Skieur's brutally honest critiques

[dots]

I don't understand why either of these blokes think that they are remotely qualify to hold an exclusive critique forum where they take center stage, as if their opinions are more valuable than anyone else's.

It's just in bad taste.

I voiced similar sentiments in the original thread, as had others, and all that was removed, put in a seperate thread and locked. :thumbup:

Da! Comrade Jeweler ... although as you would be i'm sure, aware; in complete accordance with Dictat 28 regarding the suppression of counter information, prejudicial to the doctrine of The People's Union of Critical Collectivisation.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

...there WAS a specific, publicly-stated request by Markw for other forum members NOT to offer their opinions in his thread...

Yes, but that's kinda what I don't really GET about these "my critiques and ONLY my critiques" threads...well, it's ONE part of what I don't get, anyway. I get that it was the thread that Markw started, so that rather than post your photo for everyone who wanted to C&C them, you could instead post them in HIS thread, for only MarkW to C&C...let's ignore the fact that I don't really get why you'd want to do that. Even if I highly value his C&C (and honestly, I have no opinion on that...haven't read enough of them to know), wouldn't you want to post your photo ONCE for lots of people to C&C??

But, anyway....so, MarkW starts a thread, inviting folks to submit photos for him to C&C...then someone else, shockingly, disagrees with Markw's assessment and offers an alternate C&C on the same thread, and he requests for that to not happen anymore. Now, here's the second part of what I don't get...since when does the OP get to run strict controls on how "their" thread is to work, and what sorts of replies are acceptable for their thread? Isn't it *reasonable* to assume, in a PUBLIC forum, that the PUBLIC has the right to reply to your posts? So, the OP could C&C other's photos all he wants, I just don't really get why he gets to keep other people from disagreeing and offering alternate C&C on the PUBLIC forum thread that he started...

But, that's just me...

All I know is, if I want a photo C&C'ed, I believe I'll just start my thread requesting such...

 

[skieur]

I don't understand why either of these blokes think that they are remotely qualify to hold an exclusive critique forum where they take center stage, as if their opinions are more valuable than anyone else's.

It's just in bad taste.

Certainly NOT my decision. Space Fuzz came on with his critique. No problem for me.

skieur

 

[skieur]

I don't understand why either of these blokes think that they are remotely qualify to hold an exclusive critique forum where they take center stage, as if their opinions are more valuable than anyone else's.

It's just in bad taste.

I voiced similar sentiments in the original thread, as had others, and all that was removed, put in a seperate thread and locked. :thumbup:

If I interpretted things correctly, Bitter suggested rather sarcastically and with a dry sense of humour that the whole site was set up wrong and we should have a chaos of individual critiquers with their own threads.

I indicated that I liked his comment...as in what I sensed as humour and sarcasm.

It seemed that both he and I were taken seriously, which I don't think either of us, expected.

Have I got it correct, Bitter?

skieur

 

[usayit]

I have no opinion on how the critiques are managed...... everyone has an opinion...


My problem is when a few voice their opinion over and over and over insisting on being a prick....


My four year old does that when he whines... i usually send him to the corner... and guess what ? He shuts the f up.

 

[skieur]

I have no opinion on how the critiques are managed...... everyone has an opinion...


My problem is when a few voice their opinion over and over and over insisting on being a prick....


My four year old does that when he whines... i usually send him to the corner... and guess what ? He shuts the f up.

Trying out your profanity, eh?

skieur

 

[Overread]

Mark started a thread where he offered to give his input specifically on peoples photos that they chose to post into that thread itself. There was no limitation or restriction on those people posting those photos elsewhere on the site to get input - but Mark's thread was made for him to give his insight specifically. Now when others started to weigh in to give their input the thread quickly started to become a mess - you had multiple people giving advice on the same shots whilst also having new photos being added - people chatting and other things.
Thus I split the thread into several subthreads only to try and allow the others to give their insight into the photos posted whilst also not having people falling over each others feet in a single monster thread.

We've had these threads where one person gives their input to multiple people before and nobody has ever complained nor fallen into disagreement about them - however for some reason Mark's has attracted this negative attitude.

 

[usayit]

We've had these threads where one person gives their input to multiple people before and nobody has ever complained nor fallen into disagreement about them - however for some reason Mark's has attracted this negative attitude.

hmmm I wonder why? Not your fault but to me the problem is clear as day.

 

[Nickhadad]

 

[skieur]

Excellent sharpness and very effective lighting. The lighting also separates the dog's head from the background as it should. Clean background and good use of depth of field. The expressive eye of the dog makes a great centre of interest and the highlight in the eye works very well too. The edge lighting on the nose and the whiskers add texture to the shot as well. The overall shot brings out that it is an interesting dog with personality. Although I much prefer colour, this is an excellent black and white shot. 10/10