A lack of civility...

[Two23]

I think people beyond a certain age should not be allowed to vote, since they have increasingly little to lose by making bad choices.

At one time in the U.S. you had to own property to vote.  That way people who had nothing to lose couldn't keep voting for politicians who were generous with other people's money.


Kent in SD

[BernardLanguillier]

At one time in the U.S. you had to own property to vote.  That way people who had nothing to lose couldn't keep voting for politicians who were generous with other people's money.

Obviously the current system is significantly better. Nowadays they have managed to demonstrate so efficiently that the voice of people "not owning land" isn't heard that they don't bother voting anymore. 

But I guess this is a political comment...

Cheers,
Bernard

[Alan Klein]

I think people beyond a certain age should not be allowed to vote, since they have increasingly little to lose by making bad choices. Perhaps the same rule can be applied to posting on Lula?

That's funny.  And I thought that anyone under 50 shouldn't be allowed to vote. 

[Alan Klein]

People who give photo advice should post their own pictures so we know whether to take them seriously or not. 

[BernardLanguillier]

People who give photo advice should post their own pictures so we know whether to take them seriously or not.

In fact that may not be needed.

In my view, a person submitting his work for public comment should be ready to accept comments and have the ability to assess the relevance of these comments, regardless of the resume of the person commenting.

When I ask my 6 years old daughter if she likes a photograph, I don't question her photographic skills if she answers no.

I am an average tennis player but I believe I have the ability to give relevant comments to players much better than me... if they are willing to listen and to accept the value of my advice for what it is without making it an ego thing.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Martin Kristiansen]

I show my work to a curator and art academic. He curates major exhibitions and workes with artists like William Kentridge and photographers like David Goldbkatt and Roger Ballen. I value everything he has to say. I have no idea of his own photography and don’t care. As far as I know he doesn’t take photos except for holiday snaps.

[Jeremy Roussak]

People who give photo advice should post their own pictures so we know whether to take them seriously or not.

That's silly. It would exclude nearly all critical thought, from critics of literature, music, musical performance, architecture, art... There need be no connection between being competent to offer serious critique and insight and the ability to do the particular task oneself.

The old line from Brendan Behan, "Critics are like eunuchs in a harem; they know how it's done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves" is amusing but doesn't affect the validity of critical insight.

Jeremy

[rabanito]

That's silly. It would exclude nearly all critical thought, from critics of literature, music, musical performance, architecture, art... There need be no connection between being competent to offer serious critique and insight and the ability to do the particular task oneself.

Well said

[Rob C]

That's silly. It would exclude nearly all critical thought, from critics of literature, music, musical performance, architecture, art... There need be no connection between being competent to offer serious critique and insight and the ability to do the particular task oneself.

The old line from Brendan Behan, "Critics are like eunuchs in a harem; they know how it's done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves" is amusing but doesn't affect the validity of critical insight.

Jeremy

Personally, I think Behan had it right. The rest, the eunuchs in the art world, are just hangin' on to the tram and raking in the fares. Look at the people they sometimes champion and ask yourself if those eunuchs are sane, crazy or just manipulative?

By example, they open the doors wide to any wannabe with the money to spend years in art education and more of them after that indulging in a fantasy of reflected glory and real financial enrichment. Power brokers all.

In the words of the mythical Glasgow conductress: come on, get off! (Translated for lucidity.)

;-)

[Ivophoto]

People who give photo advice should post their own pictures so we know whether to take them seriously or not.

I would rather say: to see what level of skill they have.
It’s smart to take all criticisms serious. Also from that stranger in our midst.
Parents of adolescents know it is stupid to discard a comment based on the tone it is said.
The question if somebody needs to be taken serious based on skill is all fine except for those who have an extraordinary feeling of superiority.
And yet, listen to comments from somebody who is supposed a lesser photographer can be refreshing and in some cases reset your winded up ego.

[Alan Klein]

I'm sorry but my statement was not clear.   I was not referring to people who give advice on your pictures.   Of course,  everyone has a right to his own aesthetic feelings.   I'm a pretty good judge of what meals I eat and how well they taste although I'm not much of a chef.   

On the other hand, once I start telling you how to prepare a superb meal, you'd want to know my experience.   

Likewise, there are loads of people giving technical photo advice here.   How do you sort through all that advice to see if it might work for you if you cannot see samples of their work and how they applied it?  It's a way of checking references.  Even if the advice is"valid", it might not be the result you want.   Being able to see the advisor's samples,  allows you to judge whether it's something you want to spend your time trying to do.

[Ivophoto]

I'm sorry but my statement was not clear.   I was not referring to people who give advice on your pictures.   Of course,  everyone has a right to his own aesthetic feelings.   I'm a pretty good judge of what meals I eat and how well they taste although I'm not much of a chef.   

On the other hand, once I start telling you how to prepare a superb meal, you'd want to know my experience.   

Likewise, there are loads of people giving technical photo advice here.   How do you sort through all that advice to see if it might work for you if you cannot see samples of their work and how they applied it?  It's a way of checking references.  Even if the advice is"valid", it might not be the result you want.   Being able to see the advisor's samples,  allows you to judge whether it's something you want to spend your time trying to do.

Sam Dilleman is a Belgian painter. He is known for his particular style and in some circles he considered as a bungler.

I happen to know early work of Sam and it is of such a high level of skill beyond believe.

At a point in his artistic career he decided to develop a more abstract style, highly intelligent but understood by only a few.

Do you think it would help an intermediate skilled painter to judge the advise of Sam by looking to his latest work? Would the advice of Sam be worthless?

This is the problem with art, photo’s, paintings, music, all art forms where the appreciation is subjective and depending on the level of understanding of the observer.

[rabanito]

Commercial photographers - and not only they - execute their "art" mainly to please others.
Usually they command the technique but have little to say but to suggest "buy this or that"
I would not be much interested in their opinion on my photography.

Other photographers try to express what they have in their souls. Almost nobody can tell them what it is.
But often they lack the technique. That is where help can help.
From those I'm glad to hear "I like your picture" Maybe this person is a little like me and this is gratifying.
I accept "I don't like it" . But that only means that we are different. A fact of life.

[Alan Klein]

I guess I'm still not clear. I'm not referring to people's opinion of my photos. Everyone has a right to their opinion. I'm referring to people who give technical advice on how to prepare better pictures either with new programs, new techniques, or different applications. It's these people who don't show their pictures I won't listen to because there's no way to judge what they're saying is accurate or even if accurate is something that I would want to copy. Those people should show their pictures.

[Ivophoto]

I guess I'm still not clear. I'm not referring to people's opinion of my photos. Everyone has a right to their opinion. I'm referring to people who give technical advice on how to prepare better pictures either with new programs, new techniques, or different applications. It's these people who don't show their pictures I won't listen to because there's no way to judge what they're saying is accurate or even if accurate is something that I would want to copy. Those people should show their pictures.

You are clear. And I don’t necessarily disagree.

What I want to explain is this:

By measuring the work of your critics and adopt your willingness to accept advise accordingly, you are indirectly limited in your learning curve to your level of understanding.

It’s not black and white, you do have a point to a certain extent, only I would be careful in judging the work of my critics. Maybe I am at a point they’ve forgotten already a long time.

[faberryman]

I guess I'm still not clear. I'm not referring to people's opinion of my photos. Everyone has a right to their opinion. I'm referring to people who give technical advice on how to prepare better pictures either with new programs, new techniques, or different applications. It's these people who don't show their pictures I won't listen to because there's no way to judge what they're saying is accurate or even if accurate is something that I would want to copy. Those people should show their pictures.

You are missing out on a lot of good advice.

[RSL]

I guess I'm still not clear. I'm not referring to people's opinion of my photos. Everyone has a right to their opinion. I'm referring to people who give technical advice on how to prepare better pictures either with new programs, new techniques, or different applications. It's these people who don't show their pictures I won't listen to because there's no way to judge what they're saying is accurate or even if accurate is something that I would want to copy. Those people should show their pictures.

I’d go a bit further than Alan’s gone. If somebody’s critiquing in a photography forum, it’s not unreasonable to assume he’s interested in photography and probably makes photographs. If all he does is critique but never shows his own work I’d have to assume he doubts the value of his work and is embarassed to show it. If that’s the case I’d have to ask why, since he can’t produce results satisfactory to himself, he feels he understands photography well enough to critique. A lot of us remember Isaac, who used to post critiques here on LuLa. His criques were emphatic, but, as I recall, often off the mark. Isaac posted one picture. I think it was a fencepost, though I don’t remember for sure. But Isaac was quick to critique landscape, street, portraiture, etc., etc,. etc. I’ve always wondered why Isaac felt he was qualified to critique the works of others when he apparently had no confidence in his own.

[rabanito]

I’d go a bit further than Alan’s gone. If somebody’s critiquing in a photography forum, it’s not unreasonable to assume he’s interested in photography and probably makes photographs. If all he does is critique but never shows his own work I’d have to assume he doubts the value of his work and is embarassed to show it.

Or he is a great photographer who doesn't want to be recognized by his work but else has a lot to say...

[RSL]

If he's a great photographer what the hell is he doing on LuLa and how can he find time to mess with we peons?

[rabanito]

Well that depends.
Out of love for photography one great photographer could mix with us pawns and teach a little so that photography in the whole is improved.

Others may have so gigantic egos that, even being good at their metier and believing they are the best of the best, would not suffer the slightest critique from us peons.

I know of both kinds.

And maybe there are other reasons of couse