Rongnongno Loc: FL

That is way to simplistic as an approach.

It is not about ego despite what folks say.
Everyone is basically has the same level of intelligence but not the experience or education.
I am not sure where 'will' stands.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Rongnongno Loc: FL

I do not understand why you associate this with ego (read another answer)
As to your self assessment being too harsh does not help you at all.

What I have seen from my own experience is that I am getting better. When I look at older images I regret a few things related to having learned more about one thing or another.

You are more than likely the same.

Just do not forget that we are our own harshest critic. It does not make it right.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

There are plenty of photographers who are bad and know it.

Anhanga Brasil Loc: Cabo Frio - Brazil

You are correct.

Tom DePuy Loc: Waxhaw, N.C.

here, here,

Stardust Loc: Central Illinois

Not true when one looks at a large portion of photos posted on UHH. Have to assume they are posting in public because they BELIEVE it is some of their best work when many are just snapshots that "good" photographers would have trashed. That is were "intelligence" comes in to play to know the difference, regardless of ones photographic ability or purpose for shooting.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

There is no such thing as a 'bad photographer' as long as he/she is personally pleased with the shot. Now, if you are talking about 'good' as meaning photography that geared to produce a commercial product then there are a set of arbitrary standards you must abide by and how well you conform to these standards determines if you are judged a good or bad photographer. JMHO

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

If you don't care for Ferdinand Leger, perhaps I can interest you in a nude portrait of Elvis reclining on a black velvet background. Now that's art!!

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Amen!

captivecookie Loc: Washington state

I think input, output issues can be at play here. A person takes a photo. They like it themselves. The feeling they get, an input of emotion , is rewarding to their psyche, so they are motivated to expand or repeat that reward. They post the picture on a place like UHH to share the feelings. Most people who comment are congratulatory whenever they comment, so the poster is again rewarded, and seeks to repeat the process with the next picture. The rare responder who seeks to give helpful advice does so, perhaps none too gently, and the poster is wary of the odd comment that doesn't match the others, so it becomes overwhelmed by the positive responses.

So to the original question, why do bad photographers think they're good, it's because we facilitate that outcome.

Unless, you know, I'm full of it and don't know what I'm talking about. That's always possible.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

I don't think it's just a question of an individuals misperception of their skills. But it does seem that a significant number of people who post on this site do not know the difference between a truly good photograph and truly mediocre one. And, in my opinion, it mostly comes down to a lack of understanding of the components of good composition and the development of techniques needed to guide the viewer into a photograph.

Many people seem to think that sharp, well exposed images makes for a good picture, but it's not just about exposure or sharpness. I see a multitude of well exposed and well sharpened images on this site every day that are not worth a second glance.

And worse than that, I see poorly composed, murky and fuzzy looking derivative images posted here and praised by others who seemingly also lack an understanding of the components of a good image. And I'm not referring to snaps of five-year-old grandkids playing their first soccer game on a Saturday afternoon, or the wife and kids standing in front of a lighthouse with 50 other people at noon on a bright sunny day in August.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Please put your thinking caps before agreeing to anything that reflects a blanket statement that in the ends means nothing other than a flat 'I do not care'.

That statement "I take photographs that that please me. I give no thought o whether I am a good or bad photographer. I give even less thought to what others think." can means quite a few different things:
I do not care because I am so good you peons can get lost
I do not care because I am in my comfort zone
I do not care because I am selfish
I do not care because some people hurt me (defensive mechanism)
I do not care because... Name your own poison.

So, what are you really agreeing to?

Rongnongno Loc: FL

This is not about what other people think of you but how you see yourself.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

That is the heart of the issue.