Glamour comments!

I still think it's a bit silly to suggest that someone who doesn't shoot a particular type of shot has opinions which are less valid, simply because they don't shoot a particular subject.

As for the comparison you gave concerning a website, it's enitrely possible that if someone with little or no web experience says "it loads too slow, the colors are harsh, and there are light fonts on a light background", it may be due to the fact that the site loads too slow, has harsh colors, and has light fonts on light backgrounds. It doesn't take a webmaster to recognize such things...

Steve

Yes I agree comments should have more depth and be more constructive and communicative than mere blunt statements. Trying to make people do so is commendable. The original poster can help in "educating" people into this by challenging one-word commentators to say more and invite verbal commentators into discussion. Making rules rarely inspires people

Not in the least, or there'd never be anything said anywhere.

I thought so. I also think that Nat's commentary stems from being slammed repeatedly - and harshly - because of his wife's physique, and not because of his photography skill (indeed, with the exception of the last few days...things seem to have been changing in there...)

And honestly, I see a ton of comments about a model's appropriateness for someone's personal tastes (ugh...) than I do about the photography itself. So I'm not sure Nat is saying that people should put up or shut up, as has been intimated many times in this particular thread...rather, I think that was more an emotional comment about the heat he's taken because of Sam's lifestyle rather than his photography.

Frankly, I think also that the concept of negative v. positive needs to perhaps be clarified.

To some people, saying "great a**" or "she can tie me to an ant hill any day" or "too bad you didn't get her a top that fits" is "postive" feedback. Instead of commenting about the photograph itself, the model's physical attributes are denigrated. I can't see that as positive feedback in a photography forum.

I've seen people slammed hard because they dared to say "well, that photograph looks like a snapshot. Try it this way." I've seen photos of men in that forum that are panned simply because they're men. That's not positive feedback; but that is encouraged and "egged on" by the comments made subsequent and prior to the posting of the shot. Does agreeing with the group mean that it's right?

I participate in a sport that has life or death consequences. If a newbie asks me some questions about skydiving, I give them the information. If someone asks me why they repeatedly botch a landing, I'll watch a few and comment. Do I hit it on my feet every time, a picture of grace and fluidity? Nawp...I'm far closer to a flying michelin man than to anything approaching graceful, but that does not invalidate my comments. Further, if an inexperienced person notices something with my gear, my landings, my flying, and makes a comment, I look at it, and if there's a good reason X is the way it is, I explain it...and if there isn't, then it gets changed. People who believe that no-one but someone better than they can comment and teach are likely to die in my sport.

On a far less dramatic aspect is a photograph. If I see something which I think could've been done better, I am rather likely to say it. If I see something which is great, I am likely to ask for information about it. I am neither great nor perfect in photography, and so I learn, learn and learn some more. Because of that, my shots have gotten progressively better since April 27th...and I look forward to continued growth.

Best-
Noni

Thank god I don't post my work.......ever see a really pretty girl covered in blood while posing in the nude?? Maybe Ill do a shoot for POTN next month in digital.......

I would like to see the outrage then....

I don't really get the point, what's the difference between making a "smart" comment or "wow what a great picture"? Neither of them are constructive in anyway, other then boosting someones ego, they do nothing to help the photographer improve. People don't criticize at all.

I understand this, I can imagine if people start criticize work, all hell will break loose. People always take things the wrong way, they might ask for criticism, but then they become really defensive about it. Personally, I love criticism, because it just makes me better and better, and if people adopt that look on things, then people would start making comments with more depth.

If you are going to say you like a picture, give a detailed reasons why, don't just say "wow, sexy". No picture is perfect, everything can be improved up. Even if you want to make a short comment, wrap it in a tasteful sentence, where you say why you feel that way, what is it about the picture that evokes such an emotion.

There are differences in taste, I see some picture and cringe, while others see them and love them, it's really a matter of what you like and what you shoot. But opinion is opinion, nobody's is wrong. The best is to take both sides and see what you can do by merging many ideas, making bigger and better photographs.

If you don't like the way something looks in the picture, then suggest a better idea, it doesn't need to be a destructive comment. For example, as above mentioned, if you have an issue with the physique of the model, then suggest better poses that would suit the specific model. You would be surprised how you can hide things at different angles. I mean, there is no denying if someone doesn't have a great look, they just don't, but trust me, there are ways to get around problems like that.

Cheers

The subject, be it his wife or otherwise, is integral to the picture, yes? I had no idea it was his wife, so perhaps you should stop making assumptions. I commented on the picture I saw.

It seems like you're tryiing to turn the comments into something personal about Nat, and that's not the case at all. In fact, if this "common knowledge" was so out there, perhaps it would've caused some to temper their comments, perhaps then not offering their true critique of the image. How does that help anyone looking for an honest opinion?

I commented that I don't find muscle-bound women attractive. By saying that, I'm not talking about his wife, I'm talking about muscle-bound women. I know people who find brunettes unattractive. I've been married to one for almost 20 years.

Should I be offended that some people in this world find brunettes unattractive?

