Suggestion for a new RFF forum - thoughts?

[RichC]

In the thread Why is gear talk more popular than photo talk?, x-ray said

It might help to discourage gear discussions by not mentioning camera or lens.

I’ve a thought... About 5 years ago, someone set up a new photo group called Miniclick. The idea is that once a month there’s a free public event where a photographer presents their work for an hour, and then everyone talks about it. It’s deliberately informal.

What makes it different is that all talk of gear is forbidden - neither the photographer nor the audience is allowed to mention anything technical! So, all that’s left is to show, look and talk about photographs - what was their motivation, why they were taken in this particular way, do they work, what were the pitfalls, did taking them lead to anything unexpected, what’s next, and so on?

Originally it was run by one bloke but it’s become so succesful that they now regularly get well-known people like Magnum Photographers to present, and have expanded to a team and a second city! It’s still free and informal.

So, there’s definitely an appetite for wanting to talk about photos, not gear. This isn’t high-brow art critique but simple general discussion - why, how, what...

So, what about a new RFF forum where we talk about specific photographs - could be your own, could be others (best not pick other RFF members unless they’re willing!) - but all mention of gear is banned?

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

We have forums where people can show their work, but serious critique is rare. I offered to critique photos in my subforum but only got one person who was interested. I'd love to do more.

 

[Richard G]

It’s a good idea. I’m a member of a photographic group where, except for me, the only film shooter, the others never raise gear, except the wonderful iPhone proponent, and some using novel processes. It’s mostly only about the images.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I don't know if it is a good idea. About photography, everybody has a different taste: digital or film, b+w or color, staged pictures or street photography etc. Then the differences between full frame shooting or cutting the picture for better composition, subject matter, style of scanning or printing etc. A thread about taste in photography will result in confirming the own position. Not very interesting. It is better to show work without any comments. Technical discussions on gear, as we know them on RFf, are much more instructive.

Erik.

 

[RichC]

We have forums where people can show their work, but serious critique is rare. I offered to critique photos in my subforum but only got one person who was interested. I'd love to do more.

We do ... I think the problem with those is that either they’re just to show photos, or you’re showing your own photo and asking for a critique (stressful for some)..

My idea is hopefully to get talk going... neither to showcase images or disect a photo but to stimulate discussion around a photo.

Chris: your (long) thread with images of your home town has examples. Although it wasn’t created specifically to discuss your photos, there are lots of interesting posts where folk pick up something in a photo - when was it taken, or what it shows - and you reply with a bit of local history or why that photo is important to you. (PS: hope you’re feeling better!)

 

[Michael Markey]

In the ten years that I`ve been attending my weekly photographic society gear has never been discussed .
Prints are shown and discussed either by the members or visiting judges.
People could care less what was used although software technique is discussed.

I think a balance needs to be struck .... to much discussion on the photographs themselves always seem to concentrate on the negative and you begin to wonder at times if there is anything good out there.

On the other hand this forum has gradually grown more gear centric to the point that the threads are becoming repetitive .

The only thing that seems to change is how the question is asked.

 

[RichC]

Wouldn’t you lot like to know a bit about these photos of mine? These are just a few from this project...

Why were they were taken? What’s the background? How did I go about it? Do I like history? Why the nostalgic look? How many did I take in this project? What am I going to do with them? Was it for someone or for myself? Where did I get all this stuff!? Do I like insects!?

 

[Michael Markey]

I agree Rich .... for more interesting that what you used.
I`m not big on critique because as Eric has already said it often comes down to just taste .... ie I would have done it this way or that way.
However the questions which you pose are far more interesting to me.
I can learn far more from that approach.

 

[jmilkins]

Love the bokeh in these Rich - A sonnar? But it must have been an uncoated one because of the muted colours...Canon 1.5 or an early Zeiss 🙄😉

But seriously, I think your concept is a good idea. A few of my photographs have a meaningful story behind them. They might not be technically good (in fact, they most likely are not) but sometimes the story, the motivation or the choices are more than the image.

Sometimes that story will mean something to me but not to others, so I suggest a disclaimer / sticky that encourages people to park their egos and suspend judgment. Will hopefully avoid potential bad feeling. Share in a spirit of community.

That said, I've really enjoyed seeing the lens or film dedicated threads with notably great images in them that teach me about the signature of an emulsion or a lens.

And I also think there is significant benefit in constructive critique of the technical or creative aspect of an image, but I understand why there might be few takers, despite the potential benefit.

Looking forward to seeing where this goes...

Wouldn’t you lot like to know a bit about these photos of mine? These are just a few from this project...

Why were they were taken? What’s the background? How did I go about it? Do I like history? Why the nostalgic look? How many did I take in this project? What am I going to do with them? Was it for someone or for myself? Where did I get all this stuff!? Do I like insects!?

 

[RichC]

Gear talk would be allowed, though, if it's important to how and why photos were taken...

For example, in some of these photos I used a tilt-shift lens to put the plane of focus exactly where I wanted, notably for the pinned insects - in the second row, second photo, I wanted just the dust at the bottom right in focus and nothing else, so the plane of focus is on a diagonal. So, knowing I used a tilt-shift lens to show exactly what I wanted helps you understand how I met my aims when going about the project.

This then begs the question of why I wanted the dust in focus but not the insects! <grin>

 

[Bobfrance]

Wouldn’t you lot like to know a bit about these photos of mine? These are just a few from this project...

Why were they were taken? What’s the background? How did I go about it? Do I like history? Why the nostalgic look? How many did I take in this project? What am I going to do with them? Was it for someone or for myself? Where did I get all this stuff!? Do I like insects!?

I like these images a great deal Rich.
I've had a look at the explanation on your website - which I think is just enough to inform but retain intrigue.

I don't think there's that many people on RFF producing this kind of work.

Bob.


.

 

[x-ray]

For years I was very active in the Professional Photographers of America. It's a huge organization with regional and local chapters as well as the huge national organization. One of their missions was to educate and improve the quality of pro photography. This was done through seminars, formal classes and photo competitions.

The standards were high in the competition. You were competing against the best of the best nationally. The judges were mostly master photographers and all had been formally trained to judge pro competition. After receiving my master of photography title I attended their school and judged some of these competitions.

There are basic elements that make a photo excellent, composition, color, subject impact for example. Each of five judges while viewing the image would keep the basic elements in mind while scoring 0-100 points. Each Hughes would submit his or her score electronically and the 5 scores would be averaged. Judges could comment as they're judging and judging was open to the public.


One way to handle a "critique" forum would be to establish key elements as mentioned above and handle it as a poll. Setup a template of elements of a photo that are strengths and weaknesses and vote on those qualities. That way you get the general consensus of each person averages as a group.

One thing as a judge that I always kept in mind that improving ones work can come from both criticism and positive comment. It's equally as important to know an images strengths as it is its weaknesses. I always had to keep in mind too that we all have our biases and are subconsciously influenced by the subject. In other words it's had to be totally neutral.

Edit: in professional competition there is no discussion of camera, film or lens. No technical data is allowed. Each image is judged on impact, quality and the other elements that make a great image. It's the final image that counts and nothing more. The image must stand in its own two legs.

 

[x-ray]

Things to consider here are people commenting or judging aren't as a rule a highly skilled group of master photographers. Second there are no specific skewing standards. Some of us have calibrated monitors and many don't. This might cause the end result to be skewed.

 

[RichC]

Things to consider here are people commenting or judging aren't as a rule a highly skilled group of master photographers. Second there are no specific skewing standards. Some of us have calibrated monitors and many don't. This might cause the end result to be skewed.

As I specifically mentioned, this proposed forum would ABSOLUTELY NOT be for critiquing photos, but to discuss them in general. In short, we'd be talking about the pictures themselves - what they show, why they were taken, what they mean to the photographer, how the photographer went about getting them, etc.

When I see a photo that interests me, I want to know more about their background - the how and why.

See the example questions posed for my insect photos above.

Gear would be ignored in this proposed forum, usually: mostly the camera or lens makes no difference to the picture, especially when seen as a JPG online! And no critiquing: this forum would be about what the pictures show, not how "good" they are.

 

[lynnb]

Rich, you might find this thread interesting, where at the end of the year I invite people to post their favourite photo taken during the year and talk about the back story. 2017 was the second year of this thread. People are welcome to discuss and ask questions about the photos posted in the thread. I suspect there are many like me who like to know how a picture came about and what was the thinking behind it.

Critique is a minefield... which I think most people would rather avoid, both as givers and receivers, unless there are pre-existing clear understandings on both sides.

BTW I like your insect pictures. Interesting. And well executed. And displayed. They don't bug me at all 🙂.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Talks like this are usually initiated by those who post thier pictures at forums in next to none rate. Maybe I'm wrong this time 🙂

And here is zero reason to post threads like this. We have the Gallery. It is forum where pictures are posted. The Gallery is the forum. Pictures are posted daily, feel free to talk about pictures and not about gear. What is the problem?

 

[helen.HH]

can be done as a 'New Thread' / or Forum... Easy enough
Have a set of guidelines, members/mentors, & your off and running

I am sure You will have lots of participants... how long it will last
is hard to say... just Go for it !

It seems some of us have become a fickke lot here on RFf
maybe suffering ftom attention deficit with all this social media brain drain
ooops, did I say that

I remember we had a gentlemen here on RFf
Frank Jackson, lovely fellow, Wonderful Photographer.
He would start Great Threads, Set a Challenge
but it all turned sour... not sure why

Moody & Intriguing Photos Rich

 

[Prest_400]

As I specifically mentioned, this proposed forum would ABSOLUTELY NOT be for critiquing photos, but to discuss them in general. In short, we'd be talking about the pictures themselves - what they show, why they were taken, what they mean to the photographer, how the photographer went about getting them, etc.

This thread made me realise that I'm using instagram mostly this way. Find enjoyable seeing the work of others from many places and drop a useful comment about it. Sometimes it stirs a bit of discussion and it gets constructive.

Other parts of the platform I dislike, and although I posted a little bit, I don't find much enjoyment on it plus the likes/follower metrics game gets on my nerves. For the exact reason Helen says

all this social media brain drain
ooops, did I say that

 

[Pherdinand]

sorry but even the title is gear talk oriented ("new rff forum")

 

[cz23]

I don't know if it is a good idea. About photography, everybody has a different taste: digital or film, b+w or color, staged pictures or street photography etc. Then the differences between full frame shooting or cutting the picture for better composition, subject matter, style of scanning or printing etc. A thread about taste in photography will result in confirming the own position. Not very interesting. It is better to show work without any comments. Technical discussions on gear, as we know them on RFf, are much more instructive.

Erik.

All good points, but I still think it's worth a try. "Critique" is the wrong word, I feel, because it implies judgement. "Discussion" is better and accommodates different tastes.

With some clear guidelines and a commitment from members, I think it could work.

Not sure how the logistics of this suggestion would work, but I also feel a thread facilitator would be beneficial. Just to keep things focused and in a constructive direction.

John