fotogk Loc: Tuftonboro, NH

I am always amazed that if you have to explain your photo or defend what you did, that maybe you need to re-evaluate what you did since others did not see what you are trying to get across. If you don't want to evaluated criticism of your work, maybe you should not share it. If all you want is a pat on the back upload to flickr and show your friends.

Sher Loc: Colorful Colorado

Wow, you sound angry

Falcon Loc: Abilene, Texas

If I post a photo asking for a critique, and explain what effect I was attempting to achieve, I think I would get a better--and more specific--critique. If I am happy with the photo I wouldn't ask for forum comments. Obviously, I ask for comments because I didn't achieve what I wanted and need some guidance. You can't give guidance unless you know what I am after. This all assumes the photo is posted in the "Photo analysis" section. If I post in the "Photo Gallery" section, then I am pleased with the photo and just want to share.

T Loc: New York State

fototk wrote; '... if you have to explain your photo or defend what you did, than maybe you need to re-evaluate what you did since others did not see..."

...
Nicely said!

Such understanding, warmed by anger, fear, or desperation, does bring forth greater feats. On both sides of a photo.

People mostly do not, will not, can not, see what they haven't seen before, in which case the onus is on the photographer to show them what is really there, perhaps even something more.

On the other hand, photographers must see by choice, not just by chance, what they would have be seen by others.

There is a photograph of worth in any given bit of time and shadow. Bringing it to blossom in another viewers' mind is a battle filled with all manor of peril and delusion, hope and ghosts, and infinitesimal grandeur on an endless stage.

So what it takes a little anger's glow to gather up some light and fling it back at silence, at darkness in the night?

It is after all, a first rate excuse for a great deal of fun!

t

SQUIRL033 Loc: Chehalis, WA

which is all just a very long-winded and poetic-sounding way of saying, "making people see what you wanted them to see is a bitch"...

which is true, if you're trying to use a photo to convey some deep meaning, social message, or some other aspect of "the human condition". but if, like most people here, all you're looking to do is share some photos you like, or show a little snippet of your world, your dog, your kid, whatever, all that "hidden message" stuff means nothing. it's just a photo of a dog or a flower or a pretty scene.

a photograph should stand on its own. if you have to explain or defend your photo, you're doin' it wrong.

CC-EBBETS Loc: abit west of the Atlantic

There are times when I must question all that I think I know about what is good/not so good in a photograph.
Have any of you seen the photograph "Rhine II" by Andreas Gursky? It was sold at Christie's New York on Nov. 9th, 2011.
The bid paid for this image is reportedly $4.3m! (Ref. "Digital SLR Photography" magazine, January 2012 issue-top of page 13)

fotogk Loc: Tuftonboro, NH

Just the opposite I put my images out there and take it all in to see what people see to improve my sight. When I say something about an image I try to phrase it so that their is a specific change I am seeing that is needed

Dan821 Loc: Traveling........

Personally, I don't care what people either see or not in my images.
I take pictures of what I like, edit as I like, and post what I like.
Everyone sees images differently, so I don't bother to explain anything.
That being said, IF someone makes a comment, and I find it adds to what I was trying to achieve in a given shot, then I might make some PP changes.
I am my own worst critic and constantly want to make a better picture to express my view or thought at that point in time.
Just my thoughts...

Dave Chinn

You took the words right out of my mouth. Very well said.

omnila

I second that dan