artBob Loc: Near Chicago

I read your post. You are right.
However, I am upset over the mischaracterization of my posts. Again, here is how it started. I see no problem, as "edit" does not include using illustrative lines or even cropping to clarify an idea. However, I was wrong in missing the fine print, Graham's personal info, which included "marks." I acknowledged that, and agreed not to do anything to his photos.

All the after, AFTER, he initiated the confrontation. Here is my final post, accusing Graham and other of defamation, and the reasons for that claim. I hope for open minds. This has become, for me, character and reputation protection.

---------Last posts between Graham and me, regarding defamation-------------------------
artBob (a regular here) (online) Joined: May 5, 2012 Posts: 4189 Loc: Near Chicago

Graham Smith wrote:
A Professor eh? Do you think that I hadn't already discovered that. Would you prefer me to tip my hat, tug my forelock, bow deeply or prostrate my self at your feet? I would draw the line at washing your feet.

PS: you can try to insult, denigrate me, or whatever as much as you like because I just don't give a tinker's cuss.

I replied
"Again, irrelevancy. No, perhaps you are projecting when you mentioned an expectation of "tipping your hat." It should be clear to you that I was backgrounding my bona fides in regards to skeptical and objective thinking. I don't like how anything PERCEIVED BY YOU AS UNFLATTERING, even though a compliment and some questions (see my initial post in this mess below) becomes a victim cry against the injustice of it all. And you dare, dare, to denigrate the courtesy of others.

The post that started it all, apparently:
artBob (a regular here) (online) Joined: May 5, 2012 Posts: 4188 Loc: Near Chicago

Graham Smith wrote:
The framing isn't the best, the boy's feet are on the bottom, but it was shot with a Leica with framing lines in the viewfinder and they are not easy in a fast moving shot

I replied:
"Actually, the composition seems fine, a radial, as shown with the structural lines in the illustration.. I do wonder, however, what caused the strange perspective distortion of what should be slightly converging lines, as in the illustration."

To which you replied:
"Nov 7, 2019 15:39:00 #
Graham Smith (a regular here) (online) Joined: Jun 12, 2013 Posts: 6859 Loc: Cambridgeshire UK

artBob wrote:
Actually, the composition seems fine, a radial, as shown with the structural lines in the illustration.. I do wonder, however, what caused the strange perspective distortion of what should be slightly converging lines, as in the illustration.


Here we go again. Let's call it lens distortion and be done with it.

I will add that if you edit, draw your lines on or in any way mark my pictures I will cease posting in here.

It is against the section rules.

Nov 7, 2019 16:15:21 #
artBob (a regular here) (online) Joined: May 5, 2012 Posts: 4188 Loc: Near Chicago

Graham Smith wrote:
Here we go again. Let's call it lens distortion and be done with it.

I will add that if you edit, draw your lines on or in any way mark my pictures I will cease posting in here.

It is against the section rules.

Tot which I replied:
"So sorry you feel that way. Threatening others over what you perceive as my indiscretions seems unfair. I will not respond anymore to your photos. I mistakenly thought that you, like me, were a teacher, and would like to pass on knowledge, ascribing to Fair Use, understanding the difference between it and editing. Too bad you cannot answer the questions, as I would think others would find them helpful, you being so respected."

Defend yourself from your defamation of me.

-------------------------------------------

Graham Smith Loc: Cambridgeshire UK

Why?

R.G. Loc: Scotland

I've tried, unsuccessfully, to find somewhere where you acknowledge the fact that with some people your additions (overlays etc) are very unwelcome and a cause of annoyance and in some cases offence. Could you just clarify whether you acknowledge that fact or not?

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

I replied to jmatt that it was my mistake to not have seen Graham's small print referring to "edit OR marks." [emphasis added] BTW, that distinction makes my point, does it not?

The eruption of tribal hostility, led by Graham, was upsetting and provocative. It got the reciprocal response it asked for.

I have experienced such in my career. There were some students who, when they PERCEIVED a personal attack in a factual statement meant to help them, became belligerent. It was that person, I suspect, who would write on my student evaluation that I was set in my ways and disrespectful. I got one of those every three or four semesters. Meanwhile, my Dean noted that I had a great proportion of students who said I listened to them and responded honestly and respectfully. I see in many responses here the person who misperceives, is unnecessarily offended, and offends in their reaction.

