Hi, Just to contribute; Why does anyone send contributions to the gallery? This place is not the "gallery of the upmost fine arts", this is a photogallery for sharing and learning. I, for myself, sometimes send my pictures to photoforum, because I try something and want to understand if it works or not, sometimes I know that something is missing but not quite put my finger on it, sometimes I see a flaw but want to test if it is seen as a flaw with more experienced people around here. For example, in my last picture, somebody said "This picture could be taken in any city". Yes, true. But this was my intention. Photographs from Jerusalem, mostly either contain landmarks, or blood, conflicts, etc. But there are people living a life over there, for them it is "just another city". Somebody told that the railing on the right was crap, and I would have stepped two steps to the right. Yes, it is true, but it is impractical to stage a shot while walking quickly on the streets with very limited time. Somebody else pointed out privately that the lines of the bench was leading the eye to the bin so it would be better to reverse the picture. This was true, and I learned from it. Anyhow, I prefer to have critiques that show the shortcomings than to saying "very well done". Some good words always does some good too.:-) Veli Izzet > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Bob Talbot > Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 11:14 AM > To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students > Subject: Re: the end is nayy... > > > Sorry about this post. I sent it before looking at the pix. And > after > > some excitement at home. Now I think some of my stuff is good > enough..... > > > One thing though, why not critique the pix consructivley? > > Bob > > It's a cycle that goes round and round. > > In the past I have tried that - then I remember that most > here are really quite experienced/accomplished photographers. > Some react quite strongly / defensively to comments about > cropping, lighting etc. > Then, you point out things you think could/would have > improved the presentation - and your comments are classed as > nit-picking. > Then you tell the truth, be blunt, and make enemies. > Then you just be polite - and dwell only on the nice aspects ... > > ... and at last everyone thanks you for your review ;o) > > > How can you be constructive without really knowing the > author, or specifically their skill level and specific > reasons for posting the specific image? > > If you read my "Review of the crappy gallery" there are > plenty of serious comments woven in. > How though can you be constructive to David Small's image? > His normal standards are better (technically) so what point > is there in the almost condescending "David, you need to > concentrate on holding the camera steady or use a faster > shutter speed ...". I take the view that David knows what he > is doing and has therefore consciously submitted a blurred > photo: I look at it and think, "what was he trying to convey > by the blur? Did it work?" > > Q > > >
