Why do people get so excited and angry...

[dave lackey]

Just follow this piggy-back thread, and you'll probably find out. It may be gone by morning too.

🙂

Dang, I learn so much from RFF!🙂

Us country folks are simple minded so this information is always appreciated. There is a book out there about how to speak "Southern". Gotta read it someday.

 

[Roger Hicks]

That's a quite simple question that can't be simply answered.

Well, you know the old saying: "The biggest fool can ask a question the wisest man cannot answer."

Cheers,

R.

 

[Tompas]

(...) In many ways, thanks to the considerable civility of most people on RFF, I've learned a good deal more here about writing than I have about photography. (...)

We would guess so, since you write a lot more here than you post images. 😉

 

[paulfish4570]

Roger, i like your definition.
I do have a little too much book larnin' to be a redneck. Besides, i'd never throw trash out of my car. Perhaps riverrat is sufficient ... 🙂

 

[shadowfox]

I went looking for that thread this morning and was sad to see that it had been deleted. OTOH, I thought some of the posts in that thread were negative and insulting in tone, so perhaps it's not surprising that the thread was deleted. The OP there was trying to share some thoughts and start a discussion abt aethestics and photography; people are free to disagree, of course, but some failed to check their egos at the door.

I'm disappointed too.
I thought the content and the points of the material linked by the OP is very useful regardless how you feel about approaching composition.

How in the world can *that* enrage some people? (I missed the insulting parts of the thread, anyone care to give us a summary?) 😀

 

[Roger Hicks]

We would guess so, since you write a lot more here than you post images. 😉

Go to the website...

Cheers,

R.

 

[Tompas]

Go to the website...

Sure, I do that all the time but there are so many...

🙂

 

[Bingley]

I'm disappointed too.
I thought the content and the points of the material linked by the OP is very useful regardless how you feel about approaching composition.

How in the world can *that* enrage some people? (I missed the insulting parts of the thread, anyone care to give us a summary?) 😀

My sentiments, exactly. When I left off reading the thread late y'day afternoon, some of the "discussion" was beginning to vere off into ad hominem attacks. It's one thing to say that you disagree w/ a theory or w/ its application to photography in practice, but quite another to suggest that anyone who's interested in the theory is therefore stupid. I'm paraphrasing, but that was the impression I got from the tone of some of the posts.

'Nuff said. I've bookmarked Adam Marelli's website, and will read his articles on aesthetics on my own. I thank the OP for providing the link, and commend him for trying to initiate a civil discussion.

 

[Jamie123]

How in the world can *that* enrage some people? (I missed the insulting parts of the thread, anyone care to give us a summary?) 😀

IIRC it was the OP who was enraged by the some people's reaction to his post. It seems that one thing led to another until he and another poster started exchanging insults. I didn't witness all of it, though 🙂

 

[bigeye]

This composition represents Hegel's method of triadic development.

The bent form of the rear bumper is annihilated (sublation) by the downward pressure of the barrel in bed of my old Ford by the forces of the homemade fork-lift and some sort of strange old bucket loader to achieve the third of Hegel's stages, which is the first stage, returned to itself in a higher, truer, richer, and fuller form

Now, that is redneck art philosophy.

.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

IIRC it was the OP who was enraged by the some people's reaction to his post. It seems that one thing led to another until he and another poster started exchanging insults. I didn't witness all of it, though 🙂

Hi Jamie,

I thought there was just one member insulting another... Then I went to sleep long after that member's insults, and only today I found the thread was gone... And those insults remained there for a long time yesterday... I don't know if RFF mods saw the insults or not, and I don't know either if the thread was deleted by a mod or by the OP... To me the only thing that matters (as did into that thread) is how much my photography needs that theory to feel better about my images or to help me play while shooting, and the answer I'm sure of should not be important to anyone, and with all due respect and love to RFF and its members, we're all different, and I respect seriously if someone thinks the theory is true and wants to shoot considering the grid... I didn't... And I just couldn't avoid asking for real arguments, and couldn't avoid asking for great photographers' quotes that could make the theory a fact... As for the insults, those were nothing special: ass, go to hell, bad photographer... I feel bad, but not about the insults: about the impossibility to discuss here inside the best forum, into a certain level of reality, because that's what I tried to do...

I'm afraid, just like politics and religion, aesthetics is a subject I shouldn't touch in public again...

But it's strange: if I talk about designing a bag for specific gear, it's a problem and insults come. If I want a faster button on a digital camera for contrast control, insults come... If I talk about the benefits of developing differently depending on the kind of light, insults come... Seems like no matter the subject, if I discuss with arguments any position and ask for arguments, some people having no real arguments have no other reaction than insulting... One thing is to disagree, and another one is to insult.

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Ranchu]

Yeah, I didn't see Juan insulting anyone. I don't know why you're being insulted, Juan. Sorry. He started out with calling you a 'thread hijacker' which is pretty tame, and didn't make much sense to me as he seemed to be hijacking his own thread. He did seem to be irrationally angry at you. It was quite late when he went off the deep end, so maybe no mods were awake. I wanted to ask if you ever got those prints back from that guy on APUG? Whatever happened with that?

 

[claacct]

...about discussions of aesthetics? It's just about taking pictures. If you do it well, others may like what you do. If you don't; well, whose problem is that?

Let's call the extremes the Rednecks and the Fine Artists. Fine Artists may or may not rake up their academic qualifications, or quote their gurus, while Rednecks generally fall back on I Know What I Like (and sometimes quote their gurus, too).

