I have seen a number of posts on this site that praises or gives credit to lousy captures. Why?

Recently there was a series of a Red Fox. I would have deleted them in a heartbeat. They were total crap from my point of view but people posted that they were lovely, etc. Why would you make a kind comment on something that sucks? I personally wouldn't want you to give me a false pity post.

Please don't encourage garbage. The shooter will think they are doing well but in fact, that is not the case.

This is a BAD way to start a conversation- I'll explain.

Not EVERYONE on his or any other online photo forum is an aficionado of fine photography. Some folks, if they see a picture of a cute baby, a pretty bird or an interesting animal, the may simply complement the maker. Frankly, they don't know any better and the folks who do should share their expertise and familiars them with the finer points. I don't think they want to mislead an inapt shooter by telling him or her that they are a genius or give them a false sense of confidence nor do they mean to downgrade the standards around here.

So...if you want to improve the standards, rather than issue a rant calling people's work "crap", "lousy" and "garbage", why not write up a tutorial on proper technique, offer constructive critiques, and teach folks to do things right.

Thesis kinds of blanket condemnation of people's work are discouraging and only leads to more name-calling, vitriolic arguments and at the end of the day, nobody learns anything and no one improves.

As a professional photographer, teacher, trainer, print judge at professional competitions and a critic, I have seen some pretty rough stuff. Even as a "boss", a studio owner, I have been disappointed in the performance of some of my own trainees and employees. I never found that going into a tirade and demeaning anyone's work in a harsh and vulgar manner has ever remedied these issues.

Besides, if everyone deletes their mistakes and never posts any of them, how can they possibly learn from their mistakes and do better. Its frustrating when someone poses an issue about something in an image or their work in general that they are dissatisfied with and go into all kinds of written detail but never post an example of the problem- possibly because they are afraid of being browbeaten by nasty folks who just want to deride their work but refuse to help.

Most people will appreciate an honest critique and realize that a inaccurately flattering critique is a disserviced to the maker but they don't need the bluster and the rudeness.

I have seen a number of posts on this site that praises or gives credit to lousy captures. Why?

Recently there was a series of a Red Fox. I would have deleted them in a heartbeat. They were total crap from my point of view but people posted that they were lovely, etc. Why would you make a kind comment on something that sucks? I personally wouldn't want you to give me a false pity post.

Please don't encourage garbage. The shooter will think they are doing well but in fact, that is not the case.

I have seen a number of posts on this site that praises or gives credit to lousy captures. Why?

Recently there was a series of a Red Fox. I would have deleted them in a heartbeat. They were total crap from my point of view but people posted that they were lovely, etc. Why would you make a kind comment on something that sucks? I personally wouldn't want you to give me a false pity post.

Please don't encourage garbage. The shooter will think they are doing well but in fact, that is not the case.

Too funny to read this as I was tempted to post the same exact message only a day or two ago. But I figured I'd get read the riot act for doing so. I do agree completely with your post. But, I also think that the majority of users do seem to be into "snapshots" and so seem to be happy with their images. I think the people who view poor quality images and say how great they are simply don't know any better and are not aware of what a quality image is. This is a site, after all, where someone asks "what to do with their lens cap while shooting" and 2,437 (when I looked yesterday) people click on the question and 70 people actually post, while questions on technique and other important photography issues get only several hundred clicks.

I have seen a number of posts on this site that praises or gives credit to lousy captures. Why?

Recently there was a series of a Red Fox. I would have deleted them in a heartbeat. They were total crap from my point of view but people posted that they were lovely, etc. Why would you make a kind comment on something that sucks? I personally wouldn't want you to give me a false pity post.

Please don't encourage garbage. The shooter will think they are doing well but in fact, that is not the case.

There are, however, better and worse shots of wildlife and there are generally accepted practices that result in better and more pleasing shots. I photograph a lot of wildlife because I like the challenge. Each genre of photography has a set of guidelines that are generally practiced by professional photographers and photographers of a "higher caliber," for lack of anything else to call it, and these guidelines do result in very pleasing images, which is, I hope, what most of us want. Wildlife art can be listed in the "fine art" category as can almost any other genre of photography, just take a look at the Art Wolfe images that are very popular.

I have seen a number of posts on this site that praises or gives credit to lousy captures. Why?

Recently there was a series of a Red Fox. I would have deleted them in a heartbeat. They were total crap from my point of view but people posted that they were lovely, etc. Why would you make a kind comment on something that sucks? I personally wouldn't want you to give me a false pity post.

Please don't encourage garbage. The shooter will think they are doing well but in fact, that is not the case.