I would also like to point out, that with few exceptions it has been my observation here on TPF that those who proudly (and loudly) announce every "rule" that a picture has allegedly broken, are the ones that rarely offer any other insight besides "that needs portrait orientation" or, "study the rule of thirds". I feel this is the cool cyber way of taking the easy way out rather than offering any significant insight as to how the error could have been corrected. a simple "this would have looked better in portrait because...." or, the rule of thirds might have worked better here because..." or even, this needed better lighting, and this is how you could have done it..." would be a far better critique. unless of course, the sole purpose is to trash the picture. instead we see..."go study the rule of thirds", or "go read up on lighting" or "go read your cameras manual". YES..ALL OF THAT should be done. and usually before the post was made. but seriously people, this is a photography forum on the internet...and SOMETIMES, the only thing stupider than the newbie questions we get here, are the newbie-esque answers that are given. how are we supposed to expect the new photographers to take our advice (not mine of course), assimilate our critique, and follow our suggestions, when half the C&C is just as asinine as the newbies lack of research? when giving C&C, if your intention is to teach, then teach. if your intention is to just put down someones work for the sake of making yourself look better, or seem smarter...please just refrain from commenting.
P.S. I dont lump Tee in with that lot, i was just hijacking this post. :mrgreen:
