Interesting opinions about RFF

[Pherdinand]

heh, i hope you find more interesting stuff than this, to blog about.

 

[back alley]

Joe, please do not delete this thread prematurely, it is not out of hand, yet. I find your need to micromanage the forum troubling, esp. in light of your recent comments about being "positive" and the "invisible" thread.

People need to vent their feelings, and Chris Weeks' article and ensuing discussions are thought provoking--with regard to the nature of street photography, equipment fetishism, how to construct an internet persona, and on and on. Please let it continue.

read my post in total please, as you can see the thread is still here.
and moderating is what i'm supposed to be doing here.

joe

 

[SteveM(PA)]

heh, i hope you find more interesting stuff than this, to blog about.

Yeah really. A bunch of consultants with kitty cat/little girl avatars and "sh**ty galleries. Who cares.

 

[Terao]

LOL, is he English? Impressive chain-yanking 🙂

 

[foolproof]

i read the pdf article. i liked some of it. i didnt like some of it. i liked some photo's. i didnt like some photo's. so what?? indeed - it aint the bible, nothing you read is. i dont think this was its intention either. its all just food for the brain to digest and take what it needs. i read it and took what i needed from it. i didnt agree or disagree with any of it. thats not what i read it for and thats not what it was there for. its just for reading.....and i read it......and then went out doin all i know.....taking photographs my way.

 

[Pherdinand]

i read the pdf article. i liked some of it. i didnt like some of it. i liked some photo's. i didnt like some photo's. so what?? indeed - it aint the bible, nothing you read is. i dont think this was its intention either. its all just food for the brain to digest and take what it needs. i read it and took what i needed from it. i didnt agree or disagree with any of it. thats not what i read it for and thats not what it was there for. its just for reading.....and i read it......and then went out doin all i know.....taking photographs my way.

yeah, but you're foolproof 😀

 

[chrisweeks]

I agree with that.
However from the pdf itself and only from that, he seems like a ****ing arrogant asshole, honestly. Somebody that i'm not sure i'd enjoy meeting on the street.
So probably i'm wrong, one can't judge based on a few pages of blah blah, but that's all i know about him 😀

extremely arrogant! 😉

 

[chrisweeks]

i read the pdf article. i liked some of it. i didnt like some of it. i liked some photo's. i didnt like some photo's. so what?? indeed - it aint the bible, nothing you read is. i dont think this was its intention either. its all just food for the brain to digest and take what it needs. i read it and took what i needed from it. i didnt agree or disagree with any of it. thats not what i read it for and thats not what it was there for. its just for reading.....and i read it......and then went out doin all i know.....taking photographs my way.

you ... mate ... are the first person to "get it." if you were on dA, i'd love to send you a print.

extactly, read it, take from it what you will ...

never meant to be a bible. did i, in fact, ever call it that? i think not.

congrats!

 

[jja]

Joe, I've read the thread(s) in question in its totality, so lets not condescend. And yes, I know you are the moderator, I've read the rff long enough to know that.

On the subject of invisibility (perhaps I should post this on that thread, but I'll have a go at it here): Why ask why? If it bothers you, remove the option. Because you are the moderator, I accept that you know I'm here whether I click "invisible" or not, so I find it rather ominous that you should announce your access to information that the rest of us do not have. A simple matter of decorum, imo.

I also read the thread where you admonished us to keep our comments positive. A fine suggestion, but you seemed to be responding to critiques rather than negative comments.

And one last thing--and this is a sincere question--in the same thread, in a response to fitzihardwurshd, you wrote,

<<maybe read the whole of what i said before knocking it bertram, er fitzi...>>

Has fitzi publicly declared him-/herself to be bertram? If so, fine, but if not, then it is overreaching your powers as moderator to out this person's (previous?) identity.

 

[jonasv]

Haven't had time to read this PDF yet, but I did read some previous ones... "Swoosh", and something else I can't remember... They were interesting. But I don't understand the point of your (chris weeks) postings on this forum... If you want to judge RFF, at least look at the gallery and not the forum.

Personally I think the average quality of the RFF gallery is a lot (and I mean a lot) higher than that of DA, but DA has some spectacular photographers and images that make you instantly forget all the other teenager garbage posted on that site. Which is why I spend more time on DA than on RFF, and especially, post my pictures mostly on DA and not here.

http://elus1v.deviantart.com

I only wish deviantart would let me change my name. Bah...

don't understand the point of the fuzz here... not of chris weeks postings and most certainly not of everyone getting upset over just one person's opinion, one person who talks a lot of smack but at least he takes a whole lot of photographs. just move on... i'm sure you all have some rolls ready to develop or some photos waiting to be shot so why waste time discussing here?


ps. i hate the new DA styling... or maybe i'm just slow to adapt

 

[PlantedTao]

hahaha...
so entertaining. "Artist" can get soo upset sometimes. Chris must be loving yanking ya'lls chains...that what he does (or so it seems)...because he is a sarcastic a-hole (I mean that is the best way 😉 )

Anywho, I did want to say that I don't like to see some artist get put down when their art and thoughts far out shine those on either forum. Taking a shot a Beniliam (even in jest) just ain't cool...realize. He has a different point of view which I agree with and is just as talented as anyone in your article...I guess because someone doesn't have the "deviantart" edge makes them subpar? Really?

Chris, it is a good a great article and I APPRECIATE that it was free for everyone to read...that is just great and needs to be respected. That is a lot of work you guys a ripping on.

Again, he (chris) is doing a lot to promote RFers and film...and a contest, a 160 page article...what have you done lately?

my 2 cents
Flame on 🙂

Jason

 

[back alley]

Joe, I've read the thread(s) in question in its totality, so lets not condescend. And yes, I know you are the moderator, I've read the rff long enough to know that.

