Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

  1. #1

    Default Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Generally people who give comments that are objective, neutral, educational, helpful, encouraging, intelligent, humourous, etc are the ideal members. But I notice that there are 3 other groups, let juz say, the Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

    The Good - this is the angel group, they will say everything nice. Like someone said, you post an "elephant man" image and they will still say "nice". Every photos to them is , nice series, pro, etc... Personally I feel that too much of such "Good" comments are boring, like insincere, no long term objective, etc.

    The Bad - luckily you dont get too many of such members around. When they comment they are really nasty and personal, short and unfair statements. These members are not welcome.

    The Ugly - these members seldom praise but are VERY critical in their comments. They survive because they are actually quite talented themselves and they usually give lengthy replies to support their strong and sharp comments. Their belief is that good and insincere comments will not help others to improve their skills but forgeting that very critical comments frighten away many members who sincerely want to share their images with other members.

    Can we see which group we belong to? Hopefully ppl will be objective and neutral in the replies to this thread and let us not give any personal attacks here .....
    always the Light, .... always.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    I think we also need to talk a look at the people receiving the comments. I'm sure it's painfully obvious that a lot of people CAN'T take criticism at all. Probably in their mind, they know better than some "stranger on the internet" that somehow seems to think he/she is better than them. The problem is, these people don't realise that it's not about who is better or worse, it's the fact that different people perceive things differently. Someone is always bound to see something you didn't see and vice versa.

    What can be done about these people? Nothing. It's up to them to change their attitudes. If they can't then too bad then, it's their loss as they will never improve that way.

    Anyway, I think "the ugly" are good provided that they can also give complements when it's due rather than just be 100% critical for the sake of being so. Like Simon on American Idol. Yes he's painfully blunt and critical but he knows how to give praise when it's due.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    I value input from 'the Ugly' but they should also show some 'inner beauty' by critisizing with good choice of words. Even if not, I still value their input.

    But when I post, I do expect all 3 categories because it is important to get feedback not just from one but from many. It is up to poster/contributor to take what is good and forget what is not needed.

    But before I post, the strongest critique of my shots have to be myself first. Some images I have posted have not received any comments which is okay. Because I know they do not even inspire anyone to say anything. Sometimes that is the best critique of all.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Planet Eropagnis
    Posts
    2,944

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    I'd met 'Good' and 'Ugly'. As for 'Bad', none... yet... fortunately.

    Typically, for the ppl I'd met, the 'Good' usually falls in the category of non-photographers, people who usually dun appreciate the difference between an Art and Non-Art, non-artists, extremely super duper new photographer who doesn't know the difference between a Point and Shoot vs a (D)SLR.

    The 'Ugly' usually falls in the category of fellow photographers, artists and seasoned photographers with an eye for details. Somehow I expected more harsher criticism from them, but their criticism so far had been much milder than what I'd personally expected.

    That's my experience.
    "Wonders of the Human Mind. Unfathomable to the highest degree."

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Siglap
    Posts
    1,652

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    I say - yes.

    If they good keep on praising, then there is no way we're going to improve ourselves. We'll forever remain at that angle / level.

    We can't push ourselves higher and demand more from our shots when they look plain & simple - though depending on situation, might work.
    Last edited by dEthANGeL; 30th May 2006 at 04:04 PM.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    we need more "ideal" members. the rest we can just ignore.

    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  7. #7

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    we need a balance like yin-yang!

  8. #8

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Quote Originally Posted by zaren
    we need more "ideal" members.
    This statement reminds me of something which affected me profoundly.

    I was told that

    if one sees an ideal place to work in,

    if one sees an ideal place to live in,

    if one sees an ideal community to be with,

    PLEASE, DON'T GO THERE!

    Because, with your presence, that ideal place to work in, that ideal place to live in, and that ideal community to be with, will, with immediate effect, not be ideal anymore!

  9. #9

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Quote Originally Posted by Canonised

    The Good -
    The Bad -
    The Ugly -
    You forgot one other group.

    The group that do not tolerate the

    The Good -
    The Bad -, and
    The Ugly.

    Perhaps we should call this group

    The Intolerant.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Planet Eropagnis
    Posts
    2,944

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    In.. intolerant?

    A little vague on the description since its not really self-explainatory... Can elaborate a little on what the 'intolerant group' would do?
    "Wonders of the Human Mind. Unfathomable to the highest degree."

  11. #11

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Quote Originally Posted by student
    This statement reminds me of something which affected me profoundly.

    I was told that

    if one sees an ideal place to work in,

    if one sees an ideal place to live in,

    if one sees an ideal community to be with,

    PLEASE, DON'T GO THERE!

    Because, with your presence, that ideal place to work in, that ideal place to live in, and that ideal community to be with, will, with immediate effect, not be ideal anymore!
    on the contrary, you SHOULD go there, so that the ideal community can influence you to be ideal as well!
    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  12. #12

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Quote Originally Posted by student
    You forgot one other group.

    The group that do not tolerate the

    The Good -
    The Bad -, and
    The Ugly.

