why is gear talk more popular than photo talk?

johnwolf said:
Sorry, Marko, but with your condescending language like "ridiculous," "sickening," and "garbage" I can't imagine anyone inviting your critique.

John
Click to expand...

Sorry to hurt your feelings John... I must have not expressed myself properly or you didn't read my post thoroughly... I never would come out and say someone's specific work is garbage... No that's not the right way to do things... Being constructive, pointing things out that that I feel could be improved, even saying things I didn't like and why etc.. is the right way in my view...
 
nukecoke said:
Not to sound like a Vulcan or something, but you couldn't handle that student's point of view just like she couldn't handle yours. Or maybe she even handled it better. I'm not sure because more background information is needed to draw conclusion.
Click to expand...

Maybe I wasn't clear...this was along time ago..ha When everyone in the class was required to post work for critque, but this person get exempted from posted work that was my only problem..
 
Because gear is a simple matter of having it or not. Work, even classic, era-defining work, is subjective. If you own a black-paint M3 with a noctilux, I can't say "no you don't!"
For the same reason, gear is a tangible way to be aspirational. It's easier for me to dream of being Capa fondling a Contax than it is for me to dream of being Capa while riding in an amphibious assault craft.
 
I think that really good thought-provoking critiques and commentary just aren't very common even in the best of times, so be happy when you encounter it?

As for me, who am I to critique someone else's work? I took a couple of classes in college, but otherwise I'm self-taught. The vast majority of images that I see online and in print are quickly forgotten, and I won't have much to say about them. It may have nothing to do with the quality or relevance of the works, it could just be that I didn't understand them or got distracted by other things.
 
JeffS7444 said:
I think that really good thought-provoking critiques and commentary just aren't very common even in the best of times, so be happy when you encounter it?

As for me, who am I to critique someone else's work? I took a couple of classes in college, but otherwise I'm self-taught. The vast majority of images that I see online and in print are quickly forgotten, and I won't have much to say about them. It may have nothing to do with the quality or relevance of the works, it could just be that I didn't understand them or got distracted by other things.
Click to expand...

+1
Things flow too fast these days.
 
JeffS7444 said:
...As for me, who am I to critique someone else's work?....
Click to expand...

You can certainly share what works or doesn't work for you in a photograph. You can state how a picture makes you feel or think. You can share what a photograph means to you. You can inquire about and discuss the facts of a photograph - location, event, etc. You can ask questions or for opinions about a certain aspect of a picture.

None of these are critiques per se, but they all encourage conversation and understanding.

John
 
johnwolf said:
You can certainly share what works or doesn't work for you in a photograph. You can state how a picture makes you feel or think. You can share what a photograph means to you. You can inquire about and discuss the facts of a photograph - location, event, etc. You can ask questions or for opinions about a certain aspect of a picture.

None of these are critiques per se, but they all encourage conversation and understanding.

John
Click to expand...

100% legit points.
 
al1966 said:
The problem with giving a crit of someone's work is worrying that I will cause offence or upset. I have had quite brutal (honest) critiques during my masters and sometimes it left me feeling upset, though I knew it made me a far better photographer it was at the time hard. So personally I can't bring myself to make comment on others work, saying nice photo etc though flattering for the artist is easy to say an would not help them grow but pointing out things that could have been done differently makes me uncomfortable. Now talking about gear is easy, I'm pretty much with digital of the opinion that nearly every body of the past 6/7 years is plenty good enough in 99% of cases. Lenses are perhaps a different matter, but I have not found any real dogs just not as good as some others. Even with an arts education I do have an interest in technical stuff.
Click to expand...

i'm not an arts educator, but i've taken several photography and arts classes that had crit sessions. the important thing is to be respectful and for negative (and positive) comments to be concerned solely with the artwork, not the person. other people who have not had this experience will eventually find it valuable, like you did!

do you remember how the teacher conducted crit sessions? maybe you have the experience to be a moderator in the "crit session" category...
 
