John, Frank, The following is somewhat out of context, but I believe it is a good point to ponder -- I've sought critiques from several Outdoor pros and the way several of them approached it was to try to point one component of the image that if improved, would elevate the photo to the next level, fulling realizing that in some images there may be may things that need improving and to point out all those thing might crush the one asking for the critique. Just my 1 cents worth....
Kenneth Waller ---- Original Message ----- From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 7:57 PM Subject: Re: Criticism - was PAW: Dinosaur, too > Frank, > > Your terse initial response generated a rather sour (and therefore > private) reply. > > My question was not just rhetorical. I am new here, and wondered if there > was some reason why some people seem to respond to most if not all > pictures posted. Are they Judge for the Month or something? > > My view is that if you can find nothing constructive to say, it is best to > say nothing. Your response to the dinosaur post fell into the category of > nothing constructive (praising exposure and sharpness on a shot like that > is definitely damning with faint praise). > > Those who only post to praise (or to offer useful advice) will surely not > be seen as liking everything because they won't be responding to > everything. What is not said can speak as loudly as what is said. > > If somebody posts a picture, and nobody responds, I think they can assume > it wasn't a great picture (in the eyes of those who saw it)! > > I certainly don't think people just want positive feedback, but remarks > like "just leaves me cold" are neither helpful nor encouraging, and those > are surely the criteria that should apply to all well-meant criticism. > > Best wishes > > John > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 19:01:20 -0500, frank theriault > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > John, > > > > Why would you think it's better to just say nothing? I truly don't > > understand that. > > > > The whole spirit of PAW (I think), is not only to share photos, but to > > comment on the photos of others. My personal feeling, is that I'm not > > being fair to the ones that I like, if I don't comment on the ones that > > don't move me. Otherwise, people might think, "Hell, frank's comments > > are meaningless, he likes everything!" Don't you agree there has to be > > a balance here, in order for me and my comments to have credibility? > > (such as it is <g>) > > > > I think that Francis (and everyone else who submits PAWs) likely > > submitted, not only because he wanted to share the image, but because he > > wanted to know what others think - that's what PAW's all about, IMHO. > > > > Francis did say, "comments welcome and very much appreciated". Did he > > really mean, "only favourable comments are welcome and appreciated"? > > I'm guessing "no". > > > > I would actually be thrilled if an avalanche of posts followed mine, > > saying (either directly or indirectly), "frank, you're wrong, this is a > > great photo; you've obviously missed something here." So far, I > > haven't seen that. But if that's what people think, great! No one > > likes every photograph, or every work of art - this is all subjective. > > I love the process of debate, and I invite anyone here to tell me I'm > > dead wrong. Not only wouldn't it bother me, I'd be quite happy! > > > > You know, I think that if I posted a PAW, and not one person commented > > on it, I'd be quite upset! I'd much rather people be honest, and tell > > me why something isn't working. I'd rather honest, well thought out > > constructive criticism much better than silence. We're all friends and > > colleagues here, for goodness sake. > > > > I'm wondering, John, why you said, "sometimes it's better to just say > > nothing". Did you think I was being scathing? I sure as heck didn't > > think so. Certainly, my post wasn't a personal attack or anything. It > > was a critique, or more properly, a comment, and a pretty balanced one > > at that! > > > > Sorry to go off so, but to be honest, you've really struck a nerve (can > > you tell? <g>). If you don't want to comment on what you don't like, I > > won't criticize you for it. It's your prerogative, just as it's mine to > > comment on ones that don't do much for me, for the reasons stated > > above. I'd like to think that people on this list know me well enough > > that I wouldn't personally attack anyone, and that a negative or less > > than enthusiastic comment on a photo is just that - regarding that > > particular photo. And, that it's just my opinion. What the heck is > > that worth, anyway? > > > > Anyway, now I've got that off my chest. <vbg> > > > > cheers, > > frank > > > > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The > > pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer > > > > > > > > > >> From: John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Subject: Re: PAW: Dinosaur, too > >> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 22:28:47 +0100 > >> > >> Frank, > >> > >> Why do you feel you should comment on every PAW? Perhaps sometimes it > >> is better just to say nothing. > >> > >> John > >> > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Add photos to your messages with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* > > http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=htt p://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines > > > > > > > > -- > Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ >
