Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Tom Hicks
Username   Password

FM Forum Rules
Macro World Resource
  

FM Forums | Macro World | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       6       7       end
  

We can do better.
  
 
John Koerner
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #1 · p.5 #1 · We can do better.


e6filmuser wrote:
Jack,
I think your images are superb. The choice of soft textures and pastel colours works very well and even I can appreciate the creative element. I think at least some of them would qualify as "Fine Art" in the print world, although I am in no way qualified to judge.


Thank you very much Harold, I appreciate that.



e6filmuser wrote:
You are very keen on concave diffusers. This reminds me that I have an Olympus legacy T8 gun which has a diffuser the size of a dinner plate. It is cumbersome to use but I have been more concerned with its low guide number when I use ISO 100 film. With a bit more flexibility with the lower ISOs of digital, I must dig it out and perhaps try it on lenses where there is a suitable filter thread.
http://www.alanwood.net/photography/olympus/t8-ring-flash.html
Harold


Fascinating! Thank you for the link and tip!

Always glad to learn something new

Cheers,



Sep 13, 2013 at 12:58 PM
Dalantech
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #2 · p.5 #2 · We can do better.


John Koerner wrote:
...one very well known bee photographer actually does use a tripod for his work (which is exceptional), because he does not bother "chasing" them anymore.

Rather, what he does is select the best flower, sets his tripod up and composes his optimal shot in relation to that flower, and then just "waits."


Sounds too much like fishing for me

John Koerner wrote:
...Most people are afraid of spiders, and so I try to set them up in a beautiful, almost artsy way ... so as to take the "fear factor" out of spiders and (perhaps) have them perceived as something beautiful. Don't know how successful I am at that, lol, but that is what I am trying for


It's tough, but I think you're doing a good job of it by not going for the "in your face" composition.

One of the things I'm trying to do is bring out the personality in the critters that I shoot, whether they have a personality or not is irrelevant, what matter is if I can lend a sense or personality with my images. I want the viewer to be able to connect to the subject, and think of them as more than "just bugs".



Sep 13, 2013 at 07:56 PM
bladesofgrass
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #3 · p.5 #3 · We can do better.


Tom added some nice examples of images to get people's creativity going. The vast majority of my photos are flops but at least I am usually experimenting and trying something and having fun in the process. Also the one's where artistry is involved are the photos that I am more invested in and generally prefer to standard, technically 'good' shots. Here's my contribution:

Use of only flashlight and overly green tones to portray something a little more sinister, ties in with on black:



I've always liked the effect created by the aperture ring when done properly so as to create an effect like stars or a discoball:







High key photography where sections of the photo are purposefully blown out or detail is minimized in the interests of artistry:



Silhouettes are a favourite technique of mine, minimizes detail but can still be fascinating:





Purposefully small dof to paint the background in more pastels and smooth tones rather than half in and out of focus:



Bark under UV light. Normally just a uniform brown with some white patches suddenly lights up:



UV lights are cheap and can be a lot of fun. At the very least they help you think about your environment from a slightly different perspective which is what art's about, right?

Cheers,
Paul



Sep 14, 2013 at 09:35 AM
e6filmuser
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #4 · p.5 #4 · We can do better.


I just want to say that, inspired by this discussion, this morning I made a big step forward in my control of flash lighting.

I was calibrating a new lens combination* against my legacy flash for potential field use. I was surprised by how contrasty the images were, with the highlights burned out. This was with a diffuser on, which gives good results for insects in habitat. The subject was a rather pale flower but that was no excuse.

Did I need a second gun to give more even cover. Alternatively, should I go down the track of a soft box?

To cut a long story (all being documented) short, I found, in the household recycling, an everyday item which even had a handle on it (aren't I a tease? ). The flash was placed on the hotshoe ( I had tried it on a bracket with the diffuser, to light from the side, with no major improvement). I then placed the "softbox" firmly up against the front of the flash and shot some images. There was some fiddling with flash settings and ISOs, etc but the final, very useful setting was fully manual at half power, camera ISO 100.

I was amazed at how well this worked, better than twin flash would have been.

I now have to make a less bulky, hopefully hands-free version but I will definitely add this to my flash kit.

This was with a field of view 20mm wide (m4/3) at f16 and ISO 100, leaving me scope for more power or higher ISO at higher magnifications.

* Schneider-Kreuznach Apo-Componon HM 2.8/4.0 (48mm from the sensor) behind a Raynox MSN-202

Harold



Sep 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM
danski0224
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #5 · p.5 #5 · We can do better.


I considered posting up some images, but in order to do that directly, I have to become a paid member of "upload and sell".

I don't have a flickr account, and really have no interest in starting one. That approach sucks for the forum once the image links become inactive, leaving white boxes with red X's inside or "file not found" messages.

I could do image links, but a prior poster that did that was poo-pooed for that action. Then, if I modify my Dropbox, those links become useless.

So, maybe one reason why there is reduced participation is the resistance to the paid membership for images. I can agree with paid membership to sell something though.



Sep 18, 2013 at 02:43 PM
kwoodard
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #6 · p.5 #6 · We can do better.


danski0224 wrote:
I considered posting up some images, but in order to do that directly, I have to become a paid member of "upload and sell".

I don't have a flickr account, and really have no interest in starting one. That approach sucks for the forum once the image links become inactive, leaving white boxes with red X's inside or "file not found" messages.

I could do image links, but a prior poster that did that was poo-pooed for that action. Then, if I modify my Dropbox, those links become useless.

So, maybe one reason why there is reduced participation is the resistance to the
...Show more
With Flickr giving so much more space for pics, it really isn't an issue unless you clean out your feed allot.



Sep 18, 2013 at 04:38 PM
kzoockof
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #7 · p.5 #7 · We can do better.


For what its worth, the image of the bug (mosquito) in silhouette is the best image in terms of visual impact (for me). To me, this image really exemplifies what I love about photos of insects - that being the machine like, almost perfect design of these living creatures. Something that is lost when photographing people that are covered with clothes, flesh and softened lines of the human body's muscular and skin systems.

By silhouetting the insect, this takes your image really to the next level in my mind. I find it both artistic, somewhat eerie, and powerful all at the same time.

I think this is a great image and the idea of using the silhouette approach is a nice idea.



Sep 24, 2013 at 07:53 PM
psharvic
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #8 · p.5 #8 · We can do better.


Tom, this a great discussion. I'm relatively new to posting on FM and have been mainly in N/W and landscape, but my macro lens actually gets the most use. I've posted before, there are big differences among forums, i.e., serious C/C vs. feel good. I'm figuring this out and know what to expect. I'm probably guilty of the "feel good", too, but I do add C/C when I think I can contribute. Myself, I really want comments that help me improve and, indeed, I have gotten some good ideas. The talent on FM is fantastic. I do agree with your initial thought, however, art, not documentation.


Sep 25, 2013 at 11:37 PM
e6filmuser
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #9 · p.5 #9 · We can do better.


This seems to have gone quiet. Perhaps I can stimulate further discussion.

Tom Hicks wrote:
It's been almost 11 years since I got the macro forum started


And it is still called a "macro" forum. However (here come the semantics, but important ones) although there is no fixed definition of "macro", it is generally accepted to be life size (1:1) and larger in the frame, on the sensor/film. With respect, Tom, some of your excellent images posted in this topic would not qualify, under such a definition, and would be classed as close-ups. I have no problem with close-ups and shoot a lot of them and they offer more scope for, lets us call it creativity, well, composition anyway. So, was the forum intended for close-ups and macro?

Tom Hicks wrote:
It saddens me that most of what I see are excellent ID shots
.

(Here come more semantics!). From an entomologist's point of view, I would point out that the features which need to be seen for recognition are not necessarily the most photogenic and, thus, are often not shown. Of course, many photographers take good (aesthetic) pictures of insects without knowing the entomologists' needs.

Harold



Sep 30, 2013 at 09:48 PM
Tom Hicks
Offline
• • • • • • •
Moderator
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #10 · p.5 #10 · We can do better.


Harold , semantics are fine . to answer your ? Have you ever seen a close-up forum . Yes macro is generally 1to 1 and Micro is generally anything around 10to1 and over.

This is also not an entomologist site or a bug id site .

Now to simplify , I have always said that anything goes on this forum. from close-ups to Micro I don't care . What I do care about is for all to be the best you can be .

We loose more new shooter from them getting bored with what's being posted on the forums than from me pissing some off and leaving. How many times have you seen post come up on the forum asking ( are bugs all you post ) what about jewelry shots and other none bug stuff . I never go to the nature forum anymore because I'm sick and tired of looking at Eagles and Humming birds. The shots are some of the best, but they get very old . Hell, post a sparrow or something.

