Just a thought...

[ChrisS]

I've got a lot to learn about photography, and have done a lot of learning through this site. Many of the contributors clearly know and understand an awful lot and are generous in their advice, and it's really helped.

But reading some of the posts - some of those in the thread that is running right now on the rights and wrongs of cropping, for example - I've begun to wonder if, with enough time reading such threads, one could become very, very 'authoritative' without ever actually making any photographs. Can you imagine the scenario? Just keep reading until you seem to know all sorts of things, develop opinions on them, and then offer those opinions with conviction. But never take a picture.

Could this happen?

[Tim Gray]

A riff on the old chestnut:  Those who can, do.  Those who cannot critique.  

[RSL]

I've got a lot to learn about photography, and have done a lot of learning through this site. Many of the contributors clearly know and understand an awful lot and are generous in their advice, and it's really helped.

But reading some of the posts - some of those in the thread that is running right now on the rights and wrongs of cropping, for example - I've begun to wonder if, with enough time reading such threads, one could become very, very 'authoritative' without ever actually making any photographs. Can you imagine the scenario? Just keep reading until you seem to know all sorts of things, develop opinions on them, and then offer those opinions with conviction. But never take a picture.

Could this happen?

Go to the web sites listed for the people doing the posting and see which ones actually shoot pictures and how good their pictures are. It's a big help in determining the value of their advice.

[Geoff Wittig]

I've got a lot to learn about photography, and have done a lot of learning through this site. Many of the contributors clearly know and understand an awful lot and are generous in their advice, and it's really helped.

But reading some of the posts - some of those in the thread that is running right now on the rights and wrongs of cropping, for example - I've begun to wonder if, with enough time reading such threads, one could become very, very 'authoritative' without ever actually making any photographs. Can you imagine the scenario? Just keep reading until you seem to know all sorts of things, develop opinions on them, and then offer those opinions with conviction. But never take a picture.

Could this happen?

Quite so. Most folks posting here (near as I can tell, anyway; and surely those I've met personally) seem to be actual passionate photographers as opposed to gearheads who never take their cameras out of the shrinkwrap. Certainly there's the occasional raging flame war over some miniscule technical point or brand preference, but most folks seem to actually care about the image, the photograph itself. I've briefly visited another site (cough—dpreview—cough) and promptly fled in disgust over the mindless flame-wars and pixel-peeping obsessions.

George DeWolfe argues that you shouldn't waste time studying techique from anyone whose actual photographs you dislike. I'm not sure I'd go that far; surely there are artists whose work I don't like, but whose excellent technique is worth learning from. But it's always nice to see when folks expounding on technical matters actually create beautiful photographs.

[dalethorn]

I've got a lot to learn about photography, and have done a lot of learning through this site. Many of the contributors clearly know and understand an awful lot and are generous in their advice, and it's really helped.
But reading some of the posts - some of those in the thread that is running right now on the rights and wrongs of cropping, for example - I've begun to wonder if, with enough time reading such threads, one could become very, very 'authoritative' without ever actually making any photographs. Can you imagine the scenario? Just keep reading until you seem to know all sorts of things, develop opinions on them, and then offer those opinions with conviction. But never take a picture.
Could this happen?

Sometimes getting quality info is easy, and people on this forum are well spoiled in that respect. But sometimes you have to consider, for certain topics, that getting the right info is like taking a rough stone and turning it into a gem. Lots of grinding involved. Sometimes worth it, sometimes not. What I do sometimes is wait until a page or two get filled, then look at the last couple of posts to see if it's going anywhere. Whatever technique you use, you'll become good at it after awhile.

[bill t.]

Just keep reading until you seem to know all sorts of things, develop opinions on them, and then offer those opinions with conviction. But never take a picture.

Could this happen?

Then that would be typical of most professional art critics today!  Very few of those guys are more than amateurs in the fields they criticize, and I suppose many have no hands-on experience at all.  One could argue that's a plus because it removes bias.  And of course it does not take a chicken to identify a rotten egg.  But one could argue other things as well.

But personally I don't like to argue at all, most of the posts I make are to while away the long hours as the Epson does its magic over in the corner, and I know I am not alone in this.  I have gotten some great ideas from this forum.  True, there are food fights, but they are usually well thought out and well composed food fights which sets this group apart from most.

[BernardLanguillier]

I've got a lot to learn about photography, and have done a lot of learning through this site. Many of the contributors clearly know and understand an awful lot and are generous in their advice, and it's really helped.

But reading some of the posts - some of those in the thread that is running right now on the rights and wrongs of cropping, for example - I've begun to wonder if, with enough time reading such threads, one could become very, very 'authoritative' without ever actually making any photographs. Can you imagine the scenario? Just keep reading until you seem to know all sorts of things, develop opinions on them, and then offer those opinions with conviction. But never take a picture.

Could this happen?

Regardless of the "who", any topic about which people keep disagreeing and debating in the long run is probably one where the thing being discussed is in fact not really relevant to photography... Canon vs Nikon is a very good example of that.

I would disagree that you need to be on top of your game to give relevant advice though. Think of all these tennis trainers who are mediocre players themselves, but extremely good at providing advice to others.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Jeremy Roussak]

I would disagree that you need to be on top of your game to give relevant advice though. Think of all these tennis trainers who are mediocre players themselves, but extremely good at providing advice to others.

Or as Brendan Behan put it (he was describing theatre critics, I think), "They are like eunuchs in a harem: they know what to do; they see it done every night; they just can't do it themselves".

Jeremy

[Ken Bennett]

I've begun to wonder if, with enough time reading such threads, one could become very, very 'authoritative' without ever actually making any photographs.

This happens in almost any internet forum. I hang out in a hiking forum and many (seemingly knowledgeable) posts are from people whom one never sees on the trail.

[Derry]

and don't forget that many of them stayed at a Holiday Inn last night,,

I read a lot of post and pick up a few tidbits which I will try,, if they work great, if not it is time well spent as I have learned another road to not venture down,,

Derry

[Jonathan Wienke]

I weight the advice given in posts on pretty much anything based on 2 factors:

1. Does the poster know the subject matter well? If giving advice on composition, are the poster's own photographs well-composed?

2. Is the poster's advice practical in real-world use? If discussing sharpening, how well does the poster's advice on sharpening actually work?

And so on. After a while you see whose advice is practical and worthwhile, and weight reputations accordingly.

[dalethorn]

I weight the advice given in posts on pretty much anything based on 2 factors:
1. Does the poster know the subject matter well? If giving advice on composition, are the poster's own photographs well-composed?
2. Is the poster's advice practical in real-world use? If discussing sharpening, how well does the poster's advice on sharpening actually work?
And so on. After a while you see whose advice is practical and worthwhile, and weight reputations accordingly.

These are generally good rules, but there are exceptions. Many times the only examples you would have from an individual are recent experiments, rather than fundamental well-trodden work. Other times well-known reputations are well known, but how they got there isn't all that obvious. One thing I like in the Critiques area is when people make changes to a posted image and re-post it, so you can literally see what they're talking about. There are a lot of people on this forum who really know photography, and some of them don't let on much, so it's easy to assume wrongly that they don't know much. Ten years ago at a software confab my employer was hosting at Disneyland, I made a suggestion at a roundtable, and the company owner said "Disregard what Dale said, because he never worked in manufacturing before coming here."  Of course I had eleven years of manufacturing at a Fortune 50 company before coming there, but I never told the owner that.  Imagine his embarrassment when word got around.

[Justan]

... I've begun to wonder if, with enough time reading such threads, one could become very, very 'authoritative' without ever actually making any photographs. Can you imagine the scenario? Just keep reading until you seem to know all sorts of things, develop opinions on them, and then offer those opinions with conviction. But never take a picture.

Could this happen?

Absolutely. But without some degree of lab work and professional guidance, most are limited by constraints of self-education.

For example, imagine studying to become a pharmacist. Anyone can pickup a PDR and a chemistry book and start down the path of learning pharmacology. One could become an expert without any formal training whosoever, and also without ever doing any lab work. But only a few would be successful using the non-traditional approach.

You could make about the same argument as above for someone who was self-educating themselves to become an attorney and also in the example starting this thread, a photographer.

The core component of the OP’s question revolves around what it takes to be considered an expert.

In the case of pharmacology or law, one is considered an expert when one can pass the qualifying tests (the bar exam or the pharmacological board certifying tests) in the examples given. These tests are set by the industry’s and the State’s criteria for determining expertise. In both cases, if the student can pass the tests, then they are qualified to do the work. Similarly, in photography, if one can demonstrate a wide variety of skills and expertise, then they are considered an expert. It doesn’t really matter how they got their training.