There is the usual variety of people here. Some are quite interested in realistic evaluation of their photos, whether complimenting (the why of the compliment is important to me, so they can focus on strengths) or seeing a problem. Others are quite narrow in experience and/or talent, but sure that their way applies to all. The latter I do try to open up, as I always have in such situations--for the good of all, I might add. Most are too set, becoming hostile or defensive. I learn from and hope to help some here. Others, when it becomes apparent they are not willing to hear anything but praise or chit chat, I leave alone, unless they promulgate something objectively wrong (lenses don't disport perspective being one). Then, for the sake of truth as I see it (and I offer proof for my statements) and for the good of beginning photographers, I will write something. It sometimes brings on hostility rather than either facts to disprove the point or explicit reference in the thread to where it was me who introduced hostility.

I intend to continue to learn and give, for that is a joy. When confronted with an opinionated and wrong poster, I will respond as appropriate, nothing if harmless, with facts that enlarge or disprove the false opinion if appropriate.

Perhaps we can all accept each other, and each other's quirks.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

I appreciate your motives and intentions as a teacher. Hopefully your acknowledgement of Graham's preferences (wanting no interference of any kind to any of his images) is extended to everybody else who shares that preference. Hopefully you don't see those people as being in the wrong for having such a preference, and you see that preference as something they're entitled to have. That would address my main concern as stated earlier.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Hopefully you appreciate that there are many who have that preference (wanting no interference of any kind to any of their images) who don't express it openly in their signature area or in their posts. What that means is that every time you post your alterations without asking for or receiving permission, you risk causing annoyance and offence. I hope you're not indifferent to that possibility.

Drbobcameraguy Loc: Eaton Ohio

I have wasted the time to read the entire arguement and responses. As a relatively new member of uhh I say waste of space and server power. No one should mark on anyone's post without permission period. Simple as that. Respect for the poster. Simple as that. No arguement over the English language. Not the place for it. I personally see an educated idiot arguing about nothing. Bet a dollar leaning towards the left side of the boat. I say this because in my lengthy time on this earth those leaning towards the right side of the boat would apologize and that would be the end. My opinion that means nothing. Just like the last 6 pages of nothing. 😂

luvmypets Loc: Born & raised Texan living in Fayetteville NC

I realize this post is 11 days old but it has been brought to my attention and after reading some of the comments I wanted to add my thoughts.

When studying a photo/painting/work of art our minds seek what appeals to us whether it is texture, color, composition, etc. Our brains seek order from chaos and will search for those things that present as calming. I am not saying this photo is chaotic in the normal sense of the word only that our minds perceive that a scene needs to be analyzed based on the criteria that each of us deems as pleasing.

I am strongly attracted to compositional elements. Photos that contain foreground, middle ground, background which in this photo follows as the boy then statue then the girl are most pleasing to me. The second element I search for is leading lines and in this photo is a diagonal that flows from the right arm of the boy to the left of the statue then to the left side of the girl although to be in perfect line she should be a about a half stride closer but since this is a moment in time and not a posed photo this will serve as close enough. The black and white conversion was the best selection for this photo since the colors pull the eye away from the interaction between the boy and the statue.

A suggestion was made to crop out the girl because she wasn't relevant to the scene and though she is not a participant in the relationship between the boy and statue she is relevant in terms of balance. Again, the mind seeks order from chaos and to the mind an uneven number represents order and balance. If the photo were cropped to a more intimate scene of just the boy and statue it would change the story, the perspective and the compositional elements. It isn't wrong but gives less context to the scene of where Graham was and what was going on around him.

If asked: "Would you purchase this photo?" my answer would be no because it is not my preferred genre. If asked if I find it interesting my answer would be yes. I like the interaction between the boy and statue and find it compositionally pleasing. JUST MY OPINION

Dodie

As a post script I would like to say that I don't have an art degree only the lessons learned from my artist mother, the lessons of art though school and my own research to improve my photography. Technical flaws of art were pointed out but as I am the viewer, I find these points of illustration irrelevant to what I find appealing. If I were purchasing this photo for thousands of dollars and it was six feet long I would be more inclined to want the aberrations corrected if possible. AGAIN, JUST MY OPINION