Suggestion for a new RFF forum - thoughts?

[roscoetuff]

Like the idea. And Don't like the idea. Criticism doesn't NEED to be judgmental, but if it is to be heard, it needs to be constructive, and if it is to be taken rightly, it needs to be seen as a challenge.

The difficulty is that Chris is probably right and the sense of trust involved for this to be successful may require more than folks are willing to invest. I'm surprised actually he's had only one taker. Don't know about you guys, but I'm not sure I have enough good images to put in for criticism. Working toward that... but not there yet. Maybe that's a perennial problem?

Flickr actually seems fairly useful at this to me when I'm looking for things, but probably without sufficient indexing to make it as useful as it could be. Like KoFe pointed out, a Gallery may provide this... especially if the associated data is indexed in a "search" accessible form.

 

[ptpdprinter]

It is better to show work without any comments.

What is the benefit of that to anybody? Might as well waste time at Flickr.

 

[Erik van Straten]

What is the benefit of that to anybody? Might as well waste time at Flickr.

Well, it is nice to share your work with people with more ore less the same mindset. I don't think showing my work on RFf is wasting my time, maybe you do, but I don't.

Erik.

 

[cz23]

Let's accept that there are folks who feel photographs should speak for themselves, and there are others who like to discuss photographs.

Neither is right or wrong, and no one is obliged to participate in the proposed forum.

John

 

[ptpdprinter]

Let's accept that there are folks who feel photographs should speak for themselves, and there are others who like to discuss photographs.

Letting photographs speak for themselves is a choice made by the photographer not to title or otherwise explain his images. It doesn't mean persons other than the photographer should not discuss them.

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

This.
When I see a pic in the Gallery that I particularly like, I comment, but... since the Gallery is so wonky, I never post pics in my Gallery, only in threads.

The Gallery is the forum. Pictures are posted daily, feel free to talk about pictures and not about gear. What is the problem?

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Let's accept that there are folks who feel photographs should speak for themselves, and there are others who like to discuss photographs.

Neither is right or wrong, and no one is obliged to participate in the proposed forum.

John

That's perfect, all of it, but some people can't accept this. The fact that they can't is what is interesting.

If people want to create a forum for this additional talking, that's fine. Just do it instead of just talking about the benefits of talking.

 

[RichC]

Like the idea. And Don't like the idea. Criticism doesn't NEED to be judgmental, but if it is to be heard, it needs to be constructive, and if it is to be taken rightly, it needs to be seen as a challenge... Don't know about you guys, but I'm not sure I have enough good images to put in for criticism.

Yet again, I'll repeat myself. My proposed subforum is NOT FOR CRITICISM. It is for general discussion about photos - what and why.

The point is NOT to judge them in any way but to talk about them- we could discuss wonky snapshots if they were interesting in some way: memories, social comment, a record of an unusual/important event, local history.

See my earlier post with the moth photos for examples of the kinds of question that might be asked...

(Apologies for shouting - just trying to stop the thread being derailed! 😛)

 

[aizan]

i'm just chuckling to myself how people are getting hung up on how talking about photos MUST be all about saying whether they like it or not. that's not the full definition of "critique." when people talk about critique as in a crit session, they're talking about a method for studying an object.

are there any arts educators among us who could help lay down the ground rules/the method? if not, maybe we could recruit mike johnston, who's really a teacher at heart and does portfolio reviews up at his new home.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

This.
When I see a pic in the Gallery that I particularly like, I comment, but... since the Gallery is so wonky, I never post pics in my Gallery, only in threads.

One of posting in the Gallery photogs was recently interviewed by Leica Blog, BTW.

Another option is here:
Critique / Salon / Picks / Most Views

None of those two have gear info enforcement. If OP has something like his picture he wants to talk about two methods are already here.

And because of it, demand for "no gear allowed" is kind of 🙂 to me.

I came to RFF and rangefinder.ru specifically because I'm interesting about photography taken by rangefinder and similar to it cameras. Photo books I have are mostly with pictures taken by these cameras. Exhibitions with prints taken by these cameras is where I go. It is not because I'm RF collector, it is simply because no any other cameras works for me as image takers for objects and moments I'm finding worth to be taken and shared.


Yet, with modern gear it is possible to get it all with single camera. Outgoing 365 thread is one good example. I'm enjoining it as it is.

 

[cz23]

Yet again, I'll repeat myself. My proposed subforum is NOT FOR CRITICISM. It is for general discussion about photos - what and why.

The point is NOT to judge them in any way but to talk about them- we could discuss wonky snapshots if they were interesting in some way: memories, social comment, a record of an unusual/important event, local history.

See my earlier post with the moth photos for examples of the kinds of question that might be asked...

(Apologies for shouting - just trying to stop the thread being derailed! 😛)

Yes, let's get past the notions of critique and criticism. Everyone agrees that won't work.

I suggest thinking of it more like a book discussion group, a conversation about a common interest, in this case photographs. Book discussions are carried out successfully everywhere. Usually there are discussion points, and sometimes rotating facilitators. By and large people are able to remain civil and respectful.

I think every photographer would benefit from spending more time looking deeply and thoughtfully at photographs. This seems like a way to encourage that. And I think the process of listening and conversing respectfully is at least as valuable as any insights into the photograph itself.

John

 

[sepiareverb]

I’d be game. I’m getting pretty burned out on the gear, on technology (beyond an in camera meter) in general. My phone is pretty much permanently set to do not disturb.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Ansel Adams published a book called "Examples: The Making of 40 Photographs." The book's 40 chapters each showed one of Ansel's photos, along with an essay he wrote about each one. In the writings, he describes why he was interested in the subject, why he rendered it the way he did, why he chose the particular equipment/film/developer he used. He discusses any problems or challenges he encountered and how he overcame them. There is some discussion of gear, but it is not the main thrust of his essays. His purpose was to show his entire thought process for making each photo.

I think something like that might be interesting.

 

[DwF]

Well, it is nice to share your work with people with more ore less the same mindset. I don't think showing my work on RFf is wasting my time, maybe you do, but I don't.

Erik.

I agree and have enjoyed of your images that I see here Erik. Often when you include lens info, it is in response to a thread about some or other lens. The fact is, whether or not I am interested in that gear or not, if your images didn't jump off the screen to get my attention, I'd move on. And I know that if I had a question about yours or someone else's process in making the image I feel I can get that here. I might also add that some of the photographers whose work here and whose work I really admire do post in gear related threads in addition to words/no words threads.

David

 

[skopar steve]

Create a thread titled Discuss This Photo. Lay out a few ground rules. No gear talk, no critique, etc... and see where it goes.

 

[css9450]

Create a thread titled Discuss This Photo. Lay out a few ground rules. No gear talk, no critique, etc... and see where it goes.

Indeed. This forum has, what, 30 or 40 sub-sections? I am sure that with some consensus, maybe one of them can become the "Discuss" section?

 

[Big Ursus]

Aizan, here are some guide lines that might help. I've copied them from my post in another active thread here,

"You can certainly share what works or doesn't work for you in a photograph."

But when people do that, I think it's essential they point to the specific areas of the photograph they say work or don't work, and explain why they think so.

"You can state how a picture makes you feel or think. You can share what a photograph means to you."

Yes, and once again, the people who are making those statements should spell out which aspects of the picture create those feelings, thoughts, and meanings. That's some of what can happen in a critique. At least, that's been my experience as a student, and as a teacher.

It's not hard - it only requires someone to ask for the specific reasons why the people are making those statements.

Goes without saying that the entire point is that everyone involved wants to learn, to be honest, and to be a "mensch," which is the word my mother used for a decent human being.

And the word "critique", as I understand it, just means a thoughtful discussion. But if that word's a problem, let's try discussion.

So, count me in!