Comments people make.

Meh, let em have there fun. There done now lets leave at that and not get this thread locked. Thanks for all the comments and soppurt.
 
I`m sure Matt, the OP, took all our posts in a light hearted way, as they were intended.

:)
 
Christ my ears are burning!

I believe some of my recent posts have been under scrutiny from those folks "behind the scenes" and if they're going to be the judge of whether I've upset you or not Matt then I hope they do so in a fair manner and not by means of the clique that seems to exist on this forum.

I got banned last week for commenting on a photo
The only thing I can think of when I look at this picture is why does an average looking holiday snap have a professional looking watermark on it?
Click to expand...
which was what I honestly thought when I saw the photo yet it was deemed unsuitable for comment. Now I don't want to ruffle anyone's feathers here but there are a number of people that post pictures with watermarks saying xxxxxx-xxxxxxxx photography when if they're as professional as they're watermark makes them out to be I'll eat my hat.

I'm a "hobbyist" and I can't even bring myself to say that I'm a photographer (even though I have several grands worth of kit) and I can't bear to see mediocre photos with a professional stamp on them. Goodness knows what the real pro's think of when they've got amatuers elbowing in on their bread and butter.

In the real world, ok, non-league football where I "play" most I've always found it rather cut throat and even though there are one or two people who'll happilly talk and share ideas there are many more that won't. It's not a nice world.

Maybe thats why I might come across as a bit of a tool to some people, but then so does Simon Cowell :thumbs:
 
tigerimages said:
Christ my ears are burning!

I believe some of my recent posts have been under scrutiny from those folks "behind the scenes" and if they're going to be the judge of whether I've upset you or not Matt then I hope they do so in a fair manner and not by means of the clique that seems to exist on this forum.

I got banned last week for commenting on a photowhich was what I honestly thought when I saw the photo yet it was deemed unsuitable for comment. Now I don't want to ruffle anyone's feathers here but there are a number of people that post pictures with watermarks saying xxxxxx-xxxxxxxx photography when if they're as professional as they're watermark makes them out to be I'll eat my hat.

I'm a "hobbyist" and I can't even bring myself to say that I'm a photographer (even though I have several grands worth of kit) and I can't bear to see mediocre photos with a professional stamp on them. Goodness knows what the real pro's think of when they've got amatuers elbowing in on their bread and butter.

In the real world, ok, non-league football where I "play" most I've always found it rather cut throat and even though there are one or two people who'll happilly talk and share ideas there are many more that won't. It's not a nice world.

Maybe thats why I might come across as a bit of a tool to some people, but then so does Simon Cowell :thumbs:
Click to expand...


Why not? Whoever you were referring to about the watermarks maybe has real pride in their work.

Ok, they might not be the best images in the world but maybe the WM is their stamp to say "I'm proud of calling this my shot"....

Just my opinion of course, but my view is that "what's the problem with watermarking it".

Also, it may be an image that could be lifted for a reason that you're not thinking of..ie for an amusing caption and it may end up being nicked with no credit or payment being offered or given...

If you look at my "camera bag" on my profile. I have good gear and am currently learning how to get the very best out of it, and would do the same about watermarking them, cos I'm proud of the images I've taken so far..

Hope that may help you in looking at it from a different perspective :thumbs:
 
I'm not against people watermarking their images to stop them being used elsewhere, it's their photo and it's their right. I just find it rather pretentious that people choose to use xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx photography when I'll bet my bottom dollar that they're just a hobbyist and they don't have a company called xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx photography.

If you're going to watermark like that and you're not a pro then it better be a top notch picture or it deserves all the negative criticism that it gets.
 
tigerimages said:
I'm not against people watermarking their images to stop them being used elsewhere, it's their photo and it's their right. I just find it rather pretentious that people choose to use xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx photography when I'll bet my bottom dollar that they're just a hobbyist and they don't have a company called xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx photography.

If you're going to watermark like that and you're not a pro then it better be a top notch picture or it deserves all the negative criticism that it gets.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with Aspiration.

Cheers,

Gary Whittle Photographic Experts Limited.
 
Nothing wrong with aspiration in the big wide world, but when you're in a specific group related to a certain subject you need to make sure your ability and aspiration go hand in hand.

And I'm guessing that you're probably joking ;)
 
tigerimages said:
Nothing wrong with aspiration in the big wide world, but when you're in a specific group related to a certain subject you need to make sure your ability and aspiration go hand in hand.

