Bucky wrote, in response to my earlier comments: > Perhaps. Perhaps not. The expression of opinion does not > necessarily equate to expertise. ------------------------------------------------ >> I really like a lot of Shel's work, and I suspect he's got a fair amount >> of formal artistic training and has seen a tremendous number of very >> good photographs (and perhaps an even larger number of not-so- >> good photographs) against which to compare others' works. Yes Bucky, you're quite right. Certainly is a big difference between having an opinion and having expertise. Actually, I think I used the term "experienced" in my earlier post, and there's likewise a big difference between having experience and having expertise. Nonetheless, some folks on our list -- by virtue of their familiarity with perhaps several thousand very good images -- have a large mental database against which to evaluate new images they see. Maybe they've even categorized in their minds what artistic elements comprise a memorable image of a particular subject. Perhaps what looks to me like a totally new and different way of capturing an image of a sunset, for example, will remind a more experienced viewer of photographs of 100 similar images they've seen before. I can always tell the viewer what I was trying to capture, or what I believe I captured serendipitously. I can certainly enjoy my picture without any knowledge of these 100 or so other images, but I'm also curious. Have I really captured something truly new and different, or is this an idea that's been captured before in a number of ways, perhaps with greater impact? Is there a technical detail or two that I overlooked, or that I'm unaware of, that could have increased the artistic impact of my image? Did the reviewer get something from my image that was entirely different from what I had ever intended? Does the reviewer typically *expect* to get some sort of impact from an image that was never my intention to capture? If he/she can give me some well thought out and precisely worded answers to these questions, I feel like I've learned something. Now I'll admit that if the comments I get are more on the order of, "Peifer, you ham-fisted hack! My pet rock could have taken a better picture!!", I probably won't feel too good about it. However, I try to take this all in stride, laugh it off, and chalk it up to one of three things: (i) the reviewer is having a bad day; (ii) the reviewer simply isn't interested in pictures of sunsets, no mater how wonderful they are; or (iii) the reviewer wouldn't recognize a good picture of a sunset if it bit him/her in the arse. :-) As John Mason said in his earlier post today, you sometimes need thick skin for these sorts of things. I hope nobody gets discouraged from contributing to the PUG on account of anyone's critique. That said, I think I like John Mason's "Night Train" for two reasons. First, it's stimulated a lot of what I believe is some useful discussion on the value of critiques. Second, after seeing "Night Train" in the subject line of so many e-mails today, I'm reminded of the James Brown song of the same name from many, many years ago. Dammit, I can't get that saxophone out of my head now! Good thing I'm a James Brown fan. :-) More later, Bill Peifer Rochester, NY - 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 .
