the photo that makes a photo, not the subject itself.

A good subject does not a good photo make.

 

[bribrius]

Most of us are here to learn and share. In particular, to better our photographic skill. The only/best/quickest way to improvement is by learning from those who have successfully travel down a similar photographic path. It is hard to learn from a lesser skilled person. Most of us are seeking the exceptional image ... this forum not only displays what other have captured, but also provides insight into the details of the exceptional capture.

Agree to a extent.

I posted a photo elsewhere once. It was of a construction crew. Someone commented they thought it was a excellent image. The comment beneath it said it was a good image, but it was the men on the construction crew that were excellent.
I have always had that stuck in my mind. A photo doesn't mean a damn thing until it does. And it doesn't matter how "excellent" it is. Perhaps there is a difference in defining excellent? The primary content of the photo is the time, place, subject matter. To me, that is where the excellent comes from. I love photography, but it has its place as me being the peon attempting to capture something of significance. Photographers have become self absorbed imo. They take a photo of a building and suddenly they think they equate to the guys that designed and built it. What is worse, is most copied the perspective of how to shoot the building from another photographer, who copied from another, and the building has probably been shot a thousand times. They are all worried about liking each others photos and improving "skills". I am not sure exactly what the "exceptional" image is.

I think it has more to do with subject content and meaning than any self perceived skill set from copying other photographers and how many likes one gets. something that will still have significance in fifty years. That, could be a truly exceptional image. Since most of us here will probably never pull off that once in a lifetime shot, but might manage to perfect some more worthless flower images. Perhaps we should lighten up a little. There is some great work out there, but it isn't worth anything. No matter how excellent it is. Because the subject matter is non existent. Great capture, yes. Exceptional, no. And as stated, to try to make them exceptional they are photo shopping the chit out of them.

Odds are too. If someone pulls out that "once in a life time" exceptional image. It was chit luck. Right place, right time. MIght even be someone who isn't even a photographer and snapped it with their Iphone. I mention this because the vast photos, perception, like thing, i actually feel could very well be a detriment. Most of the photos people take, will never amount to anything. This is primarily a hobby site. The commercial side is much smaller, but still doesn't promote once in a lifetime "exceptional" type images. It promotes sellable images. I only suggest, people stop concerning themselves so much and do what they want. Hate to see someone spend twenty years walking down that wrong path. sure, they will gain skills. But they would anyway following their own without so much likes concerns.

This IS a online phenomenon. I pity the people that put hours and hours (weeks and weeks maybe?) or whatever into a photo just to get likes. what a waste and mis-direction.

And if we are to claim that all this is good, then we have to make the judgement that photography has improved over the last umpteen years since before so much of the online phenomenon. Me personally, i don't think it has improved. I think the equipment has to a extent, i dont think the photographers themselves have improved at all. They have just become more reliant on equipment and less on skill.

Here is where the difference is. You are placing importance in the subject of your photo, whereas the photographers place their importance in their depiction of the subject. It's composition of the photo that makes a photo, not the subject itself.

A good subject does not a good photo make.

wrong imo.
it takes both.
you can do a great job capturing a worthless subject and end up with a worthless photo. This is where phototgraphers get a little to "stuck up" on their skills. They think because the perfectly captured a park bench in means the photo has some merit when it really is worthless.

 

[bribrius]

i actually STOPPED doing that, and cut back on abstracts and such. Just because it occurred to me a simple photo of the entire park had more value than taking a "really neat" photo of a park bench.