    Perhaps we should call this group

    The Intolerant.
    actually there are only 4 groups in the world.

    a) constructive but rude
    b) constructive and polite
    c) destructive and rude
    d) destructive but polite

    the "simon cowell" would be a)
    the "ideal" would be b)
    the "bad and ugly" would be c)
    and the "silent assassin" would be d)
    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  13. #13

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Quote Originally Posted by jsbn
    In.. intolerant?

    A little vague on the description since its not really self-explainatory... Can elaborate a little on what the 'intolerant group' would do?

    This might take a while! But here goes!

    Basically, the TS said that these three groups are not "ideal" (to borrow Zaren's word) members of this community, because their comments are either useless (The Good), plainly aggressive and antagonistic with little or no value (The Bad), or unnecessary offensive and harsh even though the points might be valid (The Ugly).

    They are not ideal because their comments are not perceived as

    objective
    neutral
    educational
    helpful
    encouraging
    intelligent
    humurous

    Why are we intolerant of these "less than ideal" members of this community?

    Let me analyse the traits of these "less than ideal groups".

    "The Good":

    Undoubtedly there are those who are plainly superficial for the sake of being superficial.

    But comments such as "nice and good" are equally valid comments. Many, for reasons of age and education, cannot verbalise their thoughts and feelings in words. And simple comments like these represent their reactions to images. Why should anyone be intolerant of them?

    For those who could verbalise their feelings, but chose not to do so is also perfectly legitimate, because it really takes a lot of time to write comments properly. Why should anyone be intolerant of them? The fact that they bothered to write their emotional response is already a contribution!

    The Bad

    Frankly, I have not seen anyone who fit into this category. But just in case there are such, and as far as the TS is concerned, there must be, otherwise he would not have created this group.

    Then again, what appeared to be personal, unfair, short and nasty, may be only in the perception of the other person at the receiving end.

    What is wrong in being short?

    Nasty? Were the "nasty" comments appropriate to equally "nasty" comments made earlier? Then who is calling the kettle black?

    Personal? Were the personal comments rebuttals to equally personal comments earlier?

    Unfair? How does one measure fairness in comments?

    The problem is, what is nasty, personal, and unfair may be largely an issue of perception, and may be a reflection of what the person (receiver)is actually. The "Bad" may be more apparent than real. The "Bad" may exists only in the mind of one predisposed to being "bad" himself.

    If a person is "Truly Bad" and of no use to this community, he will not last long.

    But as it is, who are the truly "Bad"? The truly "Bad" might be the one saying that the other is "Bad" because he is intolerant of the other POV, and manners of expression.

    The Ugly

    In actual fact, the "Ugly" actually epitomises what the TS mentioned as "ideal" member, with traits like objectivity, educational, helpful (If one sees the substance rather than the delivery), and often intelligence.

    What the "Ugly" "lacks" is "graciousness". But do we need to all look and behave like angels?

    Why are we not able to accept the positive the "Ugly" gives? Why focus on the "failings?"

    Why be intolerant of the personality traits of the "Ugly".

    Why be intolerant?


    But there are those who like to stand on High Moral Grounds. These are the religious zealouts.

    These are "The Intolerants". What is the place of such in this community?

  14. #14

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Quote Originally Posted by zaren
    on the contrary, you SHOULD go there, so that the ideal community can influence you to be ideal as well!

    I have to be personal here. Sorry.

    I want to give you some credit to be a thinking person, and I sincerely hope I am wrong. But you sounded so naive! So sweetly naive to be unbelievable!

    I hope sincerely that you are only writing in jest and frivolity.

  15. #15
    Member eng_keow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mt Alvernia Hospital
    Posts
    1,022

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Quote Originally Posted by student
    What the "Ugly" "lacks" is "graciousness". But do we need to all look and behave like angels?
    BINGO! Certainly we can try to be 'nice' to one another. (not pointing to anyone in particular, so don't flame me) There are more ways to skin a cat and there are more ways we can say the same thing, one hurts, crushes and demeans whilst the other edifies, encourages and builds up. Anyway, we can never be angels, they are all in heaven. The best we can be are fallen angels.


    Quote Originally Posted by student
    But there are those who like to stand on High Moral Grounds. These are the religious zealouts.

    These are "The Intolerants". What is the place of such in this community?
    Whao..This is a unfair, sweeping statement. There are lots of religious 'zealots' out there who neither stand on High Moral Grounds or are intolerant towards anyone. In fact, they are meek and mild, but are yet steadfastly convicted of their beliefs in any circumstance. (this is just my point of view)
    Last edited by eng_keow; 30th May 2006 at 10:46 PM.
    My Webspace
    ##See and listen with your heart, for beauty will reveal thyself##

  16. #16

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Quote Originally Posted by student
    I have to be personal here. Sorry.

    I want to give you some credit to be a thinking person, and I sincerely hope I am wrong. But you sounded so naive! So sweetly naive to be unbelievable!

    I hope sincerely that you are only writing in jest and frivolity.
    yes, i was writing in jest.
    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  17. #17

    Default Re: Do we need .... the Good, the Bad, & the Ugly?

    Quote Originally Posted by zaren
    yes, i was writing in jest.

    Thank goodness!

    Whew!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •