Glamour comments!

[chris.bailey]

Let me get this straight Chris, you're objecting to my having started this post, or just to some of the comments such as 'snapshots'? Your last sentence certainly seems to be telling me and perhaps others to keep our mouths shut and don't 'rock the boat', however nicely put.
Roger.

Roger,

I actually agree and dont object with the sentiment of your original post though I would balance that by saying that I don't personally have an issue with comments such as "pretty girl" in Glamour and Nude in the same way as I would have no issue with someone saying "nice car" in Transportation, both are comments on the subject matter rather than the so called tecqnique and in a photo sharing forum I dont see the issue. By and large I think the Mods pick up on the more derogatory personal comments and I personally am able to pretty much ignore the rest. I can, however, equally understand that some people have a lower pain threshold. Other than having a high degree of censorship, which I dont think any of us really want, this is inevitable to a degree.

I do have more of a problem with some of the (my opinion) later over analysis and the implication that pictures should only be posted if they have some artistic merit. I found the phrase 'snapshot' disappointing. This is supposed to be a hobby forum that all should feel comfortable posting pictures to.

Chris

[Noni]

No matter what anyone says, I will respect and value an informed opinion more than a novice. Let me share some insight on this.

On the rare occasions that I have seen the folks I am talking about try to share insight, they usually don't know what they are talking about. Yes, the idea of what they want maybe fine. But they have no idea how to execute on it themselves. Most of them don't try, they just spend their commentary career in slamming other people's work.
Really? I see quite a few thoughtful posts being made now as opposed to prior to this particular thread. I've learned a lot from some of the questions, less from the answers from those experienced. If commentary is predicated on performance, I'd have to say some of these "novices" have interesting takes on things, and I'd love to try some of the things they've suggested. I also think that watching out for what "bothers" a person is not a bad thing, and some of the best comments are what bothers a person and why. Whether or not I agree with them does not invalidate their opinion (as I've oft repeated in this thread...sigh...), and if their thoughts make me scroll back to the original shot and look for what they're talking about because I didn't see it the first time, then so much the better.

Those people know who they are and I think (based on posts, emails and PMs) this thread has made them immensely uncomfortable.
If you're alluding to me, I'm not in the least uncomfortable discussing my thoughts, as you well can tell. Further, I'm not too concerned about posting some of my work (once I get the chance) if it meets to my own personal approval. If people don't like it, fine...I get the chance to learn more.

But none of that negates those folks who are "novices." Your insistence that someone be experienced before you recognize any commentary simply gives me more of an understanding of where your head is at...that's all.

And might I add that according to many pm's I've received, the support for this discussion is large...and those folks aren't put off from posting at the mo'...rather, they appreciate that the topic has been opened, and that some changes seem to be occurring on the forum. And that, frankly, seems to be the motivation for several "new" glam posters putting up their work.

Best-
Noni

[Noni]

I do have more of a problem with some of the (my opinion) later over analysis and the implication that pictures should only be posted if they have some artistic merit. I found the phrase 'snapshot' disappointing. This is supposed to be a hobby forum that all should feel comfortable posting pictures to.

Seeing as I made that comment, I shall respond.

I find comments such as those termed "locker room talk" far more "disappointing" than any sort of comment about the style of shot...and rather more disparaging than saying something about the photograph itself.

As for this being a "hobby" forum, then comment upon the hobby and hobbyist rather than the model...

Best-
Noni

[deedspender]

Is it not possible to draw a line on this one, imho i beleive Steve Parr had every right to view his opinion on the aspect of Samanthas muscular definition as i beleive her poses surgest emphasis on those areas of the body, now theres no doubt in my mind that samantha is a very beautiful and attractive lady and with the right non muscular poses would receive fantastic feedback as she has in many other posts todate, she fits perfectly within this catogary, please keep the posts coming nat869!!

Do we have to have this tell tale mentality whithin the forums, if there is a problem with a particular post we should leave it to the moderators to decide whether a post is inappropriate or not!

[Belmondo]

My basic premise for forum conduct is that we all come here as friends and are bound by the unwritten laws of common sense and decency to behave accordingly. In that light, I believe we should act no differently than we would if we were all meeting face to face. It’s such a simple thing to ask one’s self, “Is this something I would say in person?” before pressing the Enter key.

