I've also been to a couple of classes led by really good photographers who have strong publishing credentials. Here are some of the things I've come away with:

I paid significant money for those classes. I sure hope that the instructors set their instruction against a very high level of excellence.

Art is a breeding ground for arrogance (and a surprising amount of ignorance). You just have to know that and be prepared for it to come with everything else.

Many of the best artists have severely crippled interpersonal skills.

Most of us as hobbyists probably don't have the time, energy, focus, or desire to pursue photography to the extreme limits that those who envision themselves as the world's answer to everything do. Come on...who can really estimate 4 degrees in the field. On the other hand, now you know that the placement of the catchlight in the eye is a pretty important contributor to an engaging photograph.

Most good teachers intentionally work to "over-educate" you. They provide additional information for context (which I know greatly helps me understand and remember), but they know that you are going to forget a lot of what they teach you. By overfilling your brain, they help insure that you will remember at least some of the good stuff.

I could go on, but you get the idea.

After all the chaos and heated opinions, it's time for me to answer your very first question which is intrinsic in the TOPIC you listed. YOU e not a bad photograher and in fact, you are a good one. As they say, you did not just fall off the turnip truck and this is not your first radio. You know your way around your camera and more importantly, I can see in your images that you have a real love for animals, wildlife and nature. Kudos for wanting to improve and take in classes and subjecting yourself to criticism. "No pain- no gain," says Arnold Schwarzenegger!......



"...you did not just fall off the turnip truck and this is not your first radio."

Radio?? Did you mean rodeo?

I think he is right in bringing specific problems with
your pictures to your attention.

He is very wrong though, making you think
those specific problems have made your photos "bad" or "Non Photos".

Those specific problems are elements of very good photos that would be better without them is the reality I see
Photolady.

And your not an orphan having your photos trashed by a teacher/lecturer.

This woman (https://www.silvi.com.au/) bless her cotton socks was my lecturer/instructor for the film component
of a Photoimaging Diploma course... mate she trashed a landscape I'd spent a lot of time on.

I regarded her as a goddess, and boy did I hurt from her angry tirade in front my a class of about 12.

She liked this still life neg I printed on Ilford multigrade though... Unlike your teacher, Silvi knows/knew shadow can be put to good use :-D

Morning all! So I just got through taking a 5 day class with a very well known photographer who has won many, many awards, photos in the Smithsonian and is a judge for contests like Natures Best Photography. I learned sooo much about what makes a great photo.

Half way through the 5 days I was feeling quite overwhelmed and almost in tears because to get the photo that he would consider a photo seems near impossible. I totally understand photos before and just after sunrise and sunset are the best, but is it awful that I still want to take photos mid day? On several of my trips I have still gotten photos I really like, even though they do not have the special light and there are shadows etc. I scoured my photos and submitted them for the class and so far I do not have one photo that is not a "non-photo" due to shadow or lack of a hook or a background that is not totally creamy, or a host of other bad things.

I will post some of his comments to what I thought was going to be an ok photo.

The last one was reviewed verbally, the shadows! Bridge of the nose by eye, and the light patch of fur below the right eye as you look at the photo and curve shadow back to the nose is a big distraction. He could tell I was off by 2 degrees and that caused the bad shadow. The lighter fur to the left of the nose stops the eye from traveling from the lower left to the eye. You are supposed to have something soft in the lower left that makes your eye travel from lower left to the "hook" eye. In this case it does not work due to light fur interrupts the flow to the eye and then the shadows on the right. Then, the white fur on the lips could have been lightened to make it better if the other issues had not condemned it to be a "non-photo". Oh and the green line going through the background is bad.

Who knew you were not supposed to have sky in a bird photo, or that with something like a coyote all 4 legs must have separation and no crossover and that the farthest away front leg should be going forward. That the background must be very creamy with no light and dark areas. Shadows are the worst! Like crap, I was off by 2 or 4 degrees with the shadow. Must have a hook, no lines and of course good light, no messy sticks. Example an owl in a tree is bad if the leaves are all around it.

Anyway, I feel like a bad person/photographer for still liking some of my photos that are not perfect and still wanting to just have fun taking a photo and if I see a mom and baby moose at noon in a messy field of grass with a shadow, I'm still going to take the photo!

Again, I learned a LOT and the pro is a very nice guy and very talented. I will try and do what he says, but may still take what I know will be a "non-photo" am I bad?

Comments welcome, I have had lots of criticism lately, I can handle it! Well I might cry....