02Pilot said:
My experience with two photography groups - primarily the salon I mentioned above as well as another group that's just starting up - is that photographers who want serious critique will explain upfront what they are asking for from their viewers. So, for example, at the last salon I attended there were a couple people who asked for guidance on portfolio formation, one who wanted to see if his photos were having the intended impact on others, and I asked about paring down a group of photos to a small selection to enter in a competition. If the photographer knows what they're trying to do and explains it, it's much easier for viewers to critique effectively, as they can first discuss the simple question presented before getting into the much more complex why.

In short, for the critique to be useful and to limit the problem of sensitive egos being bruised, the process must be about the photographer's intent as much as the photos themselves. Without that guidance, it's all left to personal tastes, which, as noted elsewhere in this thread, are widely varied but not terribly useful as a means of judgement for the work of others.
Click to expand...

i've never gone to a salon, but that's an excellent rule that we could apply to keep online discussions productive and on track.

have other people attended salons? a directory of them would help people get face to face feedback.
 
johnwolf said:
You can certainly share what works or doesn't work for you in a photograph. You can state how a picture makes you feel or think. You can share what a photograph means to you.
Click to expand...

If a photo doesn't make me feel anything in particular, then I'm probably not going to have anything meaningful to say about it.
 
madNbad said:
Sites like RFF are gear centric mostly because that is what we have in common.
Click to expand...

I think this really gets to the heart of the issue. What makes a photograph compelling? I have been looking for ways to get more exposure to compelling work, but my opinion of that seems to differ from most.

There’s also the appeal of that piece of kit that will “transform” your photography. The problem is that you get that piece of upgraded kit, and the idiot behind the camera hasn’t changed.
 
I am amused and I guess not surprised that no one has mentioned as a reason why we talk gear more than pictures is because (and I'm making an assumption, but I bet it's true) -- we are mostly, maybe overwhelmingly male here. Guys like "gear" -- whether it's cars, motorcycles, bicycles, ski equipment, watches, fountain pens, etc. This may be another generality, but women don't tend to worry so much about the gear they have but instead just go out and use it.

As for criticism, I think if folks here ask for people's honest criticism, they get it, and it's generally constructive. But getting into deep "philosophical" criticism, for lack of a better word, is pretty hard to do, and frankly the BS factor in criticism is very high. Call me a Philistine, but I either like a picture or I don't. If you have to explain to me why I should like it, you've lost me. (And there are a number of highly acclaimed photographers out there today whose stuff is simply for me a matter of the emperor's new clothes.)

I will in all likelihood never mount a show of my own work. I'll most likely never enter anything in a contest. I just like taking pictures -- the finding of the subject and how to come at it and record it. So criticism beyond technical or compositional is lost on me, since frankly it's the critic's opinion, not mine.
 
'Philistine' I just love the word...

Maybe that's why there is a lack of discussion of photography.

To one person your a Philistine and to another a genius, and visa versa.

There is always someone who knows all the rules...

Taste in 'Art' is so ridiculously varied that the only safe discussion <IS> about gear and technique.

Joe
 
Hmmm, I don't do art, I do photography and I see the camera as a sort of notebook that I can use to record things with. From time to time I think pictures might amuse or entertain but I know what I like/laugh at won't appeal to others and vice versa.

So I don't see the point of it on RFF which is about range-finders and a few other types of camera.

If I was teaching or learning I'd think differently but I do suspect that teachers/critcis have favourites...

Regards, David
 
jszokoli said:
'Philistine' I just love the word...

Maybe that's why there is a lack of discussion of photography.

To one person your a Philistine and to another a genius, and visa versa.

There is always someone who knows all the rules...

Taste in 'Art' is so ridiculously varied that the only safe discussion <IS> about gear and technique.

Joe
Click to expand...

So true.

We develop our own preferences and our own eye through experience. Beginners might benefit from critiques. But the more experienced photographer who has developed his own eye and follows his own rules would likely not appreciate second guessing his work.

I'm comfortable discussing gear. I'm comfortable offering an encouraging word or compliment to other photographers about their work. But I would not be comfortable criticizing other photographer's work given the subjective nature of the art.
 
David Hughes said:
Hmmm, I don't do art, I do photography
Click to expand...

Right here is the huge reason why talking about photography here doesn't work... not a judgement either way, but art photography tends to make people a bit angry here. The threads always seems to get out of control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom