What Members REALLY think about your photographs...

[James Clark]

Russ!? Hardly either.

Yeah, but... Without making this about any individual, I think that a bit too much leeway is given to people who claim to "just tell it straight" when really, that's just an excuse for being impolite.  Dismissing the entirety of the body of an enthusiast forum that features professionals, internationally recognized competition winners and finalists, and authors and experts is, to my mind, insulting and dismissive.

Having read the thread in question, I don't find what Russ wrote as personally offensive, per se, but I find it, I don't know, unnecessary, is maybe the word I'm looking for.  And yes, some participant's images, mine certainly among them, vary in quality from time to time, but for one person, no matter how accomplished or opinionated he or she feels him/herself to be, to cast the majority of the users here as "anesthetic" is rude, and rude without purpose.  It's not constructive.  Hell, it's not even criticism.  And ultimately, all it's going to do is make someone feel bad.  And for what?

[BernardLanguillier]

We all sit somewhere in the food chain.

I hardly dare mention the cost of the photographic gear I own to most people, some P1 back owners think I work with toys.

The same applies to the quality of our photographs to some extent, but photography is much more multi-dimentional and therefore pretty much impossible to rate in absolute terms. Many of the images published in major photo magazines would be killed by some in this very forum, but shine as part of a well thought out body of work with a story and an intent.

So in my view, although we all have the opportunity to improve our vision, concepts, technique,... every day that passes by, I find the comment quoted by the OP to be not only too harsh, but revealing an ignorence of the multifaceted nature of photography.

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Some very nice pictures, indeed.

Best regards
Erik

Mr. Declan O'Neill (www.newzealandlandscape.com) appears to be a strong photographer with even stronger opinions 

[Zorki5]

Some very nice pictures, indeed.

Yes, indeed. And quite entertaining blog, too. Highly recommended: 

I was slightly disappointed when one of the group said they had their own kit as I was hoping to show off my spectacular array of crepe and other assorted bandages. An impossibly healthy looking girl was the spokesman for her three male companions and she thanked me for stopping to help. I thought it best not to point out that I had decided to stop prior to the tumble. Had I not done so, there was a strong possibility that the cyclist would have fallen into the path of my car as I overtook them. He had inadvertently touched the back wheel of the cyclist in front with his own front wheel and been thrown off. Had the collided with my car, I doubt my crepe bandages would have done a lot to help.

I discovered the unfortunate cyclist was called Stu. He was more shocked than injured and Healthy Girl asked if I could drop him at the next town about 4 KM’s down the road. On the short journey Stu wryly told me that he was studying civil engineering at university and that his nickname was ‘Safety’ Stu. I bit my tongue and nodded. He told me he’d had a summer job helping the earthquake rebuild which was my cue to tell him in some detail my views on the quality of the work being done. I could tell he was really grateful for my help as he seemed to agree with everything I said.

[Otto Phocus]

Another reason why I almost never share my photographs.  I take photographs for myself.  What I find interesting will most likely be boring for someone else.

What is often forgotten that that a scene may be interesting to the photographer because not only did the photographer take the photograph, they were there at the time.  Being there adds to the experience.

A viewer of the photograph only sees the photograph.

[pegelli]

Another reason why I almost never share my photographs.  I take photographs for myself.  What I find interesting will most likely be boring for someone else.

What is often forgotten that that a scene may be interesting to the photographer because not only did the photographer take the photograph, they were there at the time.  Being there adds to the experience.

A viewer of the photograph only sees the photograph.

Well said! For enthusiastic amateurs I think a wise mantra could be: "pleasing yourself is a must, pleasing others is optional"

[stamper]

Well said! For enthusiastic amateurs I think a wise mantra could be: "pleasing yourself is a must, pleasing others is optional"

Agreed!

[David Eckels]

A viewer of the photograph only sees the photograph.