Again I digress, diversity,diversity, diversity, Mix it up , subject, composition, lighting , perspective , Heck us a point and shoot camera and try to squeeze out all you can from it . Use your mobil phone and magnifying glass from the dollar store , Just think out of the box . Oh and Harold this is not directed AT you . I hope your skin is thicker than most. I'm only 55 can you imagine what the post will be like when I'm really old and crotchety.



Sep 30, 2013 at 10:30 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



e6filmuser
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #11 · p.5 #11 · We can do better.


Tom Hicks wrote:
Harold , semantics are fine . to answer your ? Have you ever seen a close-up forum .


Not exclusively but inclusively:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/index.php?sid=06fe5136b11fbb82f3dfc8b66a50dc4c

Tom Hicks wrote:
This is also not an entomologist site or a bug id site .


I don't think anyone thinks it is. The point I am making is that many of the images would not be suitable, as single images, for such a site. They usually merit more than "record shot" but I am a bit stuck for a suitable descriptor at the moment. That said, authors often ask for their subjects to be identified on the basis of images unsuitable for that purpose. I don't have a problem with that, it being a fact of life.

Tom Hicks wrote:


Oh and Harold this is not directed AT you . I hope your skin is thicker than most. I'm only 55 can you imagine what the post will be like when I'm really old and crotchety.


I don't take it personally. My skin gets thicker each year. I am 68 and have always been a grump!

Harold



Oct 01, 2013 at 06:27 AM
John Koerner
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #12 · p.5 #12 · We can do better.


Tom Hicks wrote:
Harold , semantics are fine . to answer your ? Have you ever seen a close-up forum . Yes macro is generally 1to 1 and Micro is generally anything around 10to1 and over.
This is also not an entomologist site or a bug id site .
Now to simplify , I have always said that anything goes on this forum. from close-ups to Micro I don't care . What I do care about is for all to be the best you can be .
We loose more new shooter from them getting bored with what's being posted on the
...Show more

Curious as to why you care so much about what others do? Sometimes there is a fine line between a coach "encouraging diversity" and a man suffering from a boundary disorder where he becomes displeased at another man's choices which differ from his own ...

What if somebody's primary interest is photographing bugs? Or spiders? Or snowflakes? Or flowers? Or butterflies? Or jewelry? And what if that person really isn't interested in photographing anything else?

It is great to want people to be "the best they can be," but it is also great just to let people BE and make their own choices in life. It is best to lead by example, and let others make the choice to emulate your work (or not), rather than to insist that they do ... and, especially, to become angry if they don't.

One could also make the argument that, in order to become "the best" at something, this generally requires specialization. In other words, Jacks of All Trades are generally Masters at NONE. The best landscape shooters generally don't also do commercial portraiture, and the best wedding photographers aren't also "on location" for National Geographic in remote jungles. Ultimately, the very best tend to dovetail their focus and really concentrate upon their strongest aptitudes, which is generally where their greatest interest lies.

True, there can be diversity within a tight discipline. I primarily photograph spiders, but I don't always photograph the same species, and I also like to photograph other creatures besides spiders (as well as flowers, etc.). Still, if I choose to photograph only one species of spider, that would still be my choice to make ... and for any person to become angry or impatient about what I decide to do with my time and efforts could be viewed as slightly demented.

Jack



Oct 01, 2013 at 02:16 PM
Tom Hicks
Offline
• • • • • • •
Moderator
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #13 · p.5 #13 · We can do better.


John in everyones life , if you were lucky there was someone who cared or you would probable be one of the 8000 plus students who drop out of school EVERY day. This might not be so high if more of our school teacher really cared. Like most of the people that post




on all the forums they are already set in their ways and really don't listen to anybody anyway . I'm caring for the few that are willing to learn as many aspects of macro photograph as possible so they will be a better all rounded photographer . When you take a hike in the wood for a few days , should you not be prepared for what every might come your way for you own protection . One does not ,( if they are smart ) only learn to start a fire with a bic lighter , or matches , he should also learn to observe the insects , or the simple smoke plum from the fire to be able to tell if he or she is under a high or low weather pressure situation .

John I'm well aware that people specialize, as do I; Robbers, spiders and dragons. At the same time, I want to be able to capture my quarry with any and all my tools , I assure you there are macro shooters on this site that still don't know they can get to 1to1 or above by simple reversing their 50mm or 28mm lens that they might have with them in the field, heaven for bid if they damage there reg macro lens.

John, Or is it Jack ? I don't have problem with people just posting bugs , that's all I post , I also know that when John post, it's more than likely going to be a bee , or Brian it a good chance of being some sort of Hover fly . I also understand we tend to shoot what we have access to. For some its small butterflies or Jumpers , or dragons , or weevils .

I'm not angry, I'm the happiest SOB you would every want to meet, the fewFMers that post here that are personal friends will tell you that. I may be slightly demented though. John or Jack I'm glad you are posting and you really do have some good work here as I have indicated before. I hope you continue to inspire us all with you post . I have enjoyed our time together , feel free to post what ever you want.

Tom , the one who cares.



Oct 01, 2013 at 07:34 PM
John Koerner
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #14 · p.5 #14 · We can do better.


Tom Hicks wrote:
John in everyones life , if you were lucky there was someone who cared or you probably would probable be one of the 8000 plus students who drop out of school EVERY day. This might not be so high if more of our school teacher really cared.


My own belief is that do-ers are proactive and learn & grow on their own; they do not need to be exhorted or "told" to do something. For this reason, again, I feel that "leading by example" is the best way to encourage creativity.

As I have tried to learn, those photographers whose work I have admired I have taken it upon myself to emulate, and those whose work didn't do anything for me, I tended to ignore. Others pursue genres of work I may admire, but choose not to get into.



Tom Hicks wrote:
Like most of the people that post on all the forums they are already set in their ways and really don't listen to anybody anyway .


Exactly right. And they especially don't listen if you insult them.



Tom Hicks wrote:
I'm caring for the few that are willing to learn as many aspects of macro photograph as possible so they will be a better all rounded photographer. When you take a hike in the wood for a few days , should you not be prepared for what every might come your way for you own protection . One does not ,( if they are smart ) only learn to start a fire with a bic lighter , or matches , he should also learn to observe the insects , or the simple smoke plum and from the fire to
...Show more

Again, getting into what people "should" or "should not" do with their own time, effort, and situation starts to sound more like a boundary disorder than actual good advice.

Every time I go into the woods, the only extra equipment I bring is a Glock .40cal, and water. I miss thousands of "bird shooting" opportunities every time I go, because (while I like bird photography as an admirer) I don't personally care about shooting birds myself. So if some other guy is doing backflips, and losing sleep over my choices and "missed opportunities," that is his problem, not mine. I could care less and sleep like a baby

Finally, I walk passed hundreds of "macro opportunities" every time I go out also. (Would the pattern on this leaf look good? Should I shoot this butterfly? Or how about this flower?) Again, I could take a day's worth of shots in a 100-sq-ft. area of the Florida wilderness, if I were so inclined, but I am not. I also miss a lot of shots by having my 180mm on a tripod, and not my 100mm f/2.8L IS in-hand, but I don't care about this either. The 60 shots I do get on my tripod and 180mm generally trump every single shot I'd get hand-holding, and so I am cool with those "missed moments." For every bug or spider I miss, there's another one around the corner to get

And, regarding "high or low pressure situations," that has never really been a thought in my head, except when looking for the Eastern Spadefoot Toad ...

Ultimately, we as macro photographers have to be as prepared as it is reasonable to be, relative to our main interests, and be comfortable in accepting the fact there will always be missed moments, rather than being fanatical about being prepared to "get everything possible" to the point we're no longer enjoying ourselves.



Tom Hicks wrote:
John I'm well aware that people specialize, as do I; Robbers, spiders and dragons. At the same time, I want to be able to capture my quarry with any and all my tools , I assure you there are macro shooters on this site that still don't know they can get to 1 to1 or above by simple reversing their 50mm or 28mm lens that they might have with them in the field, heaven for bid if they damage there reg macro lens.


See above response ...

And to that I add, you're confusing what you want to be able to do with what "other people" might be interested in doing. I personally don't care if "other people" want to go above 1:1 or not (or if they know how to get there). It has no bearing on me, what I am doing, or my photography.

I am 100% confident that (like myself) those people who do want to learn these things will ask those photographers (whom they admire), "How do you do this?," or will read their blogs/articles, explaining these things, etc., without my (or your) having to "admonish them" to do so. In the end, people will only do what they're inclined (or inspired) to do, not what they're "admonished" to do ...



Tom Hicks wrote:
John, Or is it Jack ? I don't have problem with people just posting bugs , that's all I post , I also know that when John post, it's more than likely going to be a bee , or Brian it a good chance of being some sort of Hover fly . I also understand we tend to shoot what we have access to. For some its small butterflies or Jumpers , or dragons , or weevils .


Speaking of school, and education, I thought everyone knew that "Jack" is a nickname for John ... but I guess not ... so I will spell it out for you: my legal name is John, but I go by Jack, kinda like former U.S. President "Jack" Kennedy

Moving on, we're coming close to the whole point now: people shoot what they have access to and/or what interests them. So, again, admonishing them to be more creative won't be as productive as simply showing them your own greater creativity. Those who like your work will be inspired to try similar ideas, while those who don't, won't.



Tom Hicks wrote:
I'm not angry, I'm the happiest SOB you would every want to meet, the fews FMers that post here that are personal friends will tell you that. I may slightly demented though.


After again reading all of these posts you've made, from beginning to end, my observation is that you have gone from sad to angry, but I have never seen any "happiness" expressed here by you (yet). Which is a shame, because we're all supposed to be enjoying our own hobby as photographers, not worrying about what other people do



Tom Hicks wrote:
John or Jack I'm glad you are posting and you really do have some good work here as I have indicated before. I hope you continue to inspire us all with you post.


It's Jack and thank you for the compliment--as well as for underscoring my point: our photos should inspire others ... our "words" need not admonish them. Again, if people like my photos, they can ask me questions about what I did (or follow my blog), etc. If they don't like my photos, then nothing I can say will make them change a thing about what they're doing.

The only people who "upped my game" as a photographer were those whose work I admired, and so I took it upon myself to study what they did and how they did it. My photography was never influenced by anyone whose work I didn't like "admonishing me" to do better



Tom Hicks wrote:
I have enjoyed our time together , feel free to post what ever you want.
Tom , the one who cares.


Thanks, Tom, I have enjoyed our time also ... and I also enjoyed several of your own posted photos. We actually have quite similar interests, and also seem to prefer natural light shots with a 180mm lens. Many of your creative compositions in your photos made me consider some creative compositions of my own. Your photos, Tom, not your words.

For, more than anybody, as photographers, we all must remember that, "A picture's worth a thousand words ..."

Take care,

Jack



Oct 04, 2013 at 02:48 PM
michael kilner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #15 · p.5 #15 · We can do better.


Excellent points Jack.I have read the majority of this topic but not participated mainly because I was quite appalled at how it started off.Unfortunately I like high mag,high detail shots and this was one of the things that attracted me to this forum.To see some of the incredible detail of the subjects that you dont normally see with the naked eye I thought was amazing.Again well said and points well made,Im sure a lot of people will agree with you.The unfortunate thing about the veiled insults and criticism of style and technique is that one of the best shooters,most prolific posters and most helpful bloke to newcomers has now left the forum


Oct 05, 2013 at 05:46 PM
12monkeys
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #16 · p.5 #16 · We can do better.


John Koerner wrote:
A picture's worth a thousand words


We have flickr for that. IMO, if you choose to post on a discussion forum rather than an image gallery, it's because you want to discuss the images that you've taken and are happy to listen to constructive criticism. I can quite understand a moderator reaching boiling point when, over a period of years, nearly every post is followed by the same 10 people offering the same 10 variations of "nice pics".

There's a very good French-speaking forum (beneluxnaturephoto) on which you're getting critiqued whether you like it or not, and on which standards are generally excellent. There's also more of a focus on artistic rather than documentary shots as it's seen as a photography forum, not an entomologists' forum.

Sure, people should be able to shoot whatever they want. The problem as I see it is that for a long time, some of the photographers with the loudest voices but not necessarily the most ability have been pushing their own style of photography and that becomes the accepted norm. I think this is a particular problem at a post-processing level where hideously over-saturated, over-contrasted photos are now fairly standard.

Could Tom have been more diplomatic, sure. I could too. I don't have firm beliefs about what macrophotography should be. If everyone had been zigging for so long instead of zagging, I'd now be zagging instead of zigging. It's just a question of redressing the balance.



Oct 05, 2013 at 06:20 PM
John Koerner
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #17 · p.5 #17 · We can do better.


michael kilner wrote:
Excellent points Jack.I have read the majority of this topic but not participated mainly because I was quite appalled at how it started off.Unfortunately I like high mag,high detail shots and this was one of the things that attracted me to this forum.To see some of the incredible detail of the subjects that you dont normally see with the naked eye I thought was amazing.Again well said and points well made,Im sure a lot of people will agree with you.The unfortunate thing about the veiled insults and criticism of style and technique is that one of the best shooters,most
...Show more

Exactly. There is a difference between encouraging better technique, through example, than telling people that they're "not creative enough."

