Missed opportunity

[panblue]

Fred Berg is one of my favourite contributors. He regulalrly posts a few pictures. It's relaxed. Just "nice" shots you know? Not so much gearhead BS but all the same, an appreciation of an optic, situational light/context. I know nothing about Herr Berg but I don't get a grandiose 'pushing-the-boundaries' vibe from reading his posts or chatting generally about the photo or the camera or the subject in the shot.

Can we create a scene, (without displacing/inconveniencing any of the other 57 varieties), for photographers like me and a number of others who are not looking to be coached, aren't green but aren't the font of all knowledge either since Nicéphore Niépce, don't want to be commercial photographers, aren't upgrading every fortnight to keep up with joneses; just would like to share the keepers of what they photograph every other day and use that as a social device with the option of, at any moment, discussing photography as deeply or a casually as they wish ?

If Photo Themes is the only option, then OK, I'm hanging out there, but PT seems not the place to back and forth over the top of incoming, photographic contributions. This mandatory C&C culture has bugged me for years on this forum and other forums. If I want to change what or how I photograph things, I will be INSPIRED TO CHANGE, you know? The fact that a random 19 year/90 year old who I have never interacted with in Oklohoma/Omsk/Osaka 'isn't feeling it', matters not one iota to me and has never done since the dawn of 28Kb dial-up.

cheers

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Just post your photos.

 

[pixmedic]

Fred Berg is one of my favourite contributors. He regulalrly posts a few pictures. It's relaxed. Just "nice" shots you know? Not so much gearhead BS but all the same, an appreciation of an optic, situational light/context. I know nothing about Herr Berg but I don't get a grandiose 'pushing-the-boundaries' vibe from reading his posts or chatting generally about the photo or the camera or the subject in the shot.

Can we create a scene, (without displacing/inconveniencing any of the other 57 varieties), for photographers like me and a number of others who are not looking to be coached, aren't green but aren't the font of all knowledge either since Nicéphore Niépce, don't want to be commercial photographers, aren't upgrading every fortnight to keep up with joneses; just would like to share the keepers of what they photograph every other day and use that as a social device with the option of, at any moment, discussing photography as deeply or a casually as they wish ?

If Photo Themes is the only option, then OK, I'm hanging out there, but PT seems not the place to back and forth over the top of incoming, photographic contributions. This mandatory C&C culture has bugged me for years on this forum and other forums. If I want to change what or how I photograph things, I will be INSPIRED TO CHANGE, you know? The fact that a random 19 year/90 year old who I have never interacted with in Oklohoma/Omsk/Osaka 'isn't feeling it', matters not one iota to me and has never done since the dawn of 28Kb dial-up.

cheers

Its called the "just for fun" section

 

[runnah]

So, what's being said, is that everyone is using the forum as a means to their own end, regardless of how other people think they should be using it.

I'm here for easy money and loose women...

I'm here for you, baby.

Go on...

 

[coastalconn]

Interesting thread. This is why I dislike people and only shoot birds

 

[The_Traveler]

Interesting thread. This is why I dislike people and only shoot birds

you better hope that the birds don't get a chance to shoot back. :lmao:

 

[molested_cow]

Where I am right now, the most I get to shoot is landscape. The population here is relatively low. I want to take my camera around and walk around the village and photograph people. I guess I am too timid to do that even though I know a lot of the kids here. And it's been raining all the time here too(excuse).

Landscape is great, but I am not nearly as inspired shooting landscape compared to shooting street and people.

Then there are the bugs, but looking at what's already in the macro section, I don't see any reason to post mine. I know it's really quite mediocre.

About posting photos. I notice that I don't get many replies, if any at all. Not sure why. Too many in one thread? Too boring? Too...? So that has been discouraging.

 

[rexbobcat]

About posting photos. I notice that I don't get many replies, if any at all. Not sure why. Too many in one thread? Too boring? Too...? So that has been discouraging.

+10^10

 

[gsgary]

I disagree on Winogrand entirely; he shot like a man on amphetamines, running sooooo much film through a Leica that he wore the pressure plate out; he shot the chit out of the most mundane and tedious stuff, trying to become Robert Frank, and died with so much undeveloped film it was ridiculous. Winogrand srikes me as the epitome of the spray-and-pray street shooter.

