Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
"Themed" Threads
- Thread starter jz0309
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I also had put down my camera for many years. Life took a very painful turn and I was emotionally not able to continue. Mrs. Diver bought my D50 for my birthday in 2005. I'm very glad she did.
I think this is an interesting idea, perhaps for a stickied thread. The problem I foresee is that it can get out of hand over time. Say a year from now with 20+ pages, is it going to be usable/navigatable?
Perhaps a monthly thread similar to the POTD thread? Not stickied. But a dedicated thread each month where people can post their before/after pics looking for feedback. I can see this turning into a problem on one level as the volume could be such that even the dedicated regulars don’t have time to comment on every post (and might feel guilty about this). But it might turn into something that is a useful and sustainable addition to the forum.
People would also have to be okay with hearing (potentially) unfavorable comments about their photo. I’ve seen so many people offended by well intentioned help, assuming they would only receive positive comments. I do a lot of portfolio reviews for people because I want to help them be their best but some people don’t accept comments in the spirit they are given.
Agreed, but we account for that in the rules. If you look at the Critic's Corner thread, the OP (I think it was Alex) made it very clear there wouldn't be any holding back. After that, it's up to the poster.
I'm on another website where there is a critique forum that waxes and wanes in popularity, and unfortunately a lot of folks neither know how to give nor how to receive critiques.
"This photo is beautiful-I like it" isn't a critique. "This photo is terrible. I would have deleted it" isn't a critique either.
A critique might be(not thinking of any specific photo, but just giving examples) "I like the way the line of trees draws my eye to the main subject of the photo" or "The is too much empty space in the foreground that I find distracting. I think the photo would be much stronger if you cropped it out, or if taking a similar one you composed to eliminate that." Critiques aren't necessarily negative or positive, but rather thoughtful comments about the good and the bad of a photo or what you like or dislike and-most importantly-why you like or dislike specific elements or the photo as a whole.
Oh I completely agree. And yes, presumably the rules would state everything in advance. But there’s always one or two who don’t understand what a good critique is. And some people focus too much on the negative without considering the positive (both giving and receiving ends).
And then there are those who say they welcome critique (on another site I'm on there is actually a "Critique" tag which can be affixed to the title of one's thread at the time of starting it) and while this works well in some instances, critique being offered and accepted gracefully with resulting changes made in the image, in others, not so much so. I can think of one example right off the top of my head: each and every time someone has offered thoughtful commentary on his images, there is one guy who comes back with, "oh, but I intended it to be that way," or, "yes, that's a good point, but...." He always has a "but...." with which he responds to well-meant critiques and suggestions. A lot of members have quickly caught on that in reality this guy is actually fairly thin-skinned and not truly receptive to actual critique at all.
So there's that, too. People may state that they appreciate and want critique, but then when they actually receive it, are not so welcoming of it after all. Those people are pretty easy to spot, though, as time goes on.
So there's that, too. People may state that they appreciate and want critique, but then when they actually receive it, are not so welcoming of it after all. Those people are pretty easy to spot, though, as time goes on.
I always welcome critique. Sometimes you agree with it, but sometimes you don't. But generally unless asked I keep my opinions to myself.
Occasionally (although not lately!) I attend trade shows to sell monitors (among other things), and sometimes people will bring their own photos so they can ask for help with colour management etc. The staff always have an in joke when describing these encounters.
"yes I see what you did wrong there. You pressed the shutter!"
Occasionally (although not lately!) I attend trade shows to sell monitors (among other things), and sometimes people will bring their own photos so they can ask for help with colour management etc. The staff always have an in joke when describing these encounters.
"yes I see what you did wrong there. You pressed the shutter!"
I don't disagree but I also don't think it will be a big issue. Some of the judges for the Weekly Challenge give thoughtful critiques and they have been well received. The few people that haven't been able to tolerate that generally don't come back. As I said above, it's all fair as long as the rules are clear.
If you don't like sand then don't get into the sandbox. If you get in anyway, don't complain that you got sand in your shorts.
If you don't like sand then don't get into the sandbox. If you get in anyway, don't complain that you got sand in your shorts.
Well, too be fair, a thoughtful critique written by someone who doesn't like an image, or doesn't like parts of it, isn't necessarily valid nor is the person receiving the critique obligated to act on it and one person's critique can run completely counter to what the photographer was trying to achieve with the image.
With that said, there's a definite difference between disagreeing with parts of a critique or with one particular one and flatly dismissing anything negative, which it sounds like what the guy you talked about is doing.
And, there again, I'm on one site where one regular participant in the critique forum can offer nothing more than "This photo is utter crap" or the same thing repeated endlessly and will rarely say anything if pressed for more details other than just rephrasing it over and over.
Which of course is not critique. Its just being negative. Saying the horizon is wonky or the subject is out of focus is much more useful. As it gives the poster the tools to go straighten his horizon (editing) or to work on his focus technique in the field.
One of the big differences between professional photographers and ammeters is the professional will only share his best work. Now having more experience and possibly better equipment might help him get more keepers, but he still has images that never make it past the first cull.
We have never lived in a time when so many photos are taken and seen by so many (digitally). Unfortunately that means that a lot of average photos get shared. Now there is nothing wrong with that and it has it place. But in the digital sub forum I only share images I feel happy to show. If they are rubbish, they get deleted or whatever.
No disagreement from me on any of your points.
I'm most definitely an "ammeter" photographer
but I still try to be careful about what I show. I might share a photo that's one of two dozen I've tried of a particular subject/scene at different angles, different distances or focal lengths, different apertures, or whatever else to see what ultimately "clicks" for me. Of course then too I'll work one up and find that the horizon is tilted(a perpetual problem of mine despite the fact that I reprogram the DOF preview button on my cameras to toggle the level on/off), and even worse I composed tightly enough that I can't straighten it without completely ruining the photo.Sometimes I'll just share anyway. And yes, I've received feedback before along the lines of "The tilted horizon really bothers me" or something like that, and even though I know it's there leaving it was had less of an impact on the photo-to me-than what I'd lose in fixing it. Perhaps the answer is to just trash the photo completely, but if it's one I personally like on the whole I'll share it and accept that some aren't going to agree with my decision on that. Sometimes I'll even fix it and then solicit another opinion to see if others agree or disagree with my judgement. As a bit of a side note on that, too, I think it's worthwhile to remember to compose wide if you're planning on doing any kind of perspective correction or otherwise in post-it's amazing how much PC in particular can eat up.
Even a ham-fisted guy like me has standards, though. Subject out of focus is one that gets dumped regardless of how strong the rest of the photo might be because if the subject isn't clear, you've lost the point of it. That's also why I've never gotten into the whole soft focus thing that comes and goes in popularity. At least with my pretending I know how to use Photoshop, if I do want to add a bit of touch of that, I can put a touch of Gaussian blur on one particular area if I want to make it less distracting, but sometimes that looks worse than just leaving it be.
Woah... looks like my comment went OT a bit... haha... Sorry about that. I've developed thick skin on non-constructive negative comments. For me it's easy to ignore. But a critique for me is looking at my work and learn something I never opened my eyes to, and maybe use it on my next workflow. I just asked the question here because not all pictures posted are exactly what it looks like from an untouched raw file. Everyone has their own workflow adjustments.. like exposure, shadows/highlights, whites, blacks, dodge and burn, color grading, sharpening (high pass filters) or gaussian blurring, adding/removal in PS... etc... I enjoy seeing before and after pics... and I'd like to ask questions... or even answer if I could. As for feedback and critiques, I'm open to listen to anything that will help me look at things I haven't noticed. Plus... the reason why I come to this forum... not just this sub-forum... I generally like the MR community... even if I don't use many Apple products. Okay... I'll stop now.. back OT... haha
You should feel free to start such a thread. ? I love to see before/afters.
Also, definitely feel free to ask someone how they achieved a certain effect in their post-processing....we all indeed do have different camera gear, different editing software and different approaches! I tend to be rather simple in my approach to both photography and editing: no panos, no layers, no focus stacking, whatever, although I will from time to time implement a filter just to see what happens and if I like the result, will use it.
I don’t think you went too far off topic and I think your comment prompted some really interesting replies and discussion. Kudos.
Maybe someone should start a monthly before/after thread and we can see where it goes? If there is interest I can see it becoming a staple like the POTD thread or the weekly photo contest thread.
If it takes off, we can collectively start thinking about rules related to posting guidelines for the thread (like one image post per day—though several versions allowed of that image within a single post). The expectation being that any posts are made in good faith looking for honest replies. That posters don’t spam the thread with every single pic they take, but rather exercise judgment when deciding which pics to share in the thread. And expecting that the thread will remain civil and helpful.
Thoughts?
I think there is consensus about this. @erayser threw out the idea. I suggest he kicks off the thread and let's see where it goes.
One idea I had was a thread about "Photos by Others". Rules for our threads emphasize that all the photos must be our own. I learned that when I posted a photo of a very small creature from a PBS Nature series, my intent was to make all people here aware of hard it was and the specialized equipment used to get the shot, with the emphasis on the subject. Criteria should be based on excellence of technique, subject and composition. Photos that the rest of the members here might never see. Also, more importantly, what special meaning the photo has to the poster. For example, the following photo was shot by one of Astronauts who was from the Finger Lakes area. My house was down there, so this has a lot of meaning to me as well as very unique photo.
I think photo shares should continue to be only from yourself.
Agree. I think there is the picture thread section for sharing general photos. The Digital photography sub forum should be just for people sharing their own QUALITY work.
Never mind. Didn't think my idea was original, but I didn't see the Picture Gallery, pictures of cars, pets, tatoos, beer etc. Not exactly what I had in mind.
I agree with Molly and AFB: general photos shot by anyone are already represented in other areas of MR; the digital photography subforum really is meant for photographers to share their OWN work, images of quality, their best efforts rather than snapshots of their pets, their lunch, their beer, their desktop wallpaper, whatever.