3 weeks after she buys an XTI she does this!

it's funny how this post shift from one topic to the other, I was just looking for the slayer of the troll, is there something wrong with that? unless you guys are bunch of .....nevermind it's too farfetch, you guys are wonderful people....

Gentleman Villain wrote in post #10411035
It would provide a point of reference and a way for the intellect to counter-balance the senses.

Right now there is no point of reference for technical standards so buyers and up-n-coming photographers can only rely on their own randomn likes and dislikes based on the senses in order to make decisions. A sense or sensibility cannot (and should not) be measured. However, a reliance on the senses is basically anarchy because each person has a unique and personal sensibility. Artists should understand better than anyone the importance of balance. A sense of aesthetics is personal and random, but a technical standard can be universal and rigidly measured. It's important to understand that mastery of technique requires intellect while taste only requires a sensibility. The senses must be balanced with the intellect in order to create great work and possibly even high art through a union between the two.

Those that do not have a mastery of technique can only rely on the anarchy of their own personal random likes/dislikes and senses. They will never have the balance necessary to create great work. Right now, there is no measurable technical standard enforced by photographers to counter the senses and that this why photography is not taken very seriously as an art or as a profession.

You're totally right that a guild or an academic approach will never stop 300 dollar craigs list shooters. But that's not the point at all. Low art must exist in order for high art to exist. Bad photography must exist for good photography to exist. There must be balance. The purpose behind the creation of guilds and academic approaches is to provide a balance to the low end by creating a high end. An intellectual standard is required to balance the randomness of the senses.

So there's no high end right now? Why are all you guys charging so much then, w/o this so-called guild?

What you're describing with this guild is nothing more than a way for some photographers to look down on other photographers.

Gentleman Villain wrote in post #10411035
Right now there is no point of reference for technical standards so buyers and up-n-coming photographers can only rely on their own randomn likes and dislikes based on the senses in order to make decisions.... However, a reliance on the senses is basically anarchy because each person has a unique and personal sensibility.

You mention this again... how bad it is to have the unwashed masses buy photographs or services based on their "likes and dislikes" or their "unique and personal sensibility."

I don't see that as bad.

You mention the "haters" of the guild idea and how 99% of photographers (I presume that's us technically incompetent "bad" photographers you mention) are scared of the idea of a guild.

Personally, I have no opposition to or fear of a guild. I see your arguments for the dire need to have a guild as based on fear on your part. It seems to along the lines of:

If there's not a guild to say I'm different and better, how will people know I'm different and better?

and

If people just buy what they like, they likely to buy the wrong thing because they can't really be trusted to know what they like. The guild should tell them what they should like.

Willie wrote in post #10412026
So there's no high end right now? Why are all you guys charging so much then, w/o this so-called guild?

What you're describing with this guild is nothing more than a way for some photographers to look down on other photographers.

Bingo. This creates an "official" high-end that already exists, just "unofficially." The proof is in the pudding, so to speak.

I see no benefit to a guild other than:
1) Bragging Rights
2) Lobbyist association

#1 is standard internet fare.
#2 is significantly more important, however there are already bodies that do this.

@spkerer

cool...do whatever you want...however you want nobody is going to stop anybody from doing anything

Maybe if I write that 100 more times then it might finally start to sink in for some people.

Willie wrote in post #10412026
So there's no high end right now? Why are all you guys charging so much then, w/o this so-called guild?

What you're describing with this guild is nothing more than a way for some photographers to look down on other photographers.

The ability to make money in the industry is not necessarily related to the craft. Some photographers make tons of money but that doesn't make them good at technique. That confusion is probably my mistake because I talked about the industry instead of the craft. The next time I try to talk about this topic I should divorce the idea of financial reward from technical ability by talking about the craft instead of the industry.

Why be worried that some photographers might be "looking down" on others? That type of behavior already exists right now, so I'm not sure how stopping a guild or an academic approach from forming is going to prevent any photographer from looking down on another photographer. That's already happening right now anyway.

sapearl wrote in post #10411641
But apparently your level of expertise feels threatened in some way by this individual and others like her. So as we've said before, you need to get better, drop out of the competition, or not let it bother you the way it's got your panties in a bunch.

oh...my...god. I can't believe you still don't get it. I've explained this to you before. I am not any more threatened by this than I am by pickpockets in Cairo or a murderous gang of 12 year olds in a remote village in the Urals. But that doesn't mean I can't have an opinion on it, does it?

I doubt I'm much competition to anyone and I know that I don't look at ANYBODY as competition to me...I used to shoot for papers, which means I got a paycheque every 2 weeks regardless of what anyone else around me was doing.

