The truth might hurt, but it will help to improve (Page 2): I never ask for critique. I like what I do and how I do it. I am my worst critic and am always striving to do better than...

duane klipping Loc: Bristow iowa

I never ask for critique. I like what I do and how I do it. I am my worst critic and am always striving to do better than the last time. There is really nothing that can help in a forum setting to ask for critiques from strangers you don't know.

The best thing is to do your own thing. Study online when ever possible and above all practice every chance you get.

As far as you saying pics had no business being posted is the very point I was making. One man's opinion.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

GoldwingerTX wrote:

Is this a spelling site or a Main Photography Discussion site?

Too meny, simply don't know, and can't see anee difereance(LoL)!!!
SS

YeloCab1

Like I said, the stock art website is really strict on the quality of their pictures. It would be a good way to evaluate how your pictures are and also you could make a few dollars in the process. I'm on Adobe stock and there are others too

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

duane klipping wrote:

I never ask for critique. I like what I do and how I do it. I am my worst critic and am always striving to do better than the last time. There is really nothing that can help in a forum setting to ask for critiques from strangers you don't know.

The best thing is to do your own thing. Study online when ever possible and above all practice every chance you get.

As far as you saying pics had no business being posted is the very point I was making. One man's opinion.

Duane, nothing wrong with asking for critique/opinions here.
BUT, one has to become aware of WHO is giving WHAT. It only takes a short time here to figure that out.
If anybody ever gives me an opinion on anything, the first thing I DO, is go to their history and look at EVERY pic they have posted. That tells me VERY quickly WHO is QUALIFIED, AND WHO IS NOT!
The truth is, most are not qualified to give a critique, but anybody can give you an opinion. It's up to you to decide if that individual has anything to offer.
But true, a, "great pic", comment doesn't help anybody except those that just want to hear it, but for those, I guess that helped!!! LoL
SS

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

C M - sometimes it just takes fresh eyes, too, to see something you didn't see before. You have a bit of sensor dust in the hummingbird pictures. Look for the dark circle under the wing in first image. You see it again in the third image where it's just a bit darker. You can't see it in the thumbnails, but if you open the image from the download, it's more visible.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

GoldwingerTX wrote:

I post very few photos on UHH. br I ask for (All C... (show quote)

I'm afraid these words of yours sound rather judgmental. I assume you read the verbiage that went with each image, and judged them based on the photographer's intentions - there might be a reason for how the cropping was done, for example.

On Saturday I will post a picture that I took exactly 50 years ago as of that date. As a college student, the camera I had was an Instamatic 100; although people here are fond of saying "It is the photographer, not the camera", I have discovered from past posts that a box camera image is judged using the same standards of sharpness applied to a 2017 digital camera. I view the world as a documentarian, and sometimes the event is paramount.

Drip Dry McFleye

Yes, I too have noticed that a lot of images with obvious flaws get unwarranted compliments but I like to think that those giving those compliments are just trying to encourage rather than discourage. When I see seriously flawed images posted in the gallery I try to keep in mind that a person might have issues that limit their ability to make a really good image and is just doing the best they can. I'm thinking about things like vision or health issues. I wouldn't want to be the one who tells that person they shouldn't be posting. Lastly, I don't really feel qualified to judge the work of others in any meaningful way.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Drip Dry McFleye wrote:

Yes, I too have noticed that a lot of images with ... (show quote)

I wish that were true, but most of the unwarranted superlatives come from members of this forum who don't seem to understand the basic concepts that might make one photo superior to another. I think many here compliment poorly composed and poorly exposed images because of lack of experience, lack of knowledge, lack of skill, or all three. They simply can't distinguish the very good from the not so good.

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

Was this post tongue and cheek? Couldn't tell. The submitted picture that was "excepted" was worse than nothing; a garbage shot with distracting elements in the background. How does this show "strict standards"?

YeloCab1 wrote:

Start submitting pictures in the stock art website and you'll find out quick which pictures qualify and which dont. They are really strict with their standards. This picture was just accepted this morning

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

CamB wrote:

Was this post tongue and cheek? Couldn't tell. The submitted picture that was "excepted" was worse than nothing; a garbage shot with distracting elements in the background. How does this show "strict standards"?

I agree the image in question was far from my idea of a good stock photo but useful criticism can be more constructive than your response and need not be so nasty. Your anger almost seemed personal.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

GoldwingerTX wrote:

Is this a spelling site or a Main Photography Discussion site?

The problem is that poor use of English can cause people to misunderstand what is meant. There is no reason to be sloppy in use of English, just as there is no reason to be sloppy in photography.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

CamB wrote:

Was this post tongue and cheek? Couldn't tell. The submitted picture that was "excepted" was worse than nothing; a garbage shot with distracting elements in the background. How does this show "strict standards"?

YeloCab1 said "accepted" and you said "excepted". What was the purpose for this change in words??

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

Not everyone likes or wants criticism. Many people won't benefit from it. People like different things. People who praise a pic usually do like it. People who say nothing usually don't have an opinion to offer or don't feel comfortable offering criticism unless it's specifically asked for.

YeloCab1

Call it what you want but it was accepted by the Adobe stock crew and there are lots of pictures I submit that arent. I'm still trying myself to figure out exactly what they are looking for but this one was one of the ones they are looking for or they wouldn't have accepted it

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

Didn't mean to be nasty. I admit it did come out that way. Sorry to all. I didn't see any point to the picture and didn't understand the post. Sort of a double whammy of not getting it.

mwsilvers wrote:

I agree the image in question was far from my idea of a good stock photo but useful criticism can be more constructive than your response and need not be so nasty. Your anger almost seemed personal.