I acknowledge that this might sound Pollyannaish to some, and perhaps it is. Maybe it's even a naive notion, but the simple truth is this: One of the most frequent comments we receive here at POTN is amazement at the friendliness that permeates the forum. All of us who come here regularly have a vested interested in preserving that climate, so while this discussion is circular and really not resolving anything, it’s valuable for at least asking the question and raising awareness of the appropriateness of certain types of comments in the Glamour Forum.

[nat869]

I can't believe your arrogance, and I can't believe that the mods would allow such a proclamation to stand. If we are to accept this, and if such a caveat is to be effective, some sort of sticky proclaiming this should be po....


I have never been offended by anything said about the photographic quality of my pics. It is what I post for. I have only ONE person to shoot pictures of and that is my wife. I am not sure how that is self-serving in the negative way you mean. You guys arguing over the right to insult women that are not attractive to you is pretty discouraging. It like you are saying that because the only person who will pose nude and in lingerie for me, is not attractive to you then it must not be glamour. I guess my photographic technique can only be improved by finding another model that you think is pretty. Remember this section is for registered members to view only. Why would I post pics of lingerie and nudes to the people section?

[Steve Parr]

I have never been offended by anything said about the photographic quality of my pics. It is what I post for. I have only ONE person to shoot pictures of and that is my wife. I am not sure how that is self-serving in the negative way you mean. You guys arguing over the right to insult women that are not attractive to you is pretty discouraging. It like you are saying that because the only person who will pose nude and in lingerie for me, is not attractive to you then it must not be glamour. I guess my photographic technique can only be improved by finding another model that you think is pretty. Remember this section is for registered members to view only. Why would I post pics of lingerie and nudes to the people section?

This has gotten completely out of hand...

Nobody is arguing for the "right" to insult women. I said I found muscle-bound women unattractive. I do. As I said earlier, some men find brunettes unattractive. If I posted a photo of my wife, and someone said "I find brunettes unattractive", I think it would be silly for me to take offense to that.

I think it's a tad short-sighted to ask for a critique of a picture and expect to receive only positive feedback. That's not the point of a critique, is it?

I'm really sorry I got involved in all of this. Maybe we should all just have a Coke and a smile and drop it...

Steve

[nat869]

This has gotten completely out of hand...

Nobody is arguing for the "right" to insult women. I said I found muscle-bound women unattractive. I do. As I said earlier, some men find brunettes unattractive. If I posted a photo of my wife, and someone said "I find brunettes unattractive", I think it would be silly for me to take offense to that.

I think it's a tad short-sighted to ask for a critique of a picture and expect to receive only positive feedback. That's not the point of a critique, is it?

I'm really sorry I got involved in all of this. Maybe we should all just have a Coke and a smile and drop it...

Steve


One pretty simple question: How does saying you find muscular women unattractive help me to better my photography? Once again, do my photos suck because you do not like the subject? I welcome critiques on my images, I have no one else to do it except here.

Personally I don't give a sh*! if people think Samantha is attractive or not. I do not think I have to hear poor comments about her looks, no person should have to hear insults about friends or loved ones. IT IS POSSIBLE TO CRITIQUE A PHOTO WITHOUT INSULTING THE SUBJECT. As I have said, I welcome all comments on my pics........bad or good, just do not insult my subjects, whether it be my wife or anybody else who poses for me.

[txdude35]

Ok, I think this has run its course, so I'm going to bow out gracefully. Before I do, however, just a few observations.
Bloodog, if a simple statement of the facts is arrogance, well, call me arrogant. And I never said that EVERYONE should be aware that nat posts pics of his wife. I meant YOU should know now that you've been here.

Muscular women aren't my cup of tea either, but the only thing I've ever said to nat about his posts are echoed by many others- she looks stiff in alot of her poses, and a little more relaxed look would probably suit her well. BTW- the heading of this forum is glamour _AND_ nude, so where else do you suggest nat post??
I don't care for many of the things I see here ( Frank's garishly made up models, slender models with rear ends the size of Texas that are so popular these days, etc.), but I know that many people like these things, so I politely keep my mouth shut about it if all I have to offer in the way of critique is a comment about how I don't (or do) like the model, which is so often the case in this forum.
As I said before, I fear that if the focus doesn't shift to the shot and away from personal preferences in sexual taste, this forum will be shut down.

[Steve Parr]

One pretty simple question: How does saying you find muscular women unattractive help me to better my photography? Once again, do my photos suck because you do not like the subject? I welcome critiques on my images, I have no one else to do it except here.

Personally I don't give a sh*! if people think Samantha is attractive or not. I do not think I have to hear poor comments about her looks, no person should have to hear insults about friends or loved ones. IT IS POSSIBLE TO CRITIQUE A PHOTO WITHOUT INSULTING THE SUBJECT. As I have said, I welcome all comments on my pics........bad or good, just do not insult my subjects, whether it be my wife or anybody else who poses for me.

One pretty simple question: How does saying you find muscular women unattractive help me to better my photography?

The subject is the reason you're taking the picture, correct?

If someone posted an image of an obscenely overweight woman with bad teeth and oily hair, but the lighting, focus, background, etc. was all spot on, would you consider it a glamorous photograph?

I'm guessing that you probably wouldn't, although there are probably people out there who would.

If posted in the "Glamour" section, people will either find the subject glamorous or not glamorous. To assume otherwise, I think, is naive.

So, if someone finds something unglamorous about a subject, should they hold their tongue? I didn't insult anyone. I expressed an opinion, and said why I had that opinion.

Nat, I notice Samantha is a blonde. I take that to mean that you find burnettes unattractive. Should I be offended by that? No, definitely not.

Everything in a photograph makes that photograph, whether it be lighting, background and, yes, even the subject. If someone holds the opinion that the lighting makes for an unglamorous image, they should certainly say so. Why, then, not afford the same critique of the subject?

Taken in a different environment; say one of competition, I'm sure I would be a fan of an image of a female body builder, as it would be in a context which one would expect to see a female body builder. In the setting you chose, this just wasn't the case for me.

My apologies for any misunderstanding. I can't do anything about your apparent belief that made personal slams against your wife, other than to explain the opinion I had. You can accept that or not; makes no real difference to me, but it is what it is...

Steve

[Steve Parr]

huh? I guess I don't understand. Negative comments about a person's looks help you to be a better photographer?

Actually, it's pretty simple:

A model which garners more positive comments, obviously, appeals to a wider audience. If you remove the subject from the photograph, there's not a whole lot left.

When we post pictures here, isn't that what we're doing? Putting our images up in the hopes that they'll appeal to as wide an audience as possible?

Steve

[Pekka]

So this is the message:

Hissy fits rule.

Categories are not to be observed.

Intelligent discussion will be suppressed at whim.

Gotcha.

Bloo, rules we try to have here are to keep things civilized and encourage discussions about photography. They my no means prohibit colorful language or hard talk.

[UncleDoug]

So this is the message:

Hissy fits rule...


Bloo Dog,

Hissy fits don't rule, they just get the grease IF the hissy IS warranted. Someone bringing up what they think is a violation of posting policies is ok by me. If it is a serious situ it will be dealt with by the admins, as many hot topics have been, or it will be discussed like it is here over 8 pages and a consensus will probably be reached.
Hm, sounds like democracy in action! :D

Categories can be a grey area. Like was said one persons glamour shot will be anothers weight lifting shot. If you think an image/topic has a better place, try suggesting this to the poster and see what happens.

Intelligent discussion has not been suppressed at all on this forum unless the intelligence-o-meter hits rock-bottom, i.e. a thread about a week ago, (copyrights, etc....).
The fact alone this thread has gone for 8 PAGES proves this point. ;)

[deedspender]

One day my brother and his best friend went out to dine together while on vacation in the Florida Keyes. Each year they and their wives vacation there to go diving, collect shells, and eat lots of seafood. They're at a favorite restaurant and my brother, devouring a shrimp, remarks that the shrimp are "off" this time. They are not good. His best friend says, "no, you're wrong, they are good". Which of them is correct?

You see, that's what makes all the arguments in this thread about what is art, what is erotic, what is appropriate absolutely ridiculous. It's all going to be based on our perspective.

I could tell you what MY perspective is but I think you know that, or at least you have decided that from the images I post. Many feminists hate my work and think it is degrading to women. Oddly, lesbian couples (who are often strong feminists) represent a large percentage of people who like and collect my work. Which of them are correct?

As for the ORIGINAL post in this thread, I agree about some of the comments. Particularly the ones which deal with sexual remarks OR (and I especially hate these) those which are personally unflattering to the model. Frankly, you will see me remark about a model, but usually in a flattering or positive way.

I do find it interesting, though, that some people have to espouse their opinion on what is art or what is beautiful as if their opinion is the only one that matters. They often do this behind a shield of being "enlightened". The attitude is quite holier than thou. They often approach the discussion intellectually but it really comes down to is not about enlightenment but about what their individual perspective is. And of course, if your perspective is different you must be quickly dismissed because you are not enlightened. You are ignorant. Otherwise you would certainly be of the same opinion.

There will be no end to this thread until an admin locks it. That's ok. I don't think we'll resolve anthing with our posts because our perspectives are all quite varied.

I will say this for the record. I like and respect women. I work with many different women. Some nude. Some not. Some strong. Some weak. Some very smart. Others not so much. I like and respect them all. Most of my shoots are a collaborative effort. At least, some of what you see posted here. I respect opinions too. And I won't try and tell you that yours or what you are are wrong and that mine are right. Please don't tell me mine are either. If you don't like my work, fine. You're entitled to YOUR opinion about it. Just remember that it's YOUR opinion and since you're only one person, you're likely in the minority. ;)



[/QUOTE]And I won't try and tell you that yours or what you are are wrong and that mine are right. Please don't tell me mine are either. If you don't like my work, fine. You're entitled to YOUR opinion about it. Just remember that it's YOUR opinion and since you're only one person, you're likely in the minority. ;) [/QUOTE]


charles i beleive it was your comment regarding Steve Parrs first post that highlighted the issue in the first place,
i would quote your post, but your original quote mysteriously appears to have disappeared/edited, it went someting like this "please can you keep your comments on the photos and not your taste in women" .

"people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"

regards!!
deedspender

[Pekka]

Categories can be a grey area. Like was said one persons glamour shot will be anothers weight lifting shot. If you think an image/topic has a better place, try suggesting this to the poster and see what happens.

What I would like to see is that glamour forum is taken quite strictly as such. Both amateur and pro shooters, but targeting more pure glamour. I see sometimes posts which are really about being proud of having a good looking mate and posting some shots to share it but that is essentially not glamour - glamour is hard work to make models look at their very best and attractive, carefully designing makeup, adjusting lighting and setting up (staged) environments, directing poses and expression. Glamour is very much about attention to detail, giving photos classy feel, something different that 9 to 5 and 24/7 tv dinner . CharlesU please correct if I am wrong with that definition. For amateurs: I am sure glamour can be achieved at home and outdoors, too, if you just keep in mind what glamour means and how it would be done in best possible way to really make people want to keep their eyes on the shot.

As for "nude" photography, I think that is here defined as "artistic nudes". That is common in art photography and libraries are full of examples of it.

[Tom W]

I've been following this thread for a while, and I've come to the conclusion that the only way to prevent people from commenting on the subject of an image is to start using mannequins as subjects instead of live humans. That way, seemingly crass commentary will not insult anybody, but will make the poster of such commentary stand out from the crowd a bit.

Seriously, if an image is posted in a common public place, the public is going to comment. Some will comment constructively, some not. It's the way opinions are - everyone has one, and some of them smell a bit worse than others.

The moderators can moderate on an as-needed basis based on individual complaints, and I don't think too many would have a problem with that. The moderators could also censor with a heavy hand, but I don't think censorship is what most people using this forum want. Myself, I'd rather read through a little chaffe to get the good wheat, than have my grains spoon-fed by the mods.

[bikerider]

This discussion seems to have evolved into a couple of areas. One being comments on images, which is why I started this thread in the first place. What I was seeking, agreement on the inappropriate, juvenile comments by some posters, well I got that. I asked women to comment as I felt the inappropriate comments denigrated and objectified them. The issue of the title of some of the posts came up as part of that discussion, as some women here felt the titles contributed to the 'locker room' mentality. I think in the days we live in now, people should be aware how the naming of things affects all people and be sensitive to that. This clearly indicates thinking before you post and this discussion is certainly making me think before I post now. The other area, categorisation, what fits where. This is always a problem whatever area of life we're talking about, as soon as you create a box someone is going to say 'that doesn't fit in there'. Criteria are generally created by the person or persons who made the box and changes to said criteria come about hopefully, through consensus of opinion. People are encouraged here to express their opinion in a respectful and thinking manner. I know that may seem like a lot to ask due to the emotional factor that's generated during debates. However, useful discussion will not take place unless people look at their reaction first and think about it, then post your thoughts not your emotions.
Roger.

[ilya]

Its really quite simple if you remove the noise

Noise being that if you don't like glamour, nudes or amateur shots of nudes, don't go into that forum.

The original post was about the comments on the glamour forum that exhibit poor taste and lack of common sense. Great suggestion.

Also pretty simple - exercise common sense and show good taste. Its not very complex. Follow the rules, and you'll be fine.

I don't get the amount of noise that this topic brings though. But maybe I'm missing something.

Ilya

[nat869]

Actually, it's pretty simple:

A model which garners more positive comments, obviously, appeals to a wider audience. If you remove the subject from the photograph, there's not a whole lot left.

When we post pictures here, isn't that what we're doing? Putting our images up in the hopes that they'll appeal to as wide an audience as possible?

Steve

Actually, I put my images up so I can get some opinion about my technique. As I have said, I have only one model who willingly, most of the time, poses for me. According to you, I guess I should not post untill a playboy or maxim girl wants to shoot with me?

[Steve Parr]

Actually, I put my images up so I can get some opinion about my technique. As I have said, I have only one model who willingly, most of the time, poses for me. According to you, I guess I should not post untill a playboy or maxim girl wants to shoot with me?

Oh, for the love of God...

Nat, you're right. You should go get some cover girl model to shoot, or you should hang it up. Clearly, without that, you have not future.

Geez, Nat, when did I say anything resembling what you think I said? When? Hmmm? Please provide a quote from one of my posts where I say that, and I'll buy you a house.

Here's a tip, slick: You're not going to please everyone all the time. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people here like your shots, the subject; everything. If you're going to obsess over one guy who didn't care for them, for whatever reason, you have issues. I'm sorry that you're upset that I didn't care for them.

From now on, I'll only post the most glowinig commentary I can about your work, as criticism clearly doesn't work for you.

Damn...

"Just when I thought I was out, they suck me back in..."

Steve

[Persian-Rice]

nat, I wasn't talking about the physique of the model, rather comments about the image as a whole. It's true there are several different discussions going on in this thread, I'm more talking about people taking any criticism about anything in their picture.

To be honest, going through the nude/glamour section again, only a small percentage of the posts show any photographic skill or tasteful nudity. Many of the posts do have this raunchy softcore porn look. I don't care about porn, I don't think it is good, or bad, it's just there. But I honestly believe that taking a head on shot of a girl bending over smack dab in the center of frame, has basically little or no artistic value. I know this is taking the argument in a slightly different direction and is somewhat hard to moderate against because the line is very very grey in between what is a artistic nude and the snap of a half naked girl, not in my eyes, but for many it is, whatever she looks like. Cutting down on posts like this will already fix half the issue, they don't even belong.

[chris.bailey]

As for this being a "hobby" forum, then comment upon the hobby and hobbyist rather than the model...

Best-
Noni


"LOL, that he does. Nothing better than an older man with character in his face"

so how was this a comment on the hobby or hobbyist rather than the model...?

I don't quite get the difference between this comment from you and a comment such as "pretty girl, nice shot" in Glamour and Nude. Its a natural reaction from many here to comment on the model be that a Train, Plane or Automobile or even and older man with character in his face. As long as those comments are tempered with a degree of sensitivity, and I do agree that some cross that invisible line, I dont see the issue

[Noni]

"LOL, that he does. Nothing better than an older man with character in his face"

so how was this a comment on the hobby or hobbyist rather than the model...?