Then I left papers to pursue other interests and now I strictly shoot for people who approach me, usually friends or friends of friends who have seen/heard about my work. I don't advertise, I don't have a LowriderS10 Photography FB page, etc. And it's exactly the way I want it...so please, oh please stop with the line of reasoning that I'm threatened by this or I'm not good enough, and so on...

photoguy6405 wrote in post #10411671
Why is anybody a so-called "troll"? There's no baiting going on. Just because they have a differing and strong opinion? What's wrong with that? It's precisely this type of abuse and misuse of the term that has rendered it meaningless.

absolutely...I may not agree with some of the people I'm arguing with, but I don't see any trolling going on...just a lively debate, that's all (and a good one, too...I've never even given a photo guild much thought...but after reading Gentleman Villain's posts, I think it's something that could be very sensible and useful).

moose10101 wrote in post #10413242
Historically, the function of a guild has been to do exactly that.

Historically, armies have also been used to systematically murder people based on their religion or skin colour...are you going to judge every soldier you meet on that?

LowriderS10 wrote in post #10413286
Historically, armies have also been used to systematically murder people based on their religion or skin colour...are you going to judge every soldier you meet on that?

Try to be reasonable. He's speaking that historically guilds have been used as a means of control. To say a newly proposed trade guild may tend towards being similar to prior trade guilds throughout history is well... pretty straightforward.

LowriderS10 wrote in post #10402396
Obviously you haven't been paying attention and you've probably never been paid for a shot in your life.

What's annoying about this is the general public sees all these "Jane Doe Photography" people (99% of whom are utterly talentless) and they see me (have had hundreds of pictures published, shot weddings, houses, etc for clients) and they think we're on a level playing field. They see both as "photographers."

People like them are cheapening the industry. It's because of people like them that 90% of the ads looking for photographers are offering no pay so you can "pad your portfolio" and because of photographers like them that a lot of good photographers are losing business because their rates are being undercut by complete hacks.

I'm annoyed for the same reason a racecar driver would be annoyed if every person with a driver's licence said they were professional drivers, every person with a pan said they're a chef and every fool who gives directions on how to open a jar of pickles called themselves a teacher.

You must not be that good then. If people think you're at the same level as the know-nothing noob, it's time for you to step up your game. Or perhaps the know-nothing noob knows more than you care to admit.

Gentleman Villain wrote in post #10411035
It would provide a point of reference and a way for the intellect to counter-balance the senses.

Right now there is no point of reference for technical standards so buyers and up-n-coming photographers can only rely on their own randomn likes and dislikes based on the senses in order to make decisions. A sense or sensibility cannot (and should not) be measured. However, a reliance on the senses is basically anarchy because each person has a unique and personal sensibility. Artists should understand better than anyone the importance of balance. A sense of aesthetics is personal and random, but a technical standard can be universal and rigidly measured. It's important to understand that mastery of technique requires intellect while taste only requires a sensibility. The senses must be balanced with the intellect in order to create great work and possibly even high art through a union between the two.

Those that do not have a mastery of technique can only rely on the anarchy of their own personal random likes/dislikes and senses. They will never have the balance necessary to create great work. Right now, there is no measurable technical standard enforced by photographers to counter the senses and that this why photography is not taken very seriously as an art or as a profession.

You're totally right that a guild or an academic approach will never stop 300 dollar craigs list shooters. But that's not the point at all. Low art must exist in order for high art to exist. Bad photography must exist for good photography to exist. There must be balance. The purpose behind the creation of guilds and academic approaches is to provide a balance to the low end by creating a high end. An intellectual standard is required to balance the randomness of the senses.

This may sound a bit ridiculous,bu instead of forming a guild, petition the camera manufactures to create certification of the use of their equipments as it relates to photography. This would at least gives the customer an idea if the photographer has some technical knowledge of the camera. and of coure certification idea can lead to another can of worms

mikerosal wrote in post #10414637
This may sound a bit ridiculous,bu instead of forming a guild, petition the camera manufactures to create certification of the use of their equipments as it relates to photography. This would at least gives the customer an idea if the photographer has some technical knowledge of the camera. and of coure certification idea can lead to another can of worms

I'm a bit confused what you want to do here. It seems like you want to hand the power over to manufacturers to decide who is good and not. I wouldn't want to go that way since manufacturers are not impartial and I'm sure that would just lead to a money grabbing scheme.

tone.tran wrote in post #10414744
I'm a bit confused what you want to do here. It seems like you want to hand the power over to manufacturers to decide who is good and not. I wouldn't want to go that way since manufacturers are not impartial and I'm sure that would just lead to a money grabbing scheme.

Maybe Nikon should certify Canon shooters and Canon should certify Nikon shooters.

mikerosal wrote in post #10414637
This may sound a bit ridiculous,bu instead of forming a guild, petition the camera manufactures to create certification of the use of their equipments as it relates to photography. This would at least gives the customer an idea if the photographer has some technical knowledge of the camera. and of coure certification idea can lead to another can of worms

The camera manufacurer would then have to provide a call center with staff that had a clue.

This is why CPS membership is such an attractive proposition--dedicated tech reps.