The rest of us, in the middle, can only look on in bemusement. It's not that important. If you learn something from the discussion, great. If not, not. But why get angry about it? I can understand being angry about personal insults, or exasperated by indefensible statements, but otherwise, who cares?

Cheers,

R.

There is a lot of anger in still photography community. Its virtually impossible to discuss anything without a fight ensuing and name calling... My conclusion is that all the topics discussed in photography forums are often so repetitious that it automatically makes people angry, for example its like the next time someone ask "which lens?" I'm going punch myself in the face, sort of a thing...

While its convenient to classify photographers, among the rednecks, fine artist, fake Pjs, wannabe Moriyamas, Gilden's lackeys, or just vulgar gear hoarders etc. in the end of the day its basically a case of sharks turning on one another as the prey has fled and there is no food to eat, which in this case is the reality that still photography is finished and creativity has left the field, so where to direct that anger and range, well, its the guy who has an annoying avatar or who cannot form a basic sentence, or the guy who has ten links in his signature trying to promote his work in an imaginary world where in actuality nobody give a damn... But I digress...

Back to the topic, whatever its actually about...

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Yeah, I didn't see Juan insulting anyone. I don't know why you're being insulted, Juan. Sorry. I wanted to ask if you ever got those prints back from that guy on APUG? Whatever happened with that?

Hi Ranchu,

Thanks!

No, I didn't get the prints from him, but he kindly wrote back a few months after those days, and sent me scans of prints he said he did... Differences (digital ones) were really small in warmth as to think about any serious conclusion... What I learned about all that, with good results since, is color negative film sees great benefit when -after incident metering- shot at +1 if there's direct frontal sun, and even at +2 for totally lateral direct sun, but for soft light it doesn't get better than N...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Jamie123]

Hi Jamie,

I thought there was just one member insulting another... Then I went to sleep long after that member's insults, and only today I found the thread was gone... And those insults remained there for a long time yesterday... I don't know if RFF mods saw the insults or not, and I don't know either if the thread was deleted by a mod or by the OP... To me the only thing that matters (as did into that thread) is how much my photography needs that theory to feel better about my images or to help me play while shooting, and the answer I'm sure of should not be important to anyone, and with all due respect and love to RFF and its members, we're all different, and I respect seriously if someone thinks the theory is true and wants to shoot considering the grid... I didn't... And I just couldn't avoid asking for real arguments, and couldn't avoid asking for great photographers' quotes that could make the theory a fact... As for the insults, those were nothing special: ass, go to hell, bad photographer... I feel bad, but not about the insults: about the impossibility to discuss here inside the best forum, into a certain level of reality, because that's what I tried to do...

I'm afraid, just like politics and religion, aesthetics is a subject I shouldn't touch in public again...

But it's strange: if I talk about designing a bag for specific gear, it's a problem and insults come. If I want a faster button on a digital camera for contrast control, insults come... If I talk about the benefits of developing differently depending on the kind of light, insults come... Seems like no matter the subject, if I discuss with arguments any position and ask for arguments, some people having no real arguments have no other reaction than insulting... One thing is to disagree, and another one is to insult.

Cheers,

Juan

My apologies, Juan, I did remember you getting insulted but you're right, there were no insults by you. Like I said, I didn't follow the thread to the end so just assumed it escalated further.

 

[paulfish4570]

bigeye, that is some fine redneck engineering ...

 

[Ranchu]

Hi Ranchu,

Thanks!

No, I didn't get the prints from him, but he kindly wrote back a few months after those days, and sent me scans of prints he said he did... Differences (digital ones) were really small in warmth as to think about any serious conclusion... What I learned about all that, with good results since, is color negative film sees great benefit when -after incident metering- shot at +1 if there's direct frontal sun, and even at +2 for totally lateral direct sun, but for soft light it doesn't get better than N...

Cheers,

Interesting, do you point the ball at the light source or the camera? I've been experimenting with pointing the ball at the light source and adding a stop for hard light, and 1/2 stop for softer light. Basically looking for more control than just assuming the ball is correct when pointed at the camera. Still on the first roll of it though.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

My apologies, Juan, I did remember you getting insulted but you're right, there were no insults by you. Like I said, I didn't follow the thread to the end so just assumed it escalated further.

No problem, Jamie... Anyway I know I take things too seriously often, and if you add English is not my language, I know what I write must sound strange or affected lots of times... I was excited as Roger's title 😱, but really trying to keep as cool as possible because the thread deserved it... Thanks for your very kind words!

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hi Ranchu,

Thanks!

No, I didn't get the prints from him, but he kindly wrote back a few months after those days, and sent me scans of prints he said he did... Differences (digital ones) were really small in warmth as to think about any serious conclusion... What I learned about all that, with good results since, is color negative film sees great benefit when -after incident metering- shot at +1 if there's direct frontal sun, and even at +2 for totally lateral direct sun, but for soft light it doesn't get better than N...

Cheers,

Interesting, do you point the ball at the light source or the camera? I've been experimenting with pointing the ball at the light source and adding a stop for hard light, and 1/2 stop for softer light. Basically looking for more control than just assuming the ball is correct when pointed at the camera. Still on the first roll of it though.

I follow a teacher's recommendation: not totally aiming camera, but almost... One third of the angle aiming to the light source: that's how he worked for his product LF slide film...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Ranchu]

Dude, you write better'n me, don't worry about your english!