Steve

I never said anything about "common knowledge", and truth be told, I don't remember where I got the idea. I believe it was in one of his posts, but I could be wrong. If you're going to get defensive about something I've said, stick with what I actually said.
My point, and one which might have been missed, is this: you know what this gentleman posts, as does anyone else who has been around here for any length of time. Knowing that the pictures are going to contain a _very_ fit woman, you have the option of not opening it or keeping your opinion of the model to yourself.
Post something of your wife. Perhaps a few "I really like the shot, but that woman sure is ugly" comments may change your perspective a bit.

Pekka wrote:
Yes I agree comments should have more depth and be more constructive and communicative than mere blunt statements. Trying to make people do so is commendable. The original poster can help in "educating" people into this by challenging one-word commentators to say more and invite verbal commentators into discussion. Making rules rarely inspires people

I agree. I don't think the rule works.

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.

Those people know who they are and I think (based on posts, emails and PMs) this thread has made them immensely uncomfortable.

Maybe some of the many people who have decided NOT to post here, because of unhelpful, negative posts will choose to participate.

Kudos on avoiding answering any of the questions I asked.

Here's an idea for you: You know when you see my name, in a thread discussing muscular women, you know what my comments might be. I'd recommend passing by them.

That makes about as much sense as your suggestion.

Again, I've not seen too many people addressing the fact that the subject of a photograph is, or should be, susceptible to critique. As I said in an earlier post, if the subject wasn't open to critique, why not just take glamour shots of Triscuit boxes?

Steve

Having read through this entire thread, and recognizing that people don't want to see negative comments about the subject of a photograph, I just have to ask: Why is it that positive comments concerning a model are welcomed, and some negative ones are not?

Steve

My apologies if I have assumed anything incorrectly. For future reference, make note of nat869, and understand that if you are in the "glamour" section, his posts will most likely be of his wife, who happens to be in outstanding physical condition.
I do not, however, see how "There are few things more unattractive to me than a muscle bound woman who is, otherwise, quite attractive." is any sort of valid critique. Neither is a comment like "great t**s" or "man, she can butter my toast anyday!"

The debate over comments like this is raging. If the focus isn't kept on the shot and off the models attractiveness or unattractiveness to you personally, I fear this forum will not be long lived.

Although I agree with the gist of what you are saying, I don't agree that just because a "novice" gives his/her opinion, it may be wrong. I am in the same boat, I agree that I take the comments and suggestions of a person with experience a lot more seriously then someone who may be a novice, most things can't match experience, but I never discount any opinion.

I think thats photographic ability can be derived in two ways in it's most primitive form. Ability through practice and experience, and ability through natural talent. Some people are able to grasp things better then others, right from the start with little experience. So not everyone's opinion, just because they are a novice, is to be always considered lightly. Because that novice might already have a far more developed eye then someone with 15 years experience.

I am being a little bit of a hypocrite, because I am guilty of this myself at times, but when it comes down to it, I truly believe this, and for the most part, follow it.

Because people are afraid of what they might learn about their own work. In a way, indirectly afraid of becoming any better.

I have to agree with some of the others, this is a GLAMOUR and nude section and granted what people find glamorous is subjective, but in glamour the model should be fair game for critique as well as the location and technical merits of the photo. Really I think that goes for just about any photo. If you took the same locations and instead of a model put a rusted out Ford Pinto and said hey look at this cool car, or look at these product shots the first thing most people would say is “that car is (insert expletive here) ugly”. Now should we not say the car is ugly, it is some body’s car and they maybe proud of it. The subject of a photograph should be open to the same critique as ever thing else about the photo, whether it’s a model or an inanimate object.

Before you post ANYTHING on the internet be it a photo or a reply to a forum thread you should remember that you a essentially putting it out there for the world to see.

That being said I don't have any problems with Samantha’s looks. I do think that the poses make her look less glamorous than she really is, they seem to forced and unnatural. I think that she (or maybe Nat) is trying to hard to get "that perfect pose". There is no perfect pose, some are always going to be better than others, and there will always be something wrong with all of them. What we as photographers should try to do is find the poses that work best for each specific model and try to make the problems that come up as discrete as possible.

I’m not into body building and don’t know much about it but most of the poses seem like they would be good for competition in front of the judges. I think that in glamour the poses should appear natural and relaxed like there’s no effort at all put into holding the pose. The first pose looks pretty good, like she’s just standing there doing what she’s doing. As I said before that other poses look like there is too much effort being put into them.

On a side note, I know people that go to the gym a several of times a week and aren’t in nearly as good a shape as Samantha is, what kind if training does it take to get that kind of shape and definition and maintain it?

I never thought in a society that to directly insult someone was ever ok. You do not like the pic, that's cool, I can handle it. I did a poor job posing the model, no problem. I underexposed the shot, fine, I suck as a photographer, thats ok too. Insult the model who posed, I do not think thats cool. This is a photography forum, not a model forum. If you were lookign to hire a model for work, then you would judge a model's looks, that s appropriate. How is commenting about the pic them adding your own preference on a woman's looks helpful.

My guess is you do not tell women in person, to their face, that they are un-appealing to you. The anonymity of the internet makes it possible for you to act rudely without fear of something bad happening. In my case, I know not everyone finds my wife attractive, its actually better that way, but never has someone come up to her and said "I think muscular women are unattractive" and I doubt you would as well. I would guess a sense of self-preservation makes you think twice about it.

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