I don't quite get the difference between this comment from you and a comment such as "pretty girl, nice shot" in Glamour and Nude. Its a natural reaction from many here to comment on the model be that a Train, Plane or Automobile or even and older man with character in his face. As long as those comments are tempered with a degree of sensitivity, and I do agree that some cross that invisible line, I dont see the issue

It doesnt. But I've not ever said don't say "pretty girl." Rather, I've stated that saying "great hooters" or "she can tie me to an ant hill any day" or "she's just too muscly for my taste" tend to cross the line.

Perhaps a clarification on what is appropriate or not is in order....CDS, in the N/G Critique thread just posted a great comment...


"People post photos of there dogs and cats and robins and seaguls in the nature section quite often

Those that find such subject matter mundane or less challenging than others do not begin every response with.. "what a lame choice of bird" or "the dog is very ugly and there fore the photo does not belong in this forum"

It's simple.. don't try and pidgeon hole a forums subject matter to your own liking and own interpretation of what is appropriate for the forum.

We understand there are lots and lots of differnet types of images that can fall under the "nature" catagory and except all those posted. If we don't want to look at another image of a Cat we move on.. if the Cat image is exceptional we may post and say so.. but we don't say "I don't like Cats" as a critique.

We would not insist that only certain classed of animals qualify,
We would not insult or criticize the choice of subject there,
We would not belittle someones choice of a plain old Amtrack in the travel section
We would not state that the model is ugly or inappropriate if the post was someones 9 year old child in "people"
We would not allow our disdain for Ford products to show (at least not to the point of insulting the photographer) when a classic Galaxy 500 image is posted.

This particular sub-forum does not release all posting here from the usual and expected levels of social courtesy we see in ALL the other forums ( and they manage without any "special" rules in place.)

It's been said dozens of times now.

Critique the photo.
If you do not like the subject, then don't comment on it.

If you do like the subject, make sure your comment on it is rated "G" and not offensive or sexist."

It may be hard to distinguish between what is offensive and/or sexist, so here's the rule set I tend to use.

1. If it was said to me about me, in public, is it acceptable? "Great hooters" would definitely NOT be something I'd find acceptable said to me in public. "baby, tie me to an ant hill" is again not something I think is acceptable. If it's not something which should be said in public, I don't say it.

2. Is it something I'd find appropriate to be said to my daughter? Sister? Mother? Brother? Father? Son? If not, then I don't say it.

3. Is it something that I think would benefit the photographer on his photographer? Or am I asking a technical question? Then I can post it.

It's about common sense, realizing that everyone can read the comments, and that some comments are better left to pm, and/or unsaid. There's a maturity level that is needed when viewing a nude/semi nude/glam shot in a photography forum that isn't required elsewhere.

Pretty girl? hey, that's all right..."pretty girl, I'd love to do her" is not.

Can you see the difference now?

Best-
Noni

[nat869]

nat, I wasn't talking about the physique of the model, rather comments about the image as a whole. It's true there are several different discussions going on in this thread, I'm more talking about people taking any criticism about anything in their picture.

To be honest, going through the nude/glamour section again, only a small percentage of the posts show any photographic skill or tasteful nudity. Many of the posts do have this raunchy softcore porn look. I don't care about porn, I don't think it is good, or bad, it's just there. But I honestly believe that taking a head on shot of a girl bending over smack dab in the center of frame, has basically little or no artistic value. I know this is taking the argument in a slightly different direction and is somewhat hard to moderate against because the line is very very grey in between what is a artistic nude and the snap of a half naked girl, not in my eyes, but for many it is, whatever she looks like. Cutting down on posts like this will already fix half the issue, they don't even belong.

No worries, some of the comments that appeared were from another thread, the mods combined withg this one, so what you read was not in response to any comments you have made. Generally I see helpful information from you. Unfortunately I am one of the majority that is turning out stuff that is not quite up to par with the pros, but I am trying.

[chris.bailey]

Can you see the difference now?

Best-
Noni

A somewhat patronising end to an otherwise sensible post.

