The Pact

[skieur]

Does that mean that if I don't get any replies from the serious photographer, belonging to the pact that you all think my stuff sucks and you're not interested?

Quite the contrary.
If you get no replies, that means your photos are perfect!
Well, thats how I see it anyways. :mrgreen:

Actually, it often means that there are so many things wrong with it that the person does not know where to start.

skieur

 

[manaheim]

.

Debating the pact is essentially like debating whether or not I should like the color blue.

Dude, you made the thread.
What's wrong with discussing it ?

Well, my very unclear point was that you are, in effect, arguing something that is subjective while at the same time arguing that the pact is in err in some way because it argues the subjective.

To be more specific, the pact is an agreement of sorts that people are trying to adhere to in order to make TPF into what they feel is a better place. You needn't agree with it, you needn't go along with it, you needn't like it... but those of us who are going along with it have every right to do so regardless of your opinions.

You are somewhat going against the pact because you feel it is [I'm paraphrasing a lot here, so forgive me] objectifying art and boiling it down to some core rules. You don't think that is so. Fine, don't go along with the pact. It's subjective.

I am referring to this forum, not to a photography competition. I wasn't aware that the raison d'etre of this forum was to groom, prepare or otherwise emulate a photography competition.

No one ever said it was. I suppose it could be since the mods like to make these rather specious claims that the board is "member driven" (kinda like driving the titanic using a spoon as an oar, but ok)... It's pretty clear to me that the pact says...

Critique is given to help people become better photographers, artists, and occasionally business people.
​

In fact, the intent of the critique was to make it all internal. Everything there is about what the individual will adhere to... it makes no assertions about TPF as a body. Again... don't agree? Fine. Don't "sign" the pact. Simple enough.

To a point, but I say that even blown highlights or underexposure is subjective. I've had people tell me that pictures were underexposed. And when they do, I take another look. At first I think they were right more often, but some of what is underexposed for one person, is just exactly how I want it in my picture. Who decides ? I say the ultimate decision is with the photographer, and is subjective. That's why I said to give your critique, but not in a way that makes your version of photographic reality the only one.

Yes, and the pact also says...

• I may not agree with or use all that I receive, but I will still but I will still take into consideration all critique provided.
• When appropriate, I will challenge those who critique me to gain a better understanding.

Since this is in the very same pact as all the stuff about giving critique, I think it's fair to assume that...

1. The person giving the critique fully expects the person receiving it to not always accept or agree with the critique (because we understand that there is an element of subjectiveness to it)
2. We are hoping that people here on TPF will know enough about the pact and have read it to know that it's totally ok to disagree with us and do your own thing. Maybe they're not ansel adams now, but maybe they will be soon... far be it for us to hold them down to an overexposure rule.

That being said, I do personally believe you have to understand the rules in order to know how to break them effectively. I've seen a lot of evidence of this in a variety of art forms, including painting, writing and music.

The role of critique is to be clear, concrete, understandable and as objective as possible without any artificial attempts at sensitivity or diplomacy which usually fail.

Maybe in a training school or something. Manners dictate otherwise. Now if you are critiquing a fellow photographer who you've exchanged critiques with for a while, and you both understand each other's way, then sure, dispense with the extra words and get right to the heart of the matter. You both understand each other, and on some level you both understand that the other person's critique has a largely SUBJECTIVE quality to it.
But for those who critique others whom they don't know, it's way better to take the time to package critique with a bit more care. Pretty much the same things goes for every avenue of life.

Manners are one thing, not being true to the critique is another. If your manners get in the way of honesty, then you're doing a disservice to everyone. That, of course, is my opinion. It also appears to be the opinion of many who are going with this pact. You don't agree? No problem. Don't go with it.

The pact does say...

Lastly, I will make a reasonable effort not to hurt feelings, but not at the cost of sacrificing the aforementioned statements.
​

I would like to know how this pact will affect those on this board who do not post it in their signature. I for one just accept everything listed in the Pact as common sense. I do understand what you all are aiming at, offering serious critique to those who ask, but what happens to the serious new photographer who is not part of this group. I posted yesterday a thread asking for C&C. There's been alot of activity on this thread, but not one post from anyone with over 50 posts when I do ask for help. Does that mean that if I don't get any replies from the serious photographer, belonging to the pact that you all think my stuff sucks and you're not interested? Are you not critiquing because I don't have the pact in my signature and you think I can't take it. Is my type of photography not your style?

I really think that if you show the "Pact" in your signature, it also carries a responsibility of showing that you are a very serious photographer.

Also, I was very disappointed to learn from this pact, that I was not Ansel Adams.

Moo... first, this isn't some kind of rule of law here. It's just a "member-driven" (mad coughing fits) initiative to try to instill a different culture here at TPF... we're just trying to drag it back in time a few years to when it was just as nice and cool, but more focused on growing people as photographers as well. Not just answering "What camera should I buy?" 3000 times.

Your decision to add or omit the item or sign or not sign it has no bearing whatsoever on anything... except that I would argue that the more people do, the better off TPF will be... but that is subjective.

And no, you don't have to be any level of photographer to put this in your sig and agree to it. You just have to try to follow the rules in it. If you read it carefully, you will see that it talks about things that will apply to both experienced and inexperienced photogs.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Quite the contrary.
If you get no replies, that means your photos are perfect!
Well, thats how I see it anyways. :mrgreen:

Actually, it often means that there are so many things wrong with it that the person does not know where to start.

skieur

I wonder where you can download a sense of humor.

 

[Dagwood56]

I posted this link [or one like it] a while back, but I can't find the thread now. Perhaps it will take some of the question out of "what" critque is and "how" it is given.

Basic Strategies in Reading Photographs

 

[fwellers]

This forum is on photography and the raison d'être of many here has already been stated. They want to get into semi-professional or full professional photography. Interest in competitions has also been mentioned by a number of members too. This forum is not some "nursery", isolated from the reality of what photography is like when shooting or working with outher photographers.

In my negligence I must have missed the mission statement of this forum. Can you point me to that place where it says that the purpose of existence for this forum is a training boot camp for professional and semi pro photographers and that all else is nursery school ?
Maybe I ventured onto the wrong forum half a year ago. I am just a hobbyist.

Put another way, if the technique of underexposure does NOT contribute to the quality and effectiveness of the image then it is a weakness. That point is basic.

And therein lies the rub. The determination as to what contributes to the quality of an image is SUBJECTIVE.

The ultimate decision on technique may be by the photographer BUT the ultimate decision as to the success of that technique in creating an effective image with visual impact is by the VIEWER. A photo must stand on its own in terms of quality and analysis.

Again. A subjective judgment. Not FACT.

As far as manners go, any charaterization or interpretation can be taken from a clear, concise and accurate evaluation. The reader may be the one with the "problem". The only clearly bad manners approach is using terms like: "This sucks." which usually displays the ignorance of the person making the comment more than anything else.

As long as both parties agree to what a clear and concise vocabulary of evaluation consists of. Something about flys, honey and vinegar comes to mind.

In the area of carrying manners to the point of silliness, I have seen comments such as "Great photo, but..." going on to list several things that are totally wrong with it in every area from the technical to the aesthetic.

One of the managerial skills people learn regarding critiqueing and evaluating co-workers ( which holds true throughout life ), is to say something positive before letting them have the goods so to speak. You're example seems like someone who was trying to do that.

 

[fwellers]

Well, my very unclear point was that you are, in effect, arguing something that is subjective while at the same time arguing that the pact is in err in some way because it argues the subjective.

:thumbup:

But I don't see anything wrong with that. I think that critique is too subjective and means too many things to too many people to have a bunch of people running around with "THE PACT" strapped to their sig. If everyone on the forum was an aspiring pro, and this forum's purpose was to provide that level of training then that's another story. As I said to Skieur, I am under the impression this is a social forum that has a training element to it.
I do realize that my argument is also subjective, so I guess the circle is closing in on yours and my little discussion.

To be more specific, the pact is an agreement of sorts that people are trying to adhere to in order to make TPF into what they feel is a better place. You needn't agree with it, you needn't go along with it, you needn't like it... but those of us who are going along with it have every right to do so regardless of your opinions.

