Regarding: The truth about one of our busiest "Pro" contributors

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Chris,

I must say that I have some understanding on Synn's initial posting.

That said, I would like to thank everyone involved with Lula for keeping LuLa and forums alive!

Best regards
Erik

[Rob C]

Hi Chris,

I must say that I have some understanding on Synn's initial posting.

That said, I would like to thank everyone involved with Lula for keeping LuLa and forums alive!

Best regards
Erik

Erik, were LuLa to vanish, where would I be able to spend my time when not messing about in deepest Photoshop? I suspect many others also feel that LuLa offers the best refuge from a harsher reality that demands one cook, clean and generally waste time doing useful things.

It's mutual survival, is Lula! Hell, even the trolls are funny though they don't know that yet. I laugh out loud at least once a day during my surfboarding here; very healthy and therapeutic.

;-)

Rob

[N80]

I'm new here. I'm a seasoned amateur who never feels like I've got all this photography stuff completely figured out and can count on one hand how many images I've taken in the last 20 years that I feel are exemplary. On the other hand, LuLa is populated with professional photographers, gifted amateurs and authors of photography books, blogs and even software.

That can be intimidating. And some highly qualified individuals can come across as even more intimidating, both here and on other forums. This can be for several reasons. Some people are just jerks. Fortunately I don't see that as pervasive at LuLa. Others, at the top of their field, probably just can't comprehend how little some of us know or how little experience that we have and even if they can comprehend it they cannot relate to it. I think of the gifted thermodynamics physics professor who had to teach us biology majors basic physics. He could never comprehend how dumb we were and thus could not teach us effectively.

And then there is the situation that the original post referred to. I'm not talking about any individual here or anywhere else. But there are some folks who love and understand all of the technical details at the highest possible levels and yet are not particularly gifted artists. Discovering that can lead to a bit of schadenfreude, especially if that individual is rude, overbearing or hard to get along with. But, that does not necessarily diminish their technical expertise. Again, I am reminded of a colleague in med school who was the smartest most driven person I've ever met. But, their interpersonal skills were so poor (not in a mean way) that this individual was not a particularly good physician. But man, if you needed to know something, they were the source to go to. But there were also colleagues who our clinical staff often referred to as QDW. They were always ready with an answer behind which they stood firmly but in reality they were QDW...Quick. Decisive. And Wrong.

Anyway, lots of different personalities, technical capabilities and talent levels here at LuLa. I think it is great, as an amateur, to be able to rub shoulders with folks with proven technical and talent levels here at LuLa including a good many who have both and are willing to share their knowledge and experience in a friendly, non-patronizing and helpful way.

[Hank Keeton]

Hmmm....I was amused by LL staff "locking" the "Remarks about one of our "busiest-pro" contributors" thread....and censoring Synn's post.

Sure...ad hominem is not advisable.......BUT....

We all read the drivel some folks post....and try to ignore it....but, it seems to go "with the territory"...somehow.

Who I am...and what I shoot...and how "professional" I hold myself to be...that's all VERY personal.

If I write drivel here...ignore it!!.....!!!!!

Any drivel tells you all you need to know about me.....

If it's NOT drivel...then you also know....


Be well...be creative...be flexible.....

Cheers......Hank

[GrahamBy]

Seemed like legitimate fact-checking to me.

[Rob C]

Anyway, lots of different personalities, technical capabilities and talent levels here at LuLa. I think it is great, as an amateur, to be able to rub shoulders with folks with proven technical and talent levels here at LuLa including a good many who have both and are willing to share their knowledge and experience in a friendly, non-patronizing and helpful way.

The thing is, photography doesn't really offer much opportunity to be patronizing; it's one of the most simple things to do, especially as career. The difficulty in the latter case is finding a business model that works! The snapping's not the problem - it's sustaining that snapping that floors most folks. The greatest single mistake anyone can make is imagining that being good is enough, that people are going to form an orderly queue at the end of your telephone line. Dream on. Worse, nobody can teach you that hard part; it's as much a character trait as is the image-making.

Of course, there are all sorts of specialized branches to photography, and much to learn, but that learning, at least until the digital age, wasn't rocket science. I exclude anything to do with motion here: I know zero about it.

The basic requirements used to be overwhelming desire, some minimal artistic talent and the money to buy your first couple of cameras and access regular darkroom space somewhere. In an ideal world, you'd have enough capìtal to sustain yourself for six months, at the end of which period you would have either no money left; have no money left but have a few clients owing you money; you would be starting to expand the bank account. The definition that matched one's position defined the future.

I think that most of the pros I know have never been able to shake the sense of insecurity that I believe dogs each one of us, regardless the heights of achievement: I think we are all just too aware of the many strokes of good luck that brought us wherever we find ourselves at any moment. It can always turn on you, bite your ass and make you history. On a good day. I think that peer competition is probably the last thing to fear. There's always going to be somebody much better than you are, and you just hope they keep away from your clients, but you can't do anything about that, short of murder. One lives with the strain or it drives one out of the business. And pro photography has claimed many very high-profile victims whose only imagined solution was death.

Rob

[graeme]

The thing is, photography doesn't really offer much opportunity to be patronizing; it's one of the most simple things to do, especially as career. The difficulty in the latter case is finding a business model that works! The snapping's not the problem - it's sustaining that snapping that floors most folks. The greatest single mistake anyone can make is imagining that being good is enough, that people are going to form an orderly queue at the end of your telephone line. Dream on. Worse, nobody can teach you that hard part; it's as much a character trait as is the image-making.

Rob

I think that paragraph can apply to trying to make a living out of pretty much any kind of creative endeavour.

[graeme]

Seemed like legitimate fact-checking to me.

Absolutely. I wish people would make the effort to check the credentials of some of the 'experts' in the field that my other half & I work in.

[bjanes]

Hi Chris,

I must say that I have some understanding on Synn's initial posting.

That said, I would like to thank everyone involved with Lula for keeping LuLa and forums alive!

Best regards
Erik

Synn did make a point, but his usual rebuttal to any post is, "where are your pictures?" If the post concerns artistic matters, then it would be helpful to view poster's images to see if he has artistic ability. However, if the post concerns matters of science and technology, artistic merit is of little importance and the poster's technical background is prime importance.

Unlike the DPReview forums, LuLa does not have a science and technology section and perhaps it should. In the DPReview science and technology forum, Eric Fossum (inventor of CMOS) frequently posts and no one demands to see his images. His technical expertise is unchallenged when he debunks the common assertion that CCD renders color in some special way. Silicon is silicon, and what is in front of it is of primary significance. Now that CMOS has moved to medium format, the CCD vs CMOS threads of "artists" has quieted down.

Bill

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Bill,

You are right. The example of Erik Fossum is a very good one. He might be an excellent photographer, who nows, but he is one of the foremost authorities regarding sensor technology.

Best regards
Erik

Synn did make a point, but his usual rebuttal to any post is, "where are your pictures?" If the post concerns artistic matters, then it would be helpful to view poster's images to see if he has artistic ability. However, if the post concerns matters of science and technology, artistic merit is of little importance and the poster's technical background is prime importance.

Unlike the DPReview forums, LuLa does not have a science and technology section and perhaps it should. In the DPReview science and technology forum, Eric Fossum (inventor of CMOS) frequently posts and no one demands to see his images. His technical expertise is unchallenged when he debunks the common assertion that CCD renders color in some special way. Silicon is silicon, and what is in front of it is of primary significance. Now that CMOS has moved to medium format, the CCD vs CMOS threads of "artists" has quieted down.

Bill

[Theodoros]

Did anybody checked if Synn's post was true or if he was deliberately lying to his knowledge?

Synn's post was blocked because it was an unprovoked personal attack, but it was eventually removed after it was proven to the admin, that he deliberately and to his knowledge was lying and thus the context of his post was in purpose made as to twist the truth of a real (as real as it can be) professional photographer.

[Bo_Dez]

I can only say this because I have been a dick in the past, and learned.

Engaging in, being drawn into any such negative activity is a total waste of time and energy and says more about you than anything. IMO, Life's real strength comes in finding a truth and moving on quietly.

[Christopher Sanderson]

Did anybody checked if Synn's post was true or if he was deliberately lying to his knowledge?

Synn's post was blocked because it was an unprovoked personal attack, but it was eventually removed after it was proven to the admin, that he deliberately and to his knowledge was lying and thus the context of his post was in purpose made as to twist the truth of a real (as real as it can be) professional photographer.

Theo, I removed the post since you asked me repeatedly to do so saying it was harmful to your reputation.
There was no proof of lying.
Should you persist in putting words in my mouth, you will be banned permanently.

[Theodoros]

Theo, I removed the post since you asked me repeatedly to do so saying it was harmful to your reputation.
There was no proof of lying.
Should you persist in putting words in my mouth, you will be banned permanently.

Was it hiding in purpose my active professional pages or not Chris?  Weren't the pages ignored in purpose by him linked to you by me? Isn't twisting the truth as to give (in purpose) the wrong impression the same as lying?

[Christopher Sanderson]

Was it hiding in purpose my active professional pages or not Chris?  Weren't the pages ignored in purpose by him linked to you by me? Isn't twisting the truth as to give (in purpose) the wrong impression the same as lying?

My patience with you is running out. I consider the matter resolved and closed. Persist at your peril.

[Christopher Sanderson]

I also suggest what I suggested to you privately, 
namely that you publish the professional link that you provided to me.

[Hulyss]

I also suggest what I suggested to you privately, 
namely that you publish the professional link that you provided to me.

Would be a real solution to the "problem".

[Theodoros]

I also suggest what I suggested to you privately, 
namely that you publish the professional link that you provided to me.

Thanks for the suggestion, but it's my choice not to do so.  It is a pros right to present parts of his work to an audience that can be beneficial to his business and I'm afraid there can't be added customers through forums... If I thought that there would be any benefit, I would have done so long time ago....

OTOH, there's also my recent involvement in tech camera designing which will lead to a (another) new web page and this will be linked and presented here as (to my judgement) it does have the potential to attract audience from this forum.

[synn]

Oh wow, I came back after a long weekend off to see that I was apparently banned in the meantime. lol.
So I guess fact checking is only fashionable for presidential elections, not about expert advise on LuLa, eh.. No worries.

I am sorry if I missed your REAL pro websites, Theo (Can I call you Theo? Or do you prefer Teddy?). This is all that Google shows when I search for your name and/ or your businesses, Fotometria and Fotometria-weddings. I think you should hire a Digital Marketing Manager to work some Google-fu and get you in the front page so that you don't feel such misplaced anger.

I am surprised to see the overwhelming amount of inquiries I got offline for the content that was censored. I will reply to each of them and provide the requestors with the links, after which they can make their own judgments.

p.s. Oh, if I get banned for THAT, you can always reach me using the contact form on my website (See signature).

[Rob C]

This is unseemly bullshit.

Nobody wins these daft situations, and even if one person has real evidence to support a claim, is it clever or worthy of that person to want to destroy another's credibility?

People are perfectly capable of drawing their own conclusions, however accurate or otherwise those may be, from the general input that a poster offers over time. Pushing to the bitter end in an attempt to destroy another's dignity is no good thing.

I don't seek any 'official' intervention here, just that both parties realise it's a pointless course to follow, and there is no prize at the end of it. Can we drop it, right here, and move on?

Rob C