What culture is it here??!!
- Thread starter nikontiger
- Start date
- Status
one more thing to add;
yes, it is not necessary to have the skill of a master photographer in order to qualify as an expert photography critic. BUT it is necessary to have an expert knowledge and appreciation of photography.
for example, the photo-editor of National Geographic is not as skilled a photographer as say Steve McCurry or Mike Yamashita, BUT she can tell what makes a good photo from her expertise and from countless hours of sifting through thousands of slides for that one "wow" shot that defines the magazine.
likewise, Simon Cowell is not as skilled a singer as Carrie Underwood, BUT he has many years of spotting singing talent, through developing a keen musical sense and an ability to pick out the 'x factor' in aspiring singers as well as successfully marketing them (e.g. el divo).
ditto for food critics, movie critics etc.
yes, it is not necessary to have the skill of a master photographer in order to qualify as an expert photography critic. BUT it is necessary to have an expert knowledge and appreciation of photography.
for example, the photo-editor of National Geographic is not as skilled a photographer as say Steve McCurry or Mike Yamashita, BUT she can tell what makes a good photo from her expertise and from countless hours of sifting through thousands of slides for that one "wow" shot that defines the magazine.
likewise, Simon Cowell is not as skilled a singer as Carrie Underwood, BUT he has many years of spotting singing talent, through developing a keen musical sense and an ability to pick out the 'x factor' in aspiring singers as well as successfully marketing them (e.g. el divo).
ditto for food critics, movie critics etc.
I agree with this and you should be able to distingush yourself what kind of critique you should take into consideration, after all you can always choose to ignore what is said. Valid and positive critism should mention things like composition, colors, angles, light and if the shot is able to convey anything special to the viewer or if it fits with the theme that the shooter is using. Also bear in mind it takes time and energy to go into detail with every critique so sometimes they tend to be short. Always ask for elaboration and clarification if you want more information. Ultimately as a photographer and An ARTIST you have to stay true to YOUR own vision. If you find the critique is helpful, take it in your stride. If you don't you can always ignore it. It's a free world. Also note that there are many noted critics of different genres of art that don't do the craft themselves but are able to offer good and valid critiques of what they view. Roger Ebert for movies is one such example. Its up to you to read and determine yourself if its a intelligent critique or mean spirited one. Remember that. That being said i personally choose not to post my work up here because I prefer not to see my work stolen and claimed as someone else's. No offense meant to the mods here who do a good job of taking care of such offenders but the internet's proliferation has made this ISSUE even more relevant today. I will do what i have to do protect my work which has my blood and sweat poured into it. That being said i've been happy to share my work with people on here thru pms as well. But these are individuals that i trust and they know who they are.
"if you find any member's posting unnecessary, do feedback to the moderators/superusers who are moderating the section the thread is in."
Agreed. If that person does anything defamatory or just insulting you can always take action against them.
Yes, a Food Critique does not need to know how to cook, or a passenger does not need to know how to drive -- UNLESS the Food Critique PAYs for his food with Cash, or the Passenger paid for his trip, when taking a transportation offered by the Professional Taxi DRIVER.
If they are commenting without "qualification or experence", or NOT even paying ( a customer ), then it is another story ... :thumbsd:
Also bear in mind the minute you try to produce anything creative and display it publicly you automatically open yourself up to criticism. You think this place is bad? Try taking a creative writing or Art class. Its alot worse there. The bad pieces are always praised as visionary and the good ones are always put down and insulted. Because very few people want to admit openly that there are people out there who are more competent and talented than they are. Its human nature.
Yeap you can really see this if you read the mag or its website and you read their explanation for their selection of the reader's photo of the month.
I can testify to that, and I understand your concern about stolen goods etc... as was stated in a recent thread I posted about a 14y/o girls photo in porno DVD cover, we can see a lot of individuals who doesn't agree.
Understanding Human behavior and psychology is the beginning to understand WHY Critiques critique ! ... ahahahaha
If One is confident and knows His own standing, he will see thru the commentors' angles and will not be affected by it ...
Having said that, there are situations whereby "critiques" are coming from where there are peers' jealousy, and negativity toward your works will only make them look bad ( for those who can discern it ).
:thumbsup:
As you mentioned here about good and bad, its your POV against their POV now, then the credibility between these differing parties will be what the general public adopt as the benchmark.
Well you need to think about this: If you consider yourself a commercial photographer/artist and you're looking to sell you work, then you must remember that you are shooting for your audience; which is the public. So their criticism will have to have more weight on your mind when you shoot.
If you're being artistic and looking to satisfy your vision then you don't have to pay attention to what people say. It all depends on what you're looking to do.
I think what I have in mind is the word moderation. As mentioned before, there's no way a critique giver can get away with zero credibility e.g. though a food critic doesn't cook, I'm sure he/she can boil an egg 
...don't kid me lah :bsmilie:
So as Csers here, portfolio is one way, site link another, and pm another, to show we can at least boil an egg.
...don't kid me lah :bsmilie: So as Csers here, portfolio is one way, site link another, and pm another, to show we can at least boil an egg.
the thing about putting down good works and praising bad works really is dependent on the maturity of the community one operates in. not that they don't happen, but they aren't always the case everywhere, so not to lose hope
the harshness of criticisms in this forum indeed pales in comparison to real life ones, but since this is the internet and we can't see each other's face(s), i think applying a certain degree of courtesy and neutrality may be good on most ocassions when making a critique ... of course on the other hand, critique seekers will have to treat the exercise on the internet as impersonal, since most of the time it's only some nicknames we're communicating with.
nonetheless bad behaviours still need to be reported.
Yes, they maybe NOT artistic people or Practitioners themselves, BUT they do GET PAID for what they write or giving opinions and reviews -- it's their day job !
For those Criticizing for the sake of critique, that's different.' :bsmilie:
I think what I have in mind is the word moderation. As mentioned before, there's no way a critique giver can get away with zero credibility e.g. though a food critic doesn't cook, I'm sure he/she can boil an egg
So as Csers here, portfolio is one way, site link another, and pm another, to show we can at least boil an egg.
what would be a better gauge will be to look at the critic's previous critiques. a critic who takes good pictures at most testify that he/she knows something about making good pictures, but if he/she cannot articulate his/her thoughts with clarity in words, i doubt he/she makes a good critic. having knowledge is one thing, how that is being put across in the most appropriate manner is another.
like how one will choose a photographer based on the photographer's portfolio, one may like to value the words of a critic based on the critic's pervious writings.
can always challenge them to boxing match like director Uwe Boll did with his critics :bsmilie:
i think that's an overly simplistic model of thinking.
for example, a paid photographer may not always perform better than a serious hobbyist.
- Status
Similar threads
