Obviously I can speak only for myself, but I suspect that most contributors
do not contribute to have their shots "critiqued" in this way.
Quite frankly...
if I make a submission and you like it, I like to hear it.
if there's something I could have done better, I like to hear it.
if your opinion is that it's virtually worthless, then what's the point in
commenting? If as the photographer, I felt that way, I wouldn't have chosen
it.
> After all, what is the use of feedback if it
> can only ever be praise? Surely a sincerely held, and well argued,
> negative opinion is better than any number of insincere positive
> opinions.
You are arguing something I did not say. Feedback, both positive or negative
may be appropriate. OTOH, if we look hard enough we can find or manufacture
something negative about practically anything. Is that beneficial?
Sometimes emphasizing the positive can be just as good or better, in it's
effect on the hearer than anything else. In part, the tone and/or content
of the feedback depends on what its intended purpose is.
> Ah, but was that the photographer's intention? If so then the picture
> was successful; if not then the picture has failed. Since we don't
> know what the photographer's intention or motives were we cannot say
> whether or not it is a successful picture.
I disagree. It may be, as you say, that the photo invokes emotions the
photographer was not trying to convey depending on who looks at it. If the
photo invokes an emotion different than what the photographer was attempting
to convey, why does that make it unsuccessful? It simply means different
people see different things. If a photo can evoke many different feelings
in many people, and the photographer did not intend those feelings, maybe
it's more sucessful than he ever realized at the time he was taking it.
>
> Of course, each individual will react differently to any given
> picture. <sni[p> That may seem like a very over-the-top thing to mention,
but it makes
> the point that as far as useful criticism goes, the feelings evoked in
> the critic by the photograph are worthless.
>
> Criticism is very difficult; Shel is at least trying to go beyond the
> rather bland and innocuous comments that most other people give. If
> and when I next submit to the PUG I hereby request to be reviewed by
> Shel. And he can take the gloves off :o)
Post a photo you feel good about and let me tell you it was amateurish,
something just barely worthy of a beginner photographer, and of little or no
significance. Then tell me what it felt like.
I agree. Criticism is difficult when you are looking for the right approach
so that it will be taken in the way intended. I say again, I don't think
the majority are looking for a "critique" in the sense that Broadway plays
or Hollywood movies are critiqued in newspaper columns. I haven't found the
comments thus far to be bland or innocuous, just because they're mostly
positive. And since the gallery has a long history of containing many
pleasing shots, it doesn't surprise me the comments tend to be positive.
>
> > It evokes some kind of emotion or wonder which
> > good photography is supposed to do.
>
> It's a matter of opinion what good photography is supposed to do (if
> anything).
>
I would guess photography must do something for us, otherwise we'd be doing
something else.
I'm a little riled, so please don't take my comments personally.
Tom C.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
