Chances Are, You Suck

Luckily "suck" is relative.

Basically the guy has a point--which most here long ago made a note of: if you can take it, tough love can help.

But tough love can also cause people to give up altogether.

So what, you might ask---anyone who gives up is hopeless anyway. Well, if all the hopeless ones gave up there would be no camera industry, so that's not gonna help.

I've taught skiing for 25 years. 2 or 3k skiers on our mountain on a given day and how many moments of great skiing occur? Not many.

Lot's of people have fun though. Some thrive on props and even believe them. Others are driven by an anal quest for perfection. The really great efforts are usually beyond both. 🙂

6839847667_5d7f10135c_z.jpg
 
hmmm...

hmmm...

The need for aknowledgment and appreciacion from others is human. For some this need becomes a strong urge to get praise, the lack thereof generates great frustration. But no one is completely immune to that, I believe. Certainly not those who claim that they photograph only for themselves and don't care about other's opinions on their work, and yet share their work online.

Johannes Brahms is considered as one of the greatest composers of all times. He was an extreme perfectionist who claimed to be the only judge of his own work. He burned most of his production including 20 string quartets as he did not want it to be given to the world and associated with his name. Was he working for himself, pursuing his own perfection ideal, or for his reputation? And isn't there a chance we would love today those 20 string quartets he burned? We'll never know.
 
I love this thread. Flickr contains so much crap because it's so popular, I especially like all the bokeh groups with thousands of pics of cats and flowers and "macros", all taken at min focus and max aperture with no compositional skills whatsoever.

My favourite flickr pics though are the ones taken with an M9 or bespoke MP with 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH of someones alleyway full of garbage cans and rubble and not even a cat in view...
 
So far, I'd refrained from joining in, because I really didn't like the heading.

No, I don't 'suck'. Yes, there's room to get better. But I have a grievously cynical view of those whose opinions REALLY matter, and they are the ones who pass the invoices.

Just about everyone I've ever met who earns any money from photography shoots their commercial stuff to fit the brief, and personal stuff for pleasure and because they believe (probably correctly) that what they learn from their personal stuff will, in the long term, improve their commercial work.

Anyone who is any good is likely to be insecure -- so why court insecurity, by laying yourself open to criticism from people who may well know less than you do, and who may simply be malicious? "Tough love" may work if it comes from someone whose photographic knowledge you respect, and whom you respect as a human being. Otherwise it's all too likely to be a euphemism for ignorance, stupidity and cruelty.

Cheers,

R.
 
BillBingham2 said:
I
If I suck IYHO I would ask that you say how I can improve rather than a meaningless taunt. If you really need to stand on my lifeless body to feel you are standing taller I am sorry I am not fatter so you can be taller. Please do try next time to help me learn and become better, I'm tired of helping you inflate your ego.

B2 (;->
Click to expand...

The above statement is why I believe the best critiques are the ones done in real time on a one on one basis. As other have stated if the person giving the critiques has little or no understanding to the situation in which the image was captured or what the photographer was trying to achieve. How can they give a meaningful critique, aside from pointing out basic technical issues.
Also remember in the end for most of us, who do this primarily for our own enjoyment , If often comes down to who are you trying to please, yourself or some random strangers on the internet.
 
I know I suck, which is why I post photos (though rarely these days; that's a different story) ... but I limit my contacts to a relatively small group who can provide useful and valuable feedback. And I ignore the noise. It's really not that hard to do.
 
Roger has just summed up my thoughts and reactions to this thread, only with a greater eloquence and construction than I can usually provide.

One other point that I'd like to ask is; what's wrong with posting/sharing photographs of bokeh, cats or rubbish stewn alleyways? It may not be original, technically meritorious or 'worthy' but why is there such an expectation? I'm always aware, and rather enjoy, the fact that here at RFF there is such diversity in peoples ability and interests. This is precisely why I only leave positive comments in the gallery. The Internet is no place for a decent critique but if you want some level of critical feedback online there are places for that, including here at RFF. If people wish to post pictures online, of whatever subject or standard, why can't they 'suck' or more pertinently why must they fit to someone else's criteria?

I treat my work, as Roger rightly recognises, as any professional ( in any job ) does. Sometimes the work simply requires being completed to specification. Sometimes your professional opinion will guide your clients/customers. When my work is done I get to go out and play. Must I now play to somebody else's rules? Can I only post pictures that pass muster by those with the loudest Internet voice?

I don't hold with the "Opinions, everyone has one and they all stink" line. Opinions are great; they can inform, enlighten and help make change. It's only when we forget that our opinion is infact not a fact that we start to look foolish.

So enjoy posting to Flickr, Facebook, Twitter et al and I'll continue enjoying and ignoring as I see fit without the need to denigrate in the belief everyone must be of a minimum standard.
 
thanks, simon and roger.
i also make only positive comments, and very occasionally, a suggestion, perhaps of a crop this way or that.
i don't have anything to prove, accept that RFF members have helped me improve my photography tremendously. 🙂
 
Judging photography, as an art form, is a crapshoot subject to the old dictum, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

A better way to judge a photographer, in my opinion, is on the whole body of work.
 
Mcary said:
The above statement is why I believe the best critiques are the ones done in real time on a one on one basis. As other have stated if the person giving the critiques has little or no understanding to the situation in which the image was captured or what the photographer was trying to achieve. How can they give a meaningful critique, aside from pointing out basic technical issues.
Also remember in the end for most of us, who do this primarily for our own enjoyment , If often comes down to who are you trying to please, yourself or some random strangers on the internet.
Click to expand...


I believe in receptionist aesthetics: It doesn't matter at all what the artist "intended" but only on the reaction experienced by the observer. But that is getting far to deep.

The comments on my pictures in the gallery have made me a better photographer. The comments are especially important to me from people whose work I like and respect, even if I don't know them personally. But the comments are almost always positive. Very rarely have I got constructive criticism such as "maybe it should have been cropped a bit" or "a bit more DOF would have been helpful".
 
Kenneth Jarecke makes his living with photography. I don't. Most RFF members don't. Maybe my photos "suck"; but I can afford it 🙂

There is a wrong implication in the OP and throughout this thread, that all photographers want to be professionals, that everybody with a camera wants to be published as widely as possible, etc.

Wrong for me, and I am guessing for most RFF members as well. "Pros" like Kenneth, Roger and the OP are the exception.

I love my (non Photography-related) work, and it pays well. Photography is a hobby, a welcome distraction. Taking a photo is much like cooking a good meal, telling a funny story at a party, etc. Somebody likes it, that's good enough. I also very much like the never ending learning curve, like to look at photos that I took years ago, because they remind me of how I felt when I took them. Somebody marks one of my flickr photos as a favorite, I'm happy. And that's it. Why expect more ?

One doesn't have to be a winning race car driver to like driving.

Roland.
 
Dylan Hope said:
When I want a brutally honest critique, I use a photography board that doesn't require a log-in. The anonymity brings out trolls and people who can really let you know where you went wrong
Click to expand...


For those who want to improve brutal honesty usually doesn't yield much, at least not from trolls. Constructive criticism is far more valuable. Trouble is a lot of people don't know enough about photography to say more than "that sucks" or "that's awesome." The question, as always is why?
 
Roland, if an opportunity presented itself to make money from your photography, would you actually say no?

See, I don't quite believe that most if not all would NOT want to be published (provided it was beneficial) given the opportunity. Rather I think it's a problem with motivation on their part to work towards it. People become contempt with their lives which is fine. But perhaps this is also derogatory to improving ones photography. Hence the vicious cycle tells you that you will never be good/well-known enough to make it in photography, so why even try.
 
Advice given to me by a friend who achieved the very top in his field, paraphrased: ten unqualified opinions are worth nothing at all; one qualified opinion is golden. He believed that you were wasting time asking people who knew less than you what you should do, and that you should always attach yourself to, and seek opinions of, only people who were better than you at what you wanted to do.

When I started my Flicker page, the very first thing I did was turn off comments. I have absolutely no interest in the opinion of the average Flicker member. Also, when someone on this board expresses a strong opinion, I almost always go look at their photos or homepage. If they don't have links to those things, I take that into account, too. Some of the strongest critics don't have anything of their own to see. . . . interesting. . . . .
 
Frankly, if someone wants to be a photographer then they need to find people who will pay real money for the photos and that means giving the customer what they want regardless of whether it's crap or not. The myth of the staving artist is just that, a myth. It's important to face the fact that equipment and living expenses are real threats to artistic integrity. So, I really don't think that an internet chat site is where anyone should seek out qualified critiques in order to become a better photographer. Hell, do you want me to critique your photographs? I wouldn't.
Ciao from icy Roma.
 
Tony Pio said:
Frankly, if someone wants to be a photographer then they need to find people who will pay real money for the photos and that means giving the customer what they want regardless of whether it's crap or not. The myth of the staving artist is just that, a myth. It's important to face the fact that equipment and living expenses are real threats to artistic integrity. So, I really don't think that an internet chat site is where anyone should seek out qualified critiques in order to become a better photographer. Hell, do you want me to critique your photographs? I wouldn't.
Ciao from icy Roma.
Click to expand...

Wow, where should I start with this one?
First, most of us here are not professionals, we just want to become a bit better. And we can learn from each other. Why not?
The quality of the critique here may be less useful for some professionals, but it helps me.

For a professional, financial viability is a must. But history has shown that those who have made the greatest advancements in their craft are usually not the ones who were financially the most successful of their contemporaries.

And finally, always giving your customers exactly what they want (i.e. expect) usually means that you will have pretty boring products.
 
I have never liked the use of the word 'suck' this way. I have improved a lot since coming here. It's mostly looking at lots of good photographs. Editing is often a bigger contribution from a trusted mentor than critique of an individual photo. Rushing through my iPhoto navigator last year I noticed a wonderful array of colours in one shot. Taken out the windscreen of the car in the local shopping centre. I might have deleted it twenty times but it just sat there a year or two. Leaving things sit and coming back is the advice of good poets. You the photographer are not always a good judge of which of your photos is good.
 
Peter, I don't disagree with you at all in principle. However, photography is a vast field and the overwhelming bulk of photography involves "boring products". Photos of a room, a wall fixture, or a screw involve highly technical photography (and not at all boring to those working in that field), a continuous process of learning. Creative photography to use the common term, is very different in my opinion and RFF deals with that rather small aspect of the field. As such, I'm not sure what you would be looking for in terms of a critique if it isn't the technical aspect of your photos based upon generally accepted rules. However, it is also assumed (correctly or not) that creative photography should deviate from the rules, and in these cases the creative photographer would want to know whether people like the work but likely not why.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom