No, but I do think people who do express an opinion should be willing to show their own work. Pretty easy to be sitting I don't know where in the world and lobbing insults when you hide behind an anonymous screen name. Pretty easy to strike a superior tone when your own work is invisible...
But that remark was directed at image66...
I made two posts in this thread and the first one I did reference my website, the second one I forgot to add it as I had to wrap my computer up and head home. If anybody is interested, you can visit
www.zone-10.com. Any reasonable search would have revealed that the majority of my posts are anything but anonymous. Image66 Photography happens to be my business name. I have nothing to hide.
I will freely admit that some stuff is sufficiently pedestrian to warrant enough guffaws to be heard around the world. Yet, maybe there is a gem in there once in a while too. I have never claimed to be a master photographer, that's for sure, and yes, the battle of originality is one I fight every time I pick up the camera. It is all too easy to plagiarize not only others, but yourself too! This was my point. Don't plagiarize other photographs--especially ones YOU'VE taken before.
I host and teach workshops myself. These fall into two categories: 1. The Instructional Workshop. 2. The Fishing Guide. If I'm putting on an instructional workshop the purposes are very much educational and the end goal for the participants isn't necessarily to walk away with a Portfolio Print, but a head full of new knowledge. This is evidently what the PODAS workshop was and if this is true, then I definitely have no problem with the results. If the workshop is more like a Guided Fishing Trip, then the results definitely are a problem.
A coupe of years ago I wrote a brief article called "Copying Others and Breaking Free" which defines the context of my comments in this thread. I've been working hard the past two years stretching my own horizons and doing types of photography I never dreamed of before--including using a cell-phone camera.
Link to "Copying Others and Breaking Free" article:
http://www.image66media.com/page24.htmlI don't really care about what cameras were used or the price of the average tripod in the group. The fact that the workshop alone was priced to filter out the tire-kickers is actually a good thing. But what gets me is the defensiveness in this thread by the workshop apologists who instead of admitting that some things were substandard (lighting, models, etc) they choose to attack through various means. It would be very easy to just say "this workshop was not about the photographs, it was about technology and technique." If this was stated up front, all would be forgiven. Ken Rockwell could maintain his moral high-ground and we'd be able to say "So what? It wasn't about producing photographs to begin with."
As previously stated, Ken Rockwell's original post was actually pretty specific and his criticisms are very valid. His premise to begin with was that this was a workshop about equipment and software, and producing photographs was a minor side benefit--not the main purpose.
Michael hosts some incredible trips/workshops. The Antarctic expeditions, for example, are highly regarded not only for the quality of the experience, but the quality of the photographs. Those are photography expeditions first, workshops second. The workshop portions are value-add services. This is evidently 180 degrees different than the PODAS workshop. If it's workshops first, shooting second, that's not a problem. I occasionally sit through training classes myself on highly technical equipment which is off-line.
Ken Norton
www.zone-10.com