Also, not everyone is trying to be an "artist."

Some people just like small critters, and want to take clear photos of them with macro equipment, so they can share them with other "bug" enthusiasts.

Again, the more artistic types will gravitate toward those kinds of photographers, and "bug photo sharers" will gravitate toward each other also. Neither needs to be "admonished" into changing their style, while all can benefit from constructive suggestion from their peers, especially through example.

Jack



Oct 05, 2013 at 06:40 PM
John Koerner
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #18 · p.5 #18 · We can do better.


12monkeys wrote:
We have flickr for that. IMO, if you choose to post on a discussion forum rather than an image gallery, it's because you want to discuss the images that you've taken and are happy to listen to constructive criticism. I can quite understand a moderator reaching boiling point when, over a period of years, nearly every post is followed by the same 10 people offering the same 10 variations of "nice pics".


You completely miss the point of my post.

My opening response to Tom (a couple pages back) was that I myself welcome constructive suggestion. Getting 40 "Lovely photos" as a response gets a bit insipid after awhile.

I agree, getting honest, competent, third-party observations on color, light, composition, etc. about individual photos is what I prefer, especially if they're compliments (lol), but truly especially if they make me consider things I have not before.

However, blanket statements that, "You all suck and aren't being creative," aren't very helpful. The point of my message is that posting photos as examples of how to improve, rather than belly-aching in general, is more effective (and more positive) IMO. Tom did that in one post on a page or so back, and that was great, and really all that needs to be done.



12monkeys wrote:
There's a very good French-speaking forum (beneluxnaturephoto) on which you're getting critiqued whether you like it or not, and on which standards are generally excellent. There's also more of a focus on artistic rather than documentary shots as it's seen as a photography forum, not an entomologists' forum.


There should always be a place for both.



12monkeys wrote:
Sure, people should be able to shoot whatever they want. The problem as I see it is that for a long time, some of the photographers with the loudest voices but not necessarily the most ability have been pushing their own style of photography and that becomes the accepted norm. I think this is a particular problem at a post-processing level where hideously over-saturated, over-contrasted photos are now fairly standard.
Could Tom have been more diplomatic, sure. I could too. I don't have firm beliefs about what macrophotography should be. If everyone had been zigging for so long instead of zagging,
...Show more

Photographers will always continue to shoot what they want, and if "more people" choose one style of photography over another, that is only because said style appeals to more people.

The hilarious thing is, if everyone is "equally-diverse," are they not (in some sense) therefore "the same"?

The very fact that some people keep doing the same thing, while others have a lot of diversity, is it's own form of diversity, is it not?

I think anyone who posts photos should get either the honest criticism, or the honest "nice photo," that their picture inspires out of the viewer who's looking at it ... or even a whole paragraph ... if that's the reaction of the viewer.

I always appreciate any kind of indepth response, be it praise or constructive suggestion.

Jack



Oct 05, 2013 at 06:52 PM
12monkeys
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #19 · p.5 #19 · We can do better.


Jack, I don't disagree that pictures can be valuable in purveying a message, which is why after I first commented on this thread I decided to post some pictures for the first time in about a year. I felt uncomfortable posting because it made me look egotistical and I'm really not. Maybe someone liked them and took inspiration, maybe not.

I just don't think Tom was wrong to have his say as he did and I don't think posting a few photos in itself would have given the forum the jolt it needed.

A lot of other things could be done to improve this place including some themed competitions (see benelux forum above) and, I think importantly, some more discussion threads.

I posted a question on here a couple of years ago asking what paper people used for printing. I didn't get a single reply. That's ok but it does leave me with the impression that the ultimate goal in many cases is just to get a few "nice pic" comments and leave it at that.



Oct 05, 2013 at 07:31 PM
John Koerner
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #20 · p.5 #20 · We can do better.


12monkeys wrote:
Jack, I don't disagree that pictures can be valuable in purveying a message, which is why after I first commented on this thread I decided to post some pictures for the first time in about a year. I felt uncomfortable posting because it made me look egotistical and I'm really not. Maybe someone liked them and took inspiration, maybe not.

I just don't think Tom was wrong to have his say as he did and I don't think posting a few photos in itself would have given the forum the jolt it needed.

A lot of other things could be done
...Show more


Good post.



Oct 05, 2013 at 08:06 PM
1       2       3       4      
5
       6       7       end




FM Forums | Macro World | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       6       7       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password