And this is why User Critiques is such a useful forum. Without it, I find it impossible to see a photograph through another's eyes. If I get a comment such as, "Nice tourist snapshot," or "Meh" I can be offended or try to understand why the shot leaves someone else flat. I find that process useful and take even the negative comments as generous because someone took the time to react at all, even if it was to flame me. Criticism that is always polite may not be effective; it's difficult to convey humor, frustration, puzzlement in words, especially when this group is visually oriented. A picture is worth a thousand words Thank God for emoticons!

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

And this is why User Critiques is such a useful forum. Without it, I find it impossible to see a photograph through another's eyes. If I get a comment such as, "Nice tourist snapshot," or "Meh" I can be offended or try to understand why the shot leaves someone else flat. I find that process useful and take even the negative comments as generous because someone took the time to react at all, even if it was to flame me. Criticism that is always polite may not be effective; it's difficult to convey humor, frustration, puzzlement in words, especially when this group is visually oriented. A picture is worth a thousand words Thank God for emoticons!

Well put, David.

While I agree with Pieter that  "pleasing yourself is a must, pleasing others is optional," I find it enormously valuable to hear comments from others, pro or con, about my own photographs. Such comments often help me learn about what my own interests may be. Often I start with a fuzzy idea, such as "Ooh! I like that!" and I snap a picture. But when I show it to others and get feedback, I sometimes understand better what it was that made me press the shutter button.

Sometimes the negative responses let me know that what I saw was trivial or superficial and not worth keeping.

But sometimes the negative comments simply tell me that a particular critic just didn't get it.

I think it is an important milestone in a photographer's development (pardon the pun) when he or she is able to say with confidence that a certain critic is wrong.

On the other hand, if you ever get to the point that you feel that every negative critique is wrong, then I think it's time to take up another sport, like maybe bungee jumping.

And, just for David:   

-Eric

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I think a wise mantra could be: "pleasing yourself is a must, pleasing others is optional"

Sounds like a bad marital advice

[pegelli]

Sounds like a bad marital advice

LOL, a dirty mind is a joy forever 

[pegelli]

Well put, David.

While I agree with Pieter that  "pleasing yourself is a must, pleasing others is optional," I find it enormously valuable to hear comments from others, pro or con, about my own photographs. Such comments often help me learn about what my own interests may be. Often I start with a fuzzy idea, such as "Ooh! I like that!" and I snap a picture. But when I show it to others and get feedback, I sometimes understand better what it was that made me press the shutter button.

Sometimes the negative responses let me know that what I saw was trivial or superficial and not worth keeping.

But sometimes the negative comments simply tell me that a particular critic just didn't get it.

I think it is an important milestone in a photographer's development (pardon the pun) when he or she is able to say with confidence that a certain critic is wrong.

On the other hand, if you ever get to the point that you feel that every negative critique is wrong, then I think it's time to take up another sport, like maybe bungee jumping.

And, just for David:   

-Eric

I agree, setting ever higher standards for yourself based on a thorough analysis of the criticism from others is an essential part of "pleasing yourself" (in the good sense  ). In my former profession as a researcher we often joked: "if you don't want variability do one experiment, if you want a straight line relationship two experiments will do". Similar philosophy for photography would be: "if you can't stand negative criticism on your photo's, don't show them to anybody"

[David Eckels]

"if you can't stand negative criticism on your photo's, don't show them to anybody"

+1

[RSL]

Interesting thread. Many different points of view. Most of them valid.

But I stand by what I said. People post tourist pictures or their equivalent because they're shooting what's out there rather than what's in here. What HCB meant by "the decisive moment" was the moment when what's in the viewfinder satisfies your desire for both significance and graphic balance. At that point it's likely you'll shoot something worth at least considering for a showing, provided you've studied visual art enough to understand what graphic balance means. Significance, on the other hand, is a personal judgment. What's significant to you may not be significant to someone else, and I think that's often what causes critical disagreement on User Critiques.

[luxborealis]

Interesting thread. Many different points of view. Most of them valid.

But I stand by what I said. People post tourist pictures or their equivalent because they're shooting what's out there rather than what's in here.

+1. You had it correct from the beginning, Russ!