And I'm guessing that you're probably joking ;)
Click to expand...

I might be ;)

I aspire to be the best photographer I can be though, that isn't a joke. I don't know how or when I will arrive at a level where I can call myself a pro, I suspect I will never feel like I have reached that point. In the mean time, I will enjoy trying to learn, and one day, when my shots merit, I might stick a glossy badge on them too.

I see no problem with others doing it, regardless of quality though.

Gary.
 
AHEM, how did we get on to watermarking???? :thumbsdown: I thought the topic was making comments and whether or not someone chooses to use a watermark is besides the point.

Comment on the picture and if the watermark would look better elsewhere in the frame then that may be a useful comment, but whether the picture is good enough to be watermarked is irrelevant surely.
 
Bruja said:
AHEM, how did we get on to watermarking???? :thumbsdown: I thought the topic was making comments and whether or not someone chooses to use a watermark is besides the point.

Comment on the picture and if the watermark would look better elsewhere in the frame then that may be a useful comment, but whether the picture is good enough to be watermarked is irrelevant surely.
Click to expand...

Sorry man, threads are easily side tracked at times.

G.
 
well I got banned for making a comment about a watermark and I'm also the reason that Matt Sayle started this thread :wave:
 
tigerimages said:
well I got banned for making a comment about a watermark and I'm also the reason that Matt Sayle started this thread :wave:
Click to expand...

no it was one of many. If you have a problem, admin@ or matty@, both get to me, this isnt the place to discuss it.
 
tigerimages said:
Christ my ears are burning!

I got banned last week for commenting on a photo:
The only thing I can think of when I look at this picture is why does an average looking holiday snap have a professional looking watermark on it?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The point is, I think, that your comment failed to be constructive. In fact it was offensive; You may as well have said 'this is EDITED'.

If the picture was so terrible then it should not have been difficult to make useful comments about the composition, the exposure, DOF etc. So why not make those useful comments and help the poster improve their photography?

It's the negative with no justification or explanation that makes a forum unwelcoming. And that isn't what TP is about, is it?
 
who? said:
The point is, I think, that your comment failed to be constructive. In fact it was offensive; You may as well have said 'this is EDITED'.

If the picture was so terrible then it should not have been difficult to make useful comments about the composition, the exposure, DOF etc. So why not make those useful comments and help the poster improve their photography?

It's the negative with no justification or explanation that makes a forum unwelcoming. And that isn't what TP is about, is it?
Click to expand...

precisely. thanks for bringing the thread back on topic.

please folks, keep this on track.
 
Although we did suspend tigerimages for a few rude comments (including the one he quoted above), I do agree to a point about the 'look at me I have a camera so can call myself a pro' attitude that some people have. He delivered his point in a very bad way and it was uncalled for, but the sentiment behind it was fair.

Let me make it clear I am NOT saying he was right saying it to the person he addressed it to, Im talking about the overall sentiment.
It's the old computer building thing. When PC shops became commonplace in the late 90's, every man and his dog became a 'Computer Expert'. The same with web design. When the internet became popular, everyone jumped on that bandwagon too, learnt a little bit of HTML and how to buy some cheap hosting, and called themselves "Web Designers".

The same thing happens now with photography. Many people pick up a camera and say "Oooh I can do this professionally", without a thorough understanding of photography.
I think *that* is what tigerimages was getting at. Many people start to describe themselves as a professional photographer offering a service, when theyre amateurs and hobbyists, and it can sometimes come across as, how can I describe it...'Self Important'?

That's not to say, marking your photos with "Uncle BananaBobs Photography" is necessarily a bad thing, and it certainly isn't a bad thing to aspire to and aim towards!

Anyway, that's enough about watermarking.

Comments about photos.
Honest criticism is perfectly fine, and certainly encouraged. But unnecessary criticism and comments arent. Criticism must ALWAYS be backed up with help and advice, and it doesn't hurt to sprinkle a little bit of hope, friendliness, and praise on top too. It must also ALWAYS be giving in a friendly tone.

We have been working on a little guide behind the scenes, which is going live today (very soon actually), and everyone will be encouraged to read it and take on board.

We WILL be stamping down on rudeness and unnecessary harsh comments, just like tigerimages has shown :)
 
I havent got time to read all this thread, but my take on the OP is that some people are rude, some people are just blunt, live with it. Pete C cracks me up with his posts they're so blunt!

If you don't want bad crit, don't post EDITED! :D

I'm reminded of two things I've read on here in my short time...

1. The differece between a good photographer and a bad one is that a good one only shows their best work.

2. One of the main things to learn on the journey to becoming a better photographer is your own ability to self crit. To weed out the crap shots, and know why they are crap.
 
On the subject of crit, it was one of the things that I took from the OU course that I did.

I'll go and dig my notes out and share them with you. It's very useful advice but a very brief summary would be that you should comment on composition, lighting, exposure all fine and dandy. If it's good say why you think it's good and equally if it's poor, say why you think so and if there is something that can be done to improve it such as a crop. If there is a good element, comment on it so that it balances out something that you think can be improved.

Above all, remain polite and encouraging.

It's the old adage, if you can't say something nice perhaps you should say nothing at all.
 
Marcel said:
Although we did suspend tigerimages for a few rude comments (including the one he quoted above), I do agree to a point about the 'look at me I have a camera so can call myself a pro' attitude that some people have. He delivered his point in a very bad way and it was uncalled for, but the sentiment behind it was fair.

Let me make it clear I am NOT saying he was right saying it to the person he addressed it to, Im talking about the overall sentiment.
It's the old computer building thing. When PC shops became commonplace in the late 90's, every man and his dog became a 'Computer Expert'. The same with web design. When the internet became popular, everyone jumped on that bandwagon too, learnt a little bit of HTML and how to buy some cheap hosting, and called themselves "Web Designers".

The same thing happens now with photography. Many people pick up a camera and say "Oooh I can do this professionally", without a thorough understanding of photography.
I think *that* is what tigerimages was getting at
Click to expand...
You think exactly right!
 
I'd always understood C & C to mean 'comment and critique' as opposed to criticism.

Criticism - the act of making an unfavourable or sever judgement, comment etc.
Critique - a critical (i.e containing careful or analytical evaluations) essay or commentary especially on an artistic work.

And if anyone wants to critique or comment on my 'artistic' (:thinking:) work I'm only too happy to accept, so long as its polite or amusing. If its derogatory or just plain mean then they can sod off. :wave:

Andy
 
tigerimages said:
I'm not against people watermarking their images to stop them being used elsewhere, it's their photo and it's their right. I just find it rather pretentious that people choose to use xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx photography when I'll bet my bottom dollar that they're just a hobbyist and they don't have a company called xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx photography.

If you're going to watermark like that and you're not a pro then it better be a top notch picture or it deserves all the negative criticism that it gets.
Click to expand...

In that case, and if your original comment referred to an image you saw that had that kind of watermark ob it, then I think you have a fair point.

The only reason why I'd have a watermark on mine, before earning a living from photography if that's what I end up doing, is for the reasons I stated and it would just have the copyright logo followed by my name..

Photography is my passion, images are the work of individuals and I'm proud of whatever I do (in a non up my own arse way). I'm always open to learning, always room for improvement and at the same time, I'm very cynical of people (mainly businesses) lifting images and using them without payment.

I certainly agree about all the posts concerning comments. Replies should be posted in a way in which it offers encouragement. I've always commented on the strong points ie. liking the colour, contrast etc. but also pointing out where for eg. try to get the bird looking into a bit of space etc. etc.

Not being from Walter Mitty land, I don't think I offer advice that is out of my own depth..
 
Dark Star said:
There was a post many moons ago about simply saying 'nice shot' is not what everyone wants - why is it a 'nice shot' would help!

Since then I've tried (honest I have) to say why I like it or offer constructive ideas on how a shot might be improved - always leave on a +ve note though!!!
Click to expand...

I'm with you on that principle, sometimes it is harder than others to find a positive thought. Sorry to be so far behind the game on this one. I've read the Three Stooges sketch and been through the watermark debate. I'd be interested in the notes aliB has from the OU course. Let's hope that admin offers some clear guidance on what the preferred behaviour is.
 
TBH I tend to crit more when I see something wrong, or an area where I feel there could be improvement.

Not sure whether this is wrong, but if a photo is a cracker (Les's Waterfall springs to mind recently) I think a round of applause is all that's needed. I'm sure he knows it was great, and was just sharing a great shot. Until I'm at that standard or better I'm not going to offer advice for improvement.

If I feel I can offer an opinion for improvement, or can offer an alternative perspective, I tend to. If an image is just total gash, then I usually don't comment at all for risk of offending!

Out of interest... is the general photo sharing section not really designed for crit? Think I read someone say that. I thought the general photo sharing was all the stuff that didnt fit into the other categories.
 
EdinburghGary said:
I agree with 68lbs mostly, but even the really poor photos deserve some crit I feel, even though I am probably not qualified to give it.
Gary.
Click to expand...

Then who is qualified, every-one is entitled to there own views, and the right to ok, maybe you dont know the tech side of how to correct, but pointing something out it gives the poster an idea as to something that may need working on. It may be that they decide to ignore it though as what you dont like may have actually been what they where after.

I post a mix of stuff i like, and stuff i dont to get a general view from the public
 
In answer to the OP's comments, sometimes I do wish people would give more crit than they do, or to clarify why they say 'great shot' 'carp shot'. I suppose I'm guilty as much as anyone but I will say I'm often quite pressed for time but feel that an appreciative comment is better than no comment at all.

I find the faux-gushing that some people give about pretty average shots to be a bit annoying.

Actually I have no qualms against the 'call a spade a spade' language that tigerimages (and others) occassionally use. I don't like name calling or swearing, but language that is 'to the point' isn't a bad thing.
 
EdinburghGary said:
I agree with 68lbs mostly, but even the really poor photos deserve some crit I feel, even though I am probably not qualified to give it.

Gary.
Click to expand...

Since I have been here, you have been one of the foremost clearers of unanswered posts we have. That is so encouraging when someone takes the time to consider something that has sat untouched, despite all the care that the poster has taken.

I can't remember a time when your views have been poorly thought through and expressed undiplomatically. You take good photographers and you know what works, so you are well qualified. You don't need a degree to know what you're talking about.
 
Marcel said:
Yes, "crap" is OK. The word I edited out was not. That's why it's in the swear filter.
Click to expand...

Where I come from those two words have exactly the same meaning.
 
My opinion on the watermarking etc is people can do what they want and call themselves whatever they want so long as it's not deceptive (ie. calling yourself an organisation or regulating body or something). If you call yourself a professional but have guff photos then only the foolish will be tricked.

Back on topic, I've always believed the biggest problem with online forums is that it can be difficult to express tone with your words which can often result in offense being taken. Light hearted sarcasm can be one of the hardest things to convey and often I see people taking it as a personal insult instead. It's just far too easy to take things the wrong way online and a good way I've found to make sure you aren't misunderstood is to use the smileys.

If commenting on someones work I believe you can always be polite whilst still getting the point across. When reacting to someone else commenting on your comments, I try to not reply straight away but think about it first and get back to it with a more positive mind.

Pete (already mentioned :lol:) is a bit of a classic example here, I could have taken some of his comments to me the wrong way but I kept the frame of mind that he doesn't know me personally so it would be either daft of me or very sad of him to have some personal vendetta and he was actually being helpful and offering advice in his own kinda way :)

If he does have some personal problem with me then I'll adopt a different state of mind which would be he's a good photographer so I'm gonna get as much info out of you as possible first! :p ;)
 
What on earth is the big deal about people watermarking thier images? If they want to let them. It ain`t no skin off anyones nose, is it?

I would imagine that the vast majority on here are keen hobbyists, yeah, sure, there are some damned good togs on here, probably some that are good enough to do it for a living, I don`t know. But what I do know is that my photography has come on in leaps and bounds since joining here and getting good advice and helpful criticism. By all means if an image is bad say so, but say why you think it is bad.

I also think that some people are too thin skinned and take everything to heart, mirrored by the fact that some people are just downright ignorant and rude in thier criticism. These comments are aimed at nobody in particular.

IMO, TP is not as friendly nor as helpful as it used to be, there are way too many egos on here and way too many self imposed experts.

Now for the guys who run the forum, i`m sorry about the last paragraph, I truly am, but it is how I see this great forum at the moment and it is a place that I like too visit and have learned much from.

Bottom line, if you see an image that is good, say so and say why, if you see one that is bad or not too your taste, say so, but for all our help, say why.

If you can`t offer criticism in a pleasant and helpful way, then say sod all.

My finger is now sore, so i`ll STFU..............:thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top