I so stipulate your honor. You do have the right. I will not try and arrest you for brandishing of "the pact" :meh:.

 

[manaheim]

^^^

Done and done, then. hehe...

That was an amusing ride.

On your managerial comment, btw... you're kind of getting into 'how not to be an arsehole", which is absolutely valid but may be beyond the scope of the pact to teach.

 

[manaheim]

See now, like this... this is downright phuquing rude... non-constructive, and non-helpful. This is not what the pact wants people to act like.

 

[mooimeisie]

See now, like this... this is downright phuquing rude... non-constructive, and non-helpful. This is not what the pact wants people to act like.

I totally agree with this comment on this comment. I don't think this forum or the pact will every be able to teach manners.

 

[Antarctican]

So should we, as members who can police the forum, be correcting the offender and letting them know that such unhelpful/rude comments are not the correct way to comment on someone's pics? I vote yes

 

[fwellers]

On your managerial comment, btw... you're kind of getting into 'how not to be an arsehole", which is absolutely valid but may be beyond the scope of the pact to teach.

And usually beyond the scope of my abilities.

 

[manaheim]

So should we, as members who can police the forum, be correcting the offender and letting them know that such unhelpful/rude comments are not the correct way to comment on someone's pics? I vote yes

Yeah, I was wondering that myself. I'm thinking if we're going to turn things around a bit, we're going to have to take to the streets and at least give people a friendly reminder here and there. Maybe just even pointing them to the pact. (though maybe not with the guy I so rudely called out as an example of what NOT to do...)

I mean... if we're "member driven"... right?

EDIT: There. I posted a hopefully constructive response to the non-constructive response.

On your managerial comment, btw... you're kind of getting into 'how not to be an arsehole", which is absolutely valid but may be beyond the scope of the pact to teach.

And usually beyond the scope of my abilities.

hahahahaha...

 

[Chris of Arabia]

I suppose it could be since the mods like to make these rather specious claims that the board is "member driven" (kinda like driving the titanic using a spoon as an oar, but ok)...

There are very few businesses out there that don't listen to their customers and take on board what they are saying - those that don't end up on a long and uncomfortable ride to oblivion - why would TPF be any different?

That said, it's not the Mods who have the say in what direction the forum takes, it's the new owners: Dascrow, 4nines and ekool. By all means contact them directly, they do respond. It's probably fair to say that they don't have the same emotional investment in the forum as its founders, but they still need to see it work. So if any member has concrete proposals on what needs to be changed/updated/developed or whatever else is on people's minds, then I'm sure they will consider it in line with the business strategy they are pursuing - I should point out that neither I nor any of the other Moderators are privy to that. It may be teaching granny, but comments such as "things are not like they used to be" aren't going to travel very far.

 

[mooimeisie]

Perhaps a standard reply we can post to someone's reply we feel is totally inappropriate. Something like a "How not to be a @#*&" thread or post.

 

[manaheim]

I suppose it could be since the mods like to make these rather specious claims that the board is "member driven" (kinda like driving the titanic using a spoon as an oar, but ok)...

There are very few businesses out there that don't listen to their customers and take on board what they are saying - those that don't end up on a long and uncomfortable ride to oblivion - why would TPF be any different?

That said, it's not the Mods who have the say in what direction the forum takes, it's the new owners: Dascrow, 4nines and ekool. By all means contact them directly, they do respond. It's probably fair to say that they don't have the same emotional investment in the forum as its founders, but they still need to see it work. So if any member has concrete proposals on what needs to be changed/updated/developed or whatever else is on people's minds, then I'm sure they will consider it in line with the business strategy they are pursuing - I should point out that neither I nor any of the other Moderators are privy to that. It may be teaching granny, but comments such as "things are not like they used to be" aren't going to travel very far.

That's fair and reasonable. Sorry if I'm beating you guys up a little bit. I know you don't have as much control over the situation as some of us think you do... though I didn't know that until this thread came about.

I'm fine with seeing how this pact thing goes as a first step. Who knows, it might be enough.