Feed Us Your Photoblog--The Solution
Daniel J. Matyola
danmatyola at gmail.com
Thu Jul 1 15:50:35 EDT 2010
I, for one, would appreciate more negative comments on the images I post here.
I post PESOs because I know that I'm not a very good photographer and
I'm trying to improve. [While others here have hundreds of images
accepted by Pentax, they have taken only 13 of the many I submitted,
and I know that most of those were accepted because of the cute
subject matter (little fawns) or because they are postcard views of
beautiful scenes on day with nice skies.]
When I post something, I usually say that Comments, Criticisms,
Suggestions and Abuse are all Welcome, which is my way of saying
"please don't be kind". I spent 5 years in the Marine Corps, so I've
been abused by professionals; it is unlikely this friendly group
could hurt my feelings.
In any event, this list would be more useful to all of us --
especially the hacks like me -- if we were all a little more honest
and a little more critical in our comments on images submitted to the
Just my two cents.
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:12 PM, P. J. Alling <webstertwentysix at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/1/2010 1:11 PM, Paul Sorenson wrote:
>> Like Bob, I try to look at most if not all of the images posted, although
>> I comment only on a few. From the images I view I get two things that are
>> important to me - a photographic learning experience based on what I like or
>> what I think it would take to improve the image, and I can vicariously see
>> what life is like on this planet outside of my local sphere.
>> As for comments, if I do comment on am image I like, I try to stay away
>> from platitudes and say why I like it. If I comment negatively, I'll
>> suggest a way I think it might be improved. I expect the same in return on
>> any images I post. If you tell me an image is crap without any suggestions
>> on how to improve it, your comments will go into that part of my brain where
>> all the other bullshit is filed.
>> OTOH, if you attack me on a personal basis, I'll track you down wherever
>> you are and piss in your coffee.
> There are places that make you pay extra for that.
>> On 6/29/2010 10:45 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote:
>>> I read Doug Brewer's comments, and Bill Robb's, and Doug Franklin's.
>>> Lots of what each of them said makes good sense to me.
>>> The pictures I post here are often not the greatest, but are
>>> I'm sorry my standards are so low.
>>> I look at almost every picture posted or linked to here.
>>> I probably comment positively on too many of them, and
>>> rarely make negative comments. Silence is my negative response.
>>> I try to specify exactly what it is I like about the photos,
>>> but can fall into the trap of 'Nice photo' at times.
>>> I've been on the list for a while (10+ years) and know a bunch of you.
>>> It's easy to encourage folks you know and have met personally.
>>> And I'll do this. If I'm doing to much of this, tell me to shut-up or
>>> just send me to the trash bin.
>>> I think the quality of pictures here has improved with digital and over
>>> The subject matter that we prefer individually is quite different.
>>> Look at who did and didn't enjoy the Chicago Art Institute photo exhibit.
>>> This leaves a lot of room tolerance of many different types of photos.
>>> I hope it stays this way, but I'm not likely to tell you if I hate your
>>> Regards, Bob S.
> Courier New;}}
> \viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
> interface subtly weird.\par
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML at pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.
More information about the PDML