ksmahgrts
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
ContagiousIdea wrote:
Yeah I mainly posted it for the heck of it there, was curious of the response, but it's probably too long of a post for them.
i stopped visiting threads in the People forum when the overabundance of "if it's got boobs, it's awesome" became nauseating.
now back to the initial topic - terrific insights as always, evan.
i'm of the mindset that to be most successful, critique should be honest, specific, and be presented in a "1. here's what works for me and 2. here's what i'd like to see if you were to attempt this again..." format.
it's a good jumping off point. it allows the photographer to say, "here are the elements i appear to be doing well and should continue to explore, and here are the suggested areas of need where i might want to focus some energy." feedback in a forum is not a mandate. what the photographer chooses to do with the information is framed by his level of experience and also his ability to look objectively at his own work.
as for the 'consider the source' bit, i would argue that those who are truly self-aware and unconcerned with ego don't fret over the source of the criticism. looking at someone's credentials and body of work helps you to form a value judgment about their work, but doesn't necessarily make their criticism any more or less valid. if you've done your homework, are honest with yourself about your skill sets, and are committed to growth, you will take each new piece of criticism as an opportunity for reflection and not as a point of contention. does it apply to you? great. use it. no? read it. digest it. discuss it. move on. i always find it funny (and a bit sad) when someone offers up their work for evaluation and then feels the need to tear the respondents apart instead of just taking the criticism for what it's worth, asking clarification questions if needed, and choosing to apply the feedback or not.
and then there's just the whole 'nature of the internet' thing - online criticism gets messy for a few reasons.
-often times the person soliciting the feedback has not been honest with himself as to his motivation for posting. when ego gets in the way, it