Hi,
> My point is: Why can't we just continue posting our "good
> photos" in the PUG, knowing that they are in the company of
> other "good photos"? Why should we insist on any comments when
> unfavourable comments meet with almost universal disapproval?
This raises the question: what is the PUG for?
If people treat it as an exhibition gallery then you're quite right,
people should behave as though they were hanging their prints in an
exhibition, and treat the comments sent via their email address on
the web page as they'd treat comments in the visitors' book. If this
is the case then there is no need for comments on the pdml.
If it is to be used as a learning forum then there is nothing to be
gained by sending in a shot you know is a sure-fire Pulitzer winner.
People who want advise on how to improve should, imo, tell us why
_they_ think the picture is not up to scratch - ie, give us a clue as
to what they want, and how we can help them - and then listen without
getting upset when we tell them they're not Ansel or Hank or Helmut or
whoever.
If it's to be information only ('this is representative of what I do so
you can know more about me & my pdml writing'), then any comment about the
photos is superfluous.
If it's intended to be therapy for the insecure then let's make that
clear so that nobody's allowed to tell the truth when they see a
photo they don't like, but have to say something soothing & motherly
instead.
---
Bob
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
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 .