HCB...yeah...I'm familiar with his decisive moment, everything with a 50mm lens stuff...it was pretty cool back in the 1940's...but not much of him was in the photos...it was all about the SUBJECTS. Not the artistry, but the SUBJECTS. He also never printed his own images....he just snapped them.

Joel Meyerowitz...I know him almost exclusively from his Cape Light book, and his use of color negative film back in the early 1980's, when shooting color negative film for "serious" work was a bit anti-establishment. Joel Mererowitz + Cape Light - Google Search

Alexy Titerenco is much, much more of a photographic "artist" than Winogrand or HCB; Winogrand never met a scene he didn't think warranted 20-36 frames, while HCB looked for "moments" where things came together, and had a bit more restraint than Winogrand, who if he were shooting digitally, would probably come home with 128 gigs of files every 8 hours out...

To me, artistry is when the photo is less about the SUBJECT, and more about intent, and photographer intervention and creation...so many people cannot separate great SUBJECT MATTER from artistry...they confuse the two...when a photo is all about the SUBJECT, there's usually very,very little artistry in the shot. That to me is why documentary photography is typically not very "artistic", but merely representational...mere recordings of what existed for one, short,brief moment. The images might just as well have been snapped by an unmanned Google camera roaming the streets...if ya' know what I mean...

Not many can see the shots like HCB and Winogrand

 

[gsgary]

I wrote a response but how about posting it in its own thread?

Lew

I think it had its own thread a while back

 

[Dikkie]

I'm still quite happy with the responses I get on my pictures here on this forum.
Although, everything still can get better in the future.

Compared with another forum I'm posting photos on, this one here is really nice with friendly users.
I know some forum where they only want to criticize your photo if it's posted larger than a specific amount of pixels, for example minimum 900px width or height. If you post a smaller one, they say they cannot criticize the photo. They always say it's not sharp if you post smaller, ridiculous. Sharpness has nothing to do with size, to me. And furthermore, they don't want to criticize the composition, bokeh, colours, other stuff...

To me, this forum is way better. People already react, are nice, and make jokes from time to time.

 

[manaheim]

+10^10

There are several threads out there on getting more critique. Go read up on those if you haven't already.

 

[The_Traveler]

I know some forum where they only want to criticize your photo if it's posted larger than a specific amount of pixels, for example minimum 900px width or height. If you post a smaller one, they say they cannot criticize the photo. They always say it's not sharp if you post smaller, ridiculous. Sharpness has nothing to do with size, to me. And furthermore, they don't want to criticize the composition, bokeh, colours, other stuff...

If you post small pictures, then the details get lost and, without saying that sharpness is the ultimate factor, if the critic can't see what you are doing, how can the critic say anything sensible?
I don't have any idea why people would not post decent size pictures and take up the surface they are given to use.
It makes no sense to me that, if you are trying to get people to respond to an image, to shrink it to where it can't be well presented.

 

[Dikkie]

I know some forum where they only want to criticize your photo if it's posted larger than a specific amount of pixels, for example minimum 900px width or height. If you post a smaller one, they say they cannot criticize the photo. They always say it's not sharp if you post smaller, ridiculous. Sharpness has nothing to do with size, to me. And furthermore, they don't want to criticize the composition, bokeh, colours, other stuff...

If you post small pictures, then the details get lost and, without saying that sharpness is the ultimate factor, if the critic can't see what you are doing, how can the critic say anything sensible?
I don't have any idea why people would not post decent size pictures and take up the surface they are given to use.
It makes no sense to me that, if you are trying to get people to respond to an image, to shrink it to where it can't be well presented.

Well, on this forum, they cán criticize the photos very well. All stuff is visible.

But these same photos can't be criticized on that other forum I was talking about. It's not the fault of the size of the photo, it's those forum people there who are the problem.
Anyway, the photo's I'm talking about are at least 200px wider than those I see on your website.

That's why I still like this forum, right here, people aren't that difficult.

 

[runnah]

+10^10

There are several threads out there on getting more critique. Go read up on those if you haven't already.

Be nice if it made a difference one way or the other.