Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Oh dear, I'm in the EPZ sin bin!


James_G 7 166 5
22 Nov 2009 10:00PM
I've become increasingly demoralised by seeing very average pix getting a lot of clicks and lots of praise in the galleries. So a couple of days ago, I chose three images and made some mildly critical comments - just to see what the reaction would be. Two of the three responded very well, but the third - who had put his photo up asking for a critique - took it very badly. Not only had he asked for a critique, but he suggested the manner in which that critique should be made. Lots of references to psychoanalysis, semiotics and so on. I admit that my response was blunt, but I thought his thread was insulting and a joke. And I thought his picture was dreadful. So I said so. Then the world collapsed on my head. Pete has suggested I shouldn't contribute any more to that thread, the OP posted an abusive message telling me to stay away from his thread etc.etc.
My point is this: shouldn't individual members of EPZ be allowed to criticise? What I said was perfectly valid, but I've been condemned for it.
I'm not suggesting that any of us (and I include myself in this) who are struggling to find our way in photography should be damned, but I am tired of the click cliques taking the view that they are superior to us and that they even have the right to dictate how we judge photos.
Enough. It's not rocket science, a bad pic is still a bad pic no matter who posts it. And we should say so.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

StrayCat e2
10 15.0k 2 Canada
22 Nov 2009 10:03PM
Look at the clicks and comments as encouragement, that's what they are; don't fret.
James_G 7 166 5
22 Nov 2009 10:05PM
Misunderstanding. This isn't a click thread, it's about the right to criticise, which we don't do enough of on EPZ, but when we do, we're banned. It's an important distinction.
rossd 11 1.1k England
22 Nov 2009 10:16PM

Quote:This isn't a click thread,


But it will probably end up as one.

I don't know which picture you are referring to but all criticism has to be carefully worded so that it doesn't appear as such. I use phrases like 'it might have been better if......' or 'personally, I would have zoomed in.......' etc. etc.

If you actually used the word 'dreadful' then that was certainly less than subtle!!
uggyy 9 2.1k 9 Scotland
22 Nov 2009 10:17PM
James, you need to be a little more tackfull. Even if your opinion is right or wrong the way of putting it in words needs to be more encouraging.

If I critted a camera club comp in the manner you did I would be leaving most probably with a lot less friends..
Pete e2
13 18.5k 96 England
22 Nov 2009 10:19PM
James you didn't have the courtesy to reply to my pm...thanks.
Here's what I said

Quote:Hi James
EPZ is a nightmare to manage with all the personalities, skill levels, emotions and beliefs.
There's been an undercurrent for a few months that the site has been a bit stale in terms of comments/critiques etc. Nick took it upon himself to help ramp up activity and has done a grand job. There's an upbeat feeling on the site at the moment with one thing or another. I don't want to lose that over this incident. I'm not saying you have to agree I just cant see the point of keeping going on about a point you've made, as I say it's valid but time to move on.
Hope that's ok
Pete


So you haven't been banned - I just said leave it because there's no point in repeating yourself. Everyone got your feedback/message/view. Nothing else to add.
RogBrown 7 3.0k 10 England
22 Nov 2009 10:20PM
James, I agree with you entirely. A totally pretentious subject.
James_G 7 166 5
22 Nov 2009 10:21PM
You're right, of course. I was totally lacking in tact, but the OP was so pompous and so full of phoney intellectualism, I couldn't resist! And his pic was rubbish. And that's what I said. But he clearly considers himself to be so superior to the rest of us, I thought, why not? You have to see it to believe it...
James_G 7 166 5
22 Nov 2009 10:26PM

Quote:James you didn't have the courtesy to reply to my pm...thanks.
Here's what I said
Quote:Hi James
EPZ is a nightmare to manage with all the personalities, skill levels, emotions and beliefs.
There's been an undercurrent for a few months that the site has been a bit stale in terms of comments/critiques etc. Nick took it upon himself to help ramp up activity and has done a grand job. There's an upbeat feeling on the site at the moment with one thing or another. I don't want to lose that over this incident. I'm not saying you have to agree I just cant see the point of keeping going on about a point you've made, as I say it's valid but time to move on.
Hope that's ok
Pete So you haven't been banned - I just said leave it because there's no point in repeating yourself. Everyone got your feedback/message/view. Nothing else to add.



Pete,
I did reply. You must have the message, I pressed the reply button and sent it.
I stand by what I said.
Best,
James
uggyy 9 2.1k 9 Scotland
22 Nov 2009 10:26PM
TACT !! Smile

Even if the photos total rubbish you dont say it, you say it positives to improve the shot or a few small negatives and a gentle nudge. You do not know the persons background or level of photography or even the motivation behind the shot.

You could be saying something bad about someones picture of a dog only to find out the dog died yesterday lol. Getting my drift? Wink

Dont take the site to heart too much, its meant to be fun, not a full blown crit by a judge at uni or something.
James_G 7 166 5
22 Nov 2009 10:29PM
Uggyy, You're right. But you have to see the thread... It's too awful.
James_G 7 166 5
22 Nov 2009 10:30PM
Pete, the message shows on my profile as having been sent. I'm sorry if you didn't get it. I'll resend.
James
answersonapostcard e2
10 12.6k 15 United Kingdom
22 Nov 2009 10:34PM
The thread James is referring to is part of the critical discussion groups that have been set up to provide varying types of critique (this one) - there are descriptions on the picture of what is required.
Pete e2
13 18.5k 96 England
22 Nov 2009 10:34PM

Quote:I was totally lacking in tact, but the OP was so pompous and so full of phoney intellectualism, I couldn't resist!

James I'm sure some others will feel the same. But it's a new element to the site that's been set up to have a different kind of debate, those who want to join the debate are welcome. The photo clearly says that in the description. Fine you went in and made your point and you had a fair reply, but then it kept going and I'm trying to encourage different aspects to the site. There's so much on here why focus on that one tiny element. And now start a thread on it?
Pete e2
13 18.5k 96 England
22 Nov 2009 10:37PM

Quote:Pete, the message shows on my profile as having been sent. I'm sorry if you didn't get it. I'll resend.
James


You've just sent your original message again...the one above from me is the reply to this message.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.