winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Never, christofras, I saw you take a step up and simply responded to a show of sense from you.

Don't spoil it......

Nightski

We are talking about two things.

1) Featured Photographer: I have one already. He is listed at the top of the PC&A Section. I sent him an interview, and asked that he occasionally come to the PC&A Section and critique some of the images. I would like a longer list of Featured Photographers who have been involved in competition and done formal critique. Their purpose is to set an example for proper critique, and be available to answer questions we may have in their field of expertise. I do pm CaptainC once in a while when I see something that I think is right up his alley. It's important to have several people like this so that we have more input from people that have experience in Critique. I have asked others, but they feel they either don't have the time, or they feel they are not qualified, or they don't want to get involved in the controversy that has surrounded the section. I would be open to suggestions on who to ask next.

Competitions Judged by a Qualified Panel - If we ever manage to run competitions, I would want a panel of judges for that. Or maybe rotating panels. People are only willing to put so much time into this. But, first things first. The section has a bit of growing to do before I ever get into that. If we do get to that point, I would definitely need a solid group of people that would help me put such a thing together. I know I can't make all these decisions on my own. I am merely doing the grunt work to shape it and make it grow.

I am unclear about what list you are talking about Chris. I will answer you if you explain.

jgordon Loc: Boulder CO

I am not holding my breath about having competitions. In fact, I have very mixed feelings about competitions in art altogether. Different art pieces appeal to different folks. I rather like the model better that has us all, as photographers on various levels, trying to help each other out by providing honest feedback. I think it is a wonderful idea if very accomplished folks are in the mix because that will make the process richer and more useful.

And, on another subject: I think the criteria that are often listed and to which reference is frequently made need not be considered the holly grail. Particularly for those of us who are still nowhere near the top of the photographic game (although we strive to do better) I think that a simpler approach to criticism might generate more interesting responses.

Here is a simple four step process that can be used to think about images:

1. Does this image work overall and why? (Sometimes an image can work even if there are one or more technical deficiencies and sometimes a technically perfect image can have little emotional impact.)

2. What about this image is effective?

3. What about it doesn't work so well?

4. What might the photographer have done differently to make this image better or, in the alternative, what might this photographer do differently in the future to increase the chances of making a stronger image?

I think that a review that covers these basic points would be helpful to me as a reader and observer. And, I think that the process of evaluating a photo in these terms causes me to pay closer attention to the image I am critiquing. That way I learn from the process-- which in my case is the reason I spend time critiquing images.

If this shorter approach is used, all of the factors on the long list can be brought into play as they become relevant. But a discussion of each of them might not be all that interesting with reference to every single image.

And, of course, if we are all in the game to assist one another, crankiness or imperiousness becomes a waste of time. In fact, if we accept this objective, much of the discussion in this thread becomes obviously superfluous. However, sometimes folks like to crank at each other just for the entertainment value of it and that is a whole different can of worms.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

I don't go by the philosophy of giving people unlimited second chances.
There comes a time when someone has burnt the final bridge.
With me W/R passed that point long ago.
He has just been too nasty, for too long, to too many people.
He doesn't get the "benefit of the doubt" with me.
I have seen too many ulterior motives - including the first post in this thread.
I have seen too many mind games, and insinuations and point scoring and targeted bullying from him.

The only way for that bridge to be reopened is if it is rebuilt.
That takes a prolonged period of obviously improved behaviour.
Being faux nice for 5 minutes and then reverting back just doesn't cut it. Apparently it impresses some people but not me.

I am guessing that will never happen, as I am apparently, just an insignificant person who doesn't count, to him.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

I wonder, lighthouse, whether your "problem" with me doesn't stem simply from my telling things as they are, cutting to the bones of an issue or seeing things how or for what they actually are.

I don't expect approval, least of all from people obsessed with picking fault with me personally at every opportunity because that would be silly, but it is true that sometimes the truth hurts and some people simply can't handle it.

I detect from your last sentence that your significance to me is important to you and you have taken the first steps toward achieving that for which I thank you.

Regards, Rob.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

No Rob,
Don't try to twist what i have said.
What I have said is what I mean.
The ball is in your court.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

The solution is simple, you leave me alone and I leave you alone.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

No one tells all the truth all the time. No one has the time to do that. People select the truth the tell out off a limitless expanse of available truths. The ones you select to tell define you as a person. What do your choices say about you?

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

The solution is even simpler.
Become a nice person and stop intimidating, abusing and targeting people, stop calling people names, stop talking down to people like they are idiots and lower class, and stop trying to undermine the PC&A section.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

If people act lower class and/or in an idiotic fashion is it not simple good manners to treat them according to their own standards? I would have thought so.

I only mirror abuse with that little bit added on.

I know that you are concerned as to my welfare and being liked 'cause you monitor my every post.

I really didn't know you cared but it's nice that you do.

P.S. Please check with Nightski if she thinks I am trying to undermine the section.

Regards, Rob.

Clyde141

@Lighthouse - Every time the bickering stops and members start posting some reasonable ideas on this thread you and winterrose get into it again and we all have to wait for a pause or work around the two of you. Perhaps you have been unjustly accused on prior pages of this wreck of a thread. I don't care. This time you were the one who restarted the confrontation. Why don't you just SHUT UP.

So now you can send me a nastygram if that will make you feel better. And I hope winterrose does not feel he has to reinforce what I wrote here by sending another confrontational reply.

christofras Loc: Gold Coast Australia

Here! Here!......I'm trying to be a GOOD boy!

Nightski

Clyde, remember in the beginning of this thread… I said "Put Up or Shut Up!". Well, I apologized for being rude. Because saying "shut up" is rude. You were one of the people I apologized to. I know it's frustrating. Do you have any idea how many threads Winter has started trying to undermine the section that I have worked so hard at. He has never once said anything positive about the section. I think you should go back and read Winterroses threads before you make judgements. Lighthouse did try to get along with Winterrose. In fact he defended winterrose one time. Winterrose turned on him and blamed Lighthouse for getting suspended by Admin. Lighthouse has never been suspended. There are reasons for these things. People that act appropriately do not get suspended.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

For you to say "put up or shut up" implies that the person that is directed to must either provide remedy or keep himself to himself. The term "shut up" directed at a person means that everybody is sick of his uninvited interjection.

Nightski, you would be blind if you haven't seen that lighthouse is deliberately stalking my posts.

He is the instigator of these distractions in every case, just look at how he has caused this thread to ebb and flow.

Then the other trolls latch on as usual and before very long he is successful in his deliberate trolling.

If indeed lighthouse has defended me at any time it must have been either in private or exceedingly fleetingly because sorry, I must have missed it.

And don't you dare state that I am trying to undermine your section.

If that is what I was trying to do, you would know it, believe me.

I am not.

I sent you a PM about an hour ago.

Read it then apologize, privately if otherwise it would embarrass you, then retract your misleading and inflammatory statement.

Rob.

christofras Loc: Gold Coast Australia

Come on WR, Nightsky would be the first to apologise to anyone

If she though an apology was needed....She has already done that!....Just pull your pin head in and allow her to proceed!