The gotcha in photography is that there is really only one way to demonstrate expertise...

In these 3 cases it is possible that a student of ability could become an expert with no formal training whatsoever. But it doesn’t happen often.

[dalethorn]

One could become an expert without any formal training whosoever, and also without ever doing any lab work.

The main problem here is when you're put on the spot and asked questions that were never covered in anything you learned so far. Those who have a lot of experience in the practice can usually understand the questions, even if they have to get a better explanation of the questions, then answer those questions to a fairly good degree based on actual experience. Those who don't have the hands-on experience are usually not able to do well in these cases.

From my personal experience attending lectures, seminars, presentations etc., when those presenters are teachers by profession who've prepared the presentation mainly from research and not their actual experience, they generally can't answer most of the questions I ask.  The LL forum is different in that most of the members have a lot of hands-on experience in many areas, whereas most other forums serve mainly camera hobbyists.

[Chris_T]

A riff on the old chestnut:  Those who can, do.  Those who cannot critique.  

Or,

Those who can, do. Those who cannot, teach. Those who cannot teach, write.

[Chris_T]

I've got a lot to learn about photography, and have done a lot of learning through this site. Many of the contributors clearly know and understand an awful lot and are generous in their advice, and it's really helped.

But reading some of the posts - some of those in the thread that is running right now on the rights and wrongs of cropping, for example - I've begun to wonder if, with enough time reading such threads, one could become very, very 'authoritative' without ever actually making any photographs. Can you imagine the scenario? Just keep reading until you seem to know all sorts of things, develop opinions on them, and then offer those opinions with conviction. But never take a picture.

Could this happen?

A reader is responsible for filtering, digesting and responding to any information he comes across, online or otherwise. The explosion of free and democratic info online only makes the process more important and difficult

When I post something factual, I would try to include a reference. When I post something subjective, I would always include some context to support or rationalize my comments, and provide some hint of my experience, or lack there of (e.g. Nikon xyz is the best camera ever made, and it is the only camera I have used and owned   ) These are my attempts to help the readers making their decisions.

I only pay close attention to posts with context, and by posters with a long history of good postings. I respond to genuinely sincere questions. I ignore trolls, flames, cheer leadings and sales pitches.

There is never enough time to learn everything about photography, or any subject. Trying to do so before releasing a shutter is futile. A better approach is to learn "enough" to create "sufficiently satisfactory" work for your purpose. Continue to, or periodically, keep an eye out on what's new and adopt as you see fit. Ultimately, you are the only one who can decide what suits you the best. IOW, practice what you know, instead of worrying about what you don't know. When you reach a point that you can share your knowledge, repay by posting intelligently to help others.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

A reader is responsible for filtering, digesting and responding to any information he comes across, online or otherwise. The explosion of free and democratic info online only makes the process more important and difficult

When I post something factual, I would try to include a reference. When I post something subjective, I would always include some context to support or rationalize my comments, and provide some hint of my experience, or lack there of (e.g. Nikon xyz is the best camera ever made, and it is the only camera I have used and owned   ) These are my attempts to help the readers making their decisions.

I only pay close attention to posts with context, and by posters with a long history of good postings. I respond to genuinely sincere questions. I ignore trolls, flames, cheer leadings and sales pitches.

There is never enough time to learn everything about photography, or any subject. Trying to do so before releasing a shutter is futile. A better approach is to learn "enough" to create "sufficiently satisfactory" work for your purpose. Continue to, or periodically, keep an eye out on what's new and adopt as you see fit. Ultimately, you are the only one who can decide what suits you the best. IOW, practice what you know, instead of worrying about what you don't know. When you reach a point that you can share your knowledge, repay by posting intelligently to help others.

Chris is sensible, down-to-earth, and pragmatic, as usual.

The only thing I would argue with is that Everybody Knows that the Canon zyx (the only camera I have ever used) is vastly superior to the Nikon xyz (about which I know nothing.)    

[Chris_T]

Chris is sensible, down-to-earth, and pragmatic, as usual.

Being "sensible, down-to-earth, and pragmatic" does not an "artist" made. That's why I call myself a photographer