I have and do support the essence of this thread. I have however picked up on the suggestions that pictures posted should have some artistic merit and have objected to the use of the word "snapshot" to describe some peoples efforts and the risk that this may put some people off posting in future. In my opinion that would be a great shame and in conflict with the general aura of this place. If it becomes at all elitist I for one would not visit as often if at all. My children paint pictures that are barely recognisable of the subject they have intended. My 5 year old seems to think mummy has three arms!. I still applaud their efforts and recognise that these heavy handed daubings are something they are quite rightly proud of. I would suggest a similar level of sensitivity be used here to describe what may have been the best someone is capable of.

I also picked up on the comment that one should "comment on the hobby or hobbyist and not the model..." perhaps you meant "adresss negative comments to the hobby or hobbyist and not the model...". I do see the difference in those two statements and would wholeheartedly agree with the latter but not the former.

[Croasdail]

Wow... what have I been missing. I stopped visiting this forum because an awfull lot of what was in here was collage freshmen level commentary. I did get really tired of "boy shes got great _____, or "your wife is hot - let's see more". I got sucked back in just because I followed a link and then 10 pages later, here I am. I would love to start visiting the forum more again because while I don't particularly care for the subject matter of Charles' photographs, I do admire his talent and eye - there is a lot to be learned there that can be applied to non-glamour. He and I don't have to see eye to eye on what is a great subject, but I can still learn a boat load on how to photographically capture the best of a subject - doesn't matter - old person, kid, wife, brother - who cares. If we could keep the comments at that level, I would love to read more posts here.

As to the comments on Snapshots... at first I was a little taken back by the volume of I beleived to be snap shot quality images floating around, particularly in the people forum. I am sure many would view my candids as snapshots too... that is fine. But as a great example, Fer has a post in the people section of a self portrait that looks wonderful - and then later she posted in the same thread the original. Had I seen the original first - I would have blown off the thread...my bad. The learning that can be had on how she saw different potential in the shot is wonderful experience. So with that - I say post away with snapshots - the reason many of us are here is to learn to do what Fer did.... take the image to the next level. If you don't see ways to help, move on... if you don't want help - don't post.

Lastly - and I will stop - back to Charles' comments. I do a lot of sports photography and am trying to perfect my skills. I like to view it as candids in action... its all about the people. A couple of months back being the newbie I am, I actually had the balls to post a suggestion to one of the masters of the genre... silly me. What I was pleasently surprised with was the thoughtful response back on why the photograper did what he did - and why in general he didn't do what I suggested. To take it to the next level, the next time he shot an event, he did try what I had recommended, and while the results were still very good - they were not in keeping with his "style" - but none-the-less he tried my way anyways. I would love to see Charles take on more of that role... a lot of comments are made because we are learning.... and quit often a thoughtful comment back can teach much more.

It is an art - and to debate what is or is not art is an exercise in futility. In Paris at the Modern Art museum there is one exhibit that is a pile of skies stacked next to a wall... my son commented that our garage must be a master piece then. To that artist - it meant something... to me - it reminded me that I had chores to do. Lets stop discussing if women with muscles or without is better - lets get on with learning on how to make either look their best in a photograph.

[charlesu]

while I don't particularly care for the subject matter of Charles' photographs, I do admire his talent and eye - there is a lot to be learned there that can be applied to non-glamour. He and I don't have to see eye to eye on what is a great subject, but I can still learn a boat load on how to photographically capture the best of a subject - doesn't matter - old person, kid, wife, brother - who cares.


Lastly - and I will stop - back to Charles' comments. I do a lot of sports photography and am trying to perfect my skills. I like to view it as candids in action... its all about the people. A couple of months back being the newbie I am, I actually had the balls to post a suggestion to one of the masters of the genre... silly me. What I was pleasently surprised with was the thoughtful response back on why the photograper did what he did - and why in general he didn't do what I suggested. To take it to the next level, the next time he shot an event, he did try what I had recommended, and while the results were still very good - they were not in keeping with his "style" - but none-the-less he tried my way anyways. I would love to see Charles take on more of that role... a lot of comments are made because we are learning.... and quit often a thoughtful comment back can teach much more.



Come on down for a workshop! :)

Seriously, if you are a working pro, there's probably not much I can teach you. My work is very simple.

[Big_B]

lets get on with learning on how to make either look their best in a photograph.

That seems a great way to finish the debate.