On the subject of invisibility (perhaps I should post this on that thread, but I'll have a go at it here): Why ask why? If it bothers you, remove the option. Because you are the moderator, I accept that you know I'm here whether I click "invisible" or not, so I find it rather ominous that you should announce your access to information that the rest of us do not have. A simple matter of decorum, imo.

I also read the thread where you admonished us to keep our comments positive. A fine suggestion, but you seemed to be responding to critiques rather than negative comments.

And one last thing--and this is a sincere question--in the same thread, in a response to fitzihardwurshd, you wrote,

<<maybe read the whole of what i said before knocking it bertram, er fitzi...>>

Has fitzi publicly declared him-/herself to be bertram? If so, fine, but if not, then it is overreaching your powers as moderator to out this person's (previous?) identity.

wasn't meaning to condescend in the least, i just get tired of half read threads and people responding w/o all the info.
again, i was sure you knew that i am a mod here but i do the job as i see fit and according to guidance from jorge. i know no other way but am open to suggestions.
the invisibilty thread came from a sincere curiosity. if you look in some of my past posts i have on occasion explained a bit of how the software works (the little i know). you see it as an authoritarian posture i see it as keeping the playing field as equal as possible, share the info.
you assume some negative intent, i assume, based on my behaviour here?
as far as fitzi/bertram...i have no unique info because of my mod position here, my guess is based on observable 'behaviours' that seem to resemble bertram. and just as an fyi, others have made that point to me privately so i don't think i 'outed' anyone.
i appreciate your civility in this.

joe

 

[dadsm3]

I think people don't have as much of a problem with Deviant Art as they do with a deviant personality.

 

[jja]

Joe, thanks for responding. I believe your intentions are for the good of the forum and to further discussions, so that is not in question. But we do have to measure effects as well as intent.

With that said, my suggestion is to be more invisible (there's that word again!) in you moderating. Knowing that people can get quite passionate about all kinds of things, I say let the discussions ride a little and only step in when you see a discernible personal attack (this is subject to interpretation, and you probably think you are already doing this).

There is one more thing for which I cannot site with specific examples, but here it is anyway: I sometimes feel that there is a little too much back-slapping and feel-goodism on this forum, too much of an effort to smooth things over (i.e., making people feel good about their photos) at the expense of some real learning and advancement in the area of photographic skills.

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

In all honesty, I'd be surprised if Fitzi is Bertram. I disagreed with Bertram on virtually every issue. I don't note the same situation with Fitzi. So unless Bertram has had a complete philosophical transplant, I think Fitzi is Fitzi. But I have no solid proof one way or another 🙂

Bertram is/was a bit rough around the edges, and not likely to be candidate for UN diplomat of the century. But I appreciated that his posts were usually insightful and thought provoking, albeit, well, sharp and pointy like a bag full of elbows 😉

I wish he would bring his cantankerous a _ _ back and contribute, if nothing else so I can disagree with him some more !

 

[back alley]

Joe, thanks for responding. I belive your intentions are for the good of the forum and to further discussions, so that is not in question. But we do have to measure effects as well as intent.

With that said, my suggestion is to be more invisible (there's that word again!) in you moderating. Knowing that people can get quite passionate about all kinds of things, I say let the discussions ride a little and only step in when you see a discernible personal attack (this is subject to interpretation, and you probably think you are already doing this).

There is one more thing for which I cannot site with specific examples, but here it is anyway: I sometimes feel that there is a little too much back-slapping and feel-goodism on this forum, too much of an effort to smooth things over (i.e., making people feel good about their photos) at the expense of some real learning and advancement in the area of photographic skills.

not 'feeling' defensive...but in my defense...there are those here that think i am too soft and slow moving...very hard to please all.
my idea is to just remind folks that i'm here and watching, in hopes they think twice before posting something they might later regret.
as to the back slapping, i'm unsure of my role in that.
i do openly admit to wanting this place to be more positive than negative but that is not meant to discourage honesty and sincerity from others.
i have said this before, i see rff as a 'santuary' of sorts.

joe

 

[jja]

Oops, I did not finsih my thought. The tendency toward "feel-goodism" means that we cannot even begin to agree to disagree, we must only agree to agree. Chris Weeks' article is a case in point: people feel too passionately about it, so let's just delete this thread before it gets out of hand.

As someone above said, the guy talks good smack, let's deal with it.

Last thought: I agree w/ PlantedTao, it was a low blow to dis on Benillian's photographic vision. He's an awesome photographer, so much humanity in his work.

 

[back alley]

Oops, I did not finsih my thought. The tendency toward "feel-goodism" means that we cannot even begin to agree to disagree, we must only agree to agree. Chris Weeks' article is a case in point: people feel too passionately about it, so let's just delete this thread before it gets out of hand.

As someone above said, the guy talks good smack, let's deal with it.

Last thought: I agree w/ PlantedTao, it was a low blow to dis on Benillian's photographic vision. He's an awesome photographer, so much humanity in his work.

re. benillian, that wasn't directed at me i hope?

 

[jja]

re. benillian, that wasn't directed at me i hope?

Not at you. Weeks writes some nasty stuff about Beni in his blog. It's his right, but he is wrong.

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

Beniliam (David) is a very thoughtful, talented and considerate photographer and young man. I suspect I will one day be buying a book of his work.

Chris is entitled to his opinions of others and himself.

But I know whose photos I'd rather have a print of 🙂 [hint: little girl running toward big bird, or couple through the window ... if you are listening David 😉 ]