Why are we fighting so hard to impress each other?

[Bitter Jeweler]

I mean other areas in general. Like math. I HATE math, because I'm not very good at logical critical thinking. I think some people who are very logical thinkers have a tough time with photography for the simple fact that it's more abstract...

Oh. I get it.

You want abstract? Take a Logic/Critical Thinking class or two. :shock:

I think that photography is 2 parts intuition and 3 parts "what works."

That's the thing. What is the "what works part", and for whom?


Sorry for challenging you, we generally have seen eye to eye. I guess this is for thought clarification.

Yeah, I understand what you mean about logic being less concrete than one would assume it to be. XD

What I mean by what works is statements like "if you place the light this way, it's more flattering. If you place it this way you get a different effect." It's just those things in photography that are tried and true. It has nothing to with the photographer not being creative. It has everything to do with what looks good. It's annoying how some photographers will ask critique on a creative portrait, when they obviously don't know the fundamentals of portraiture in the first place. I think you should be able to get a technically good, albeit generic photo first, so you at least have some basis for your creativity.

I also find it irritating when people are creative just for the sake of being creative. Like when someone takes a photo of a flower and adds borders and faux-lomography and blah blah....their treatment doesn't add anything to the photo, it just makes everyone realize that they don't know the fundamentals, so they're just creating their own....which rarely works.....

There are a few people, though, who are damn good at backwards engineering. Just take the third party TTL flash units as examples.

I can't really tell if I'm making any sense or not. My mind moves faster and my fingers, and I feel like I'm just rambling.

You are. Sometimes I just need clarification on vague variables. So I get you now.

 

[blackrose89]

You really need to read through the post. I didn't say there is NO point in learning. I even said there are elements that you NEED to listen to criticisms. I specified I am merely taking about the subjective elements. I never one said CC is useless.More of what I'm saying is how much should we take in on the SUBJECTIVE side of things.

The elements of design/"rules" of composition are NOT subjective.


skieur

That is simply not true. If it was then we always have to apply the RO3, we could never center our photos etc. Every photo would look the same if this was true.

Besides they're guidelines not rules.

 

[blackrose89]

I think deep down we all want to have our pictures to be loved and become known for them. My purpose here is to learn photography from others and at some point give back to the forum. Though my pictures currently are not to the caliber that I want, they will be someday. I love all these threads with visually stunning pictures and the hash but comical users that make them.

Yep same here. I will use a thread I had with Bitter as an example. I had a scenery photo with deers, chairs etc. I started getting a bunch of "subjective" CC and started way overediting it and ruining the photo because people were telling me how I should feel about the subjective elements. Assuming these people knew more I followed what they said. Until Bitter came along and said WTF are you doing? It's a good photo and YOUR instinct was correct. So who should we follow with these SUBJECTIVE matters?

Ah, but that thread points to you not knowing enough to make decisions for yourself, or stand behind what you have done and explain why it works. In subsequent threads, you have taken the stance that people don't need to learn about art. You have taken the stance that the "rules" should be thrown away, or that it's ok to "break" them. It all comes from a point of naivete.


So many expect to be "breaking" rules and be successful right out of the gate. So many want to dismiss educating themselves and reach the point that they can make their own decisions. You know why? Cuz it takes too long. They don't have that experience to judge objectively.

Good point, but still doesn't contradict what I was saying. What made that photo stand out was one one the foundations I said was important to learn in this very original post: weight balance. So the CC was something I needed to learn. I didn't say it should be discarded. I'm merely saying at what point do we judge for ourselves? I didn't even neccassarily mean myself. I am not saying I am that point yet.

And yes I agree that at first you can't break the rules. If you remember in another thread I said the best advice I got and give to others is to make completely correct photos to start with to build a solid foundation, a foundation which I advocated for in this original post.

I am quite suprised to see the turn around in your stance, did you not blast people in another thread for reffering to these design elements as "rules"?

 

[enzodm]

Besides they're guidelines not rules.

one definition of guideline (something used in many fields, not only in art) says that it is the way to correctly carry out a task in the majority of cases. This is what is needed by a beginner. The best way may be another one (which you will have to reach with your forces), but in the meantime at least you may take decent pictures according to human perception. For the next step, I think you should go outside a beginner forum. Go to 500px and see if you are even considered by someone .

 

[LuckySe7en]

I think you need to relax, dear. Most here post pics for c&c to learn not to impress anyone. Everyone here or mostly everyone here critiques your photos honestly. Hell, if all I did was go off of the feedback I get around home (family, friends, etc) I'd think I'm a professional! lol So Im very interested in hearing what these guys and gals have to say about my progress.

 

[Overread]

When you associate with experts/experienced people of any field of interest you are more and more likely to encounter people who set a higher and higher bar for quality (in whatever it is they are doing). The more "elite" and focused the group is on the subject, generally, the higher the bar will be set.

Its your own choice as to if you want to aim for that same high bar, or even exceed it and no one can pressure you to do otherwise (well barring teachers/parents/your boss). Of course if you come to a learning site like here (or any community based around furthering understanding of a craft) you'll get a lot of people pushing and trying to help you reach those higher bars.


Just take drawing, that you do already, do you really only aim for the skills needed for common, average skills in it? If so go back to stickmen cause most people are quite happy with stickmen level skills at drawing. But you don't, you've already shown that you aspire to and aim to reach a higher grade than most. Whether you follow this same practice with photography or not is your own choice in the matter - just accept that if you are posting for critique on a site that takes it more seriously you'll get the serious replies. You'll get people taking their own time to try and encourage you to improve and develop in skills.
Best thing is to remain grateful for the time they take, better is to take on board and learn from it.



Its the same with any community in the real world (the internet is very much real, if you doubt this just stop paying your fees for using it for a while ) its just that with the net you've the added bonus that you can get in contact with some of the best. You can find and talk to those people who are experts in their field or who are far more experienced than many local to yourself. You can even find those who specialise in just one or two very key areas.

 

[mjhoward]

I strive for mediocrity.

See how dumb that sounds.

 

[mjhoward]

If you like your work, other people like it and it could possibly make money who gives a **** what strangers on the internet have to say?

The many threads that you have started requesting C&C would indicate that you do. Just sayin'

 

[Derrel]

Overread's post, post #51, has two very critical paragraphs at the start. As he wrote, "When you associate with experts/experienced people of any field of interest you are more and more likely to encounter people who set a higher and higher bar for quality (in whatever it is they are doing). The more "elite" and focused the group is on the subject, generally, the higher the bar will be set."

There are people here who have been involved in real-world photography for more years that you have been alive--or even DOUBLE the number of years you have been alive. Or, in the case of a handful of respected members here, double + XX years of actual involvement in photography, and the visual arts. And the arts in other disciplines. As well as "life" itself. There are people for whom beginner-level work looks "beginner-level", even if it appears in some wall poster at the mall, advertising clothing or products. A fair number of companies today are having in-house "people" shoot photos, as a way to save money. Some of the advertising photography seen today in some venues is not very good, nor very "advanced" work...American malls for example, have a mix of average and excellent advertising and promotional photos; it depends largely on the company, and the kind of clientele they attract. There are different levels of quality and experience in advertising photos, just as there are in advertising campaign design; there is low-rent, middle,high-end, and elite advertising work.

Back to the "distracting background" line of thought; in a portrait, a distracting background is a bad,bad thing. In an environmental portrait, the background is an absolute necessity to have--it is part and parcel of the image. In a commercial product shot, the product itself might be the essential part; however, in say CLOTHING photos, very frequently the BACKGROUND is EXPLICITLY sketched out and dictated by the art director. The same goes for other types of products, such as liquor, travel services, and automobiles. A person with some experience can differentiate between different types of photography, and the different roles photography can be called upon to play. A straight, low-rent website product shot made on a seamless paper backdrop is one thing; a photo advertising a $4,500 home espresso maker might very well have an attractive, fit 30-something dude making espresso in a high-end kitchen, while in the background, shown in only moderate defocus is a lounging female figure, clearly dressed in something kind of slinky...the morning sun just coming over the skyscrapers in the background (and held in perfect value by multiple sheets of .9 ND filter material over the window). In the case of the $4,500 espresso maker for the home, the background's elements are there for an explicit reason. Imagine if the same slinky woman, shown at sunrise, were in the background of a portrait designed to be given to the guy's wife. MAJOR DRAMA would ensue. Images can have designed impact, or accidental impact.

So..."distracting background" or "environmental clues". It takes some skill and training to understand criticism of images. Visually sophisticated people who have been looking at and evaluating their own images and the images they see around them every day for 30,40,50 years are going to have a different approach to images than people who are pretty much passive sponges that just look at images, and who do not have a background in looking at images, contemplating on what they mean, and so on.

 

[Tee]

If you like your work, other people like it and it could possibly make money who gives a **** what strangers on the internet have to say?

That's easily solved by not posting photos for critique on here. If you like it, great! If you post on here then don't be shocked when people offer up their own thoughts. When someone posts on here, the members are going to approach the image with a more critical eye. You know, being a photography forum and all. I agree with another poster above in which you appear to have some sort of drama aspect going on. It feels as if you're looking for your own validation and acceptance on the internet.

 

[Robin Usagani]

I only try to impress BitterJeweller. I couldn't care less what everyone else thinks.

 

[SCraig]

... If you like your work, other people like it and it could possibly make money who gives a **** what strangers on the internet have to say?

A couple of comments (that might even take some heat off of you) and I'm going back to minding my own business.

1. There is a big difference between not "Caring" what people think and not "Listening" to people. I've been around the block enough times that I don't care what people think about my photography, but I do listen to their comments and input. I don't pretend to have all the answers and I will gladly listen to advice. I may not follow it but I will try it. If I don't like the results I'll simply go back to doing things my own way.

2. It is very important to know who to listen to, who to ignore, and how to tell them apart. Like every forum in existence this one has a lot of very helpful, very knowledgeable people. It also has its share of people who know are convinced that they know more than they actually do, and a handful who just like to stir things up. Learn to separate the knowledge from the BS.

3. If you think this forum is hard, it is. But it isn't as hard as some I frequent.

 

[GeorgieGirl]

I'm probably going to get blasted for what I am about to say... but oh well.

I've been seeing people say on here "Just because it makes money and general people will like it, doesn't mean it's good or other photographers will like it." Soooo it doesn't matter if it's reaching a lot of people or you're making money, the important thing is that the, maybe, 40 people on here don't approve? It's like "pssh, forget all of the people making money and the people who like you're work, it's only a real work if it's validated by the people on this site, these are the ones who REALLY matter."

Again, I understand correcting technical errors such focus, exposure, weight balance etc. I have been a sketch artist for a long time now, so I understand the importance of improving on a technical level, but everything else just seems like they're setting imaginary boundaries that don't actually exist in the real world. Isn't it more important to reach people in your community rather then the people on here?

If you like your work, other people like it and it could possibly make money who gives a **** what strangers on the internet have to say?

If you are looking for validation...today is not your day. I'm not sure if you actually are accomplished at sketch...if you were this sort of dialog would be moot because you would know better. The LAST people I'd take for real was 'my community'....what do they know about photography?...Like minded peers...and masses of them....that's where the body of weight is.

And BTW...I dont try to impress anyone...I work to improve to impress ME.

 

[bentcountershaft]

To the OP, I think I understand the point you are trying to make, but using the word impress probably wasn't the best choice. You said something about choosing your audience and I think is a much better way of describing it. In my opinion, the flaw in your logic is that you have to choose one or the other. Make images the public like or make images your photographic peers like. Now if you choose the former, you're never going to get the respect of your (experienced) peers. However, if you choose the later, I don't see how that would keep the public from also enjoying your work. Unless you're talking about abstract fine arts or something that the general public just doesn't understand there's really no reason they wouldn't enjoy your images as well. They may not be able to pinpoint why but to some degree they can see the difference between your shots and the standard facebook photog's and even in the worst case scenario they certainly won't think they're any worse than those.

 

[jaicatalano]

Very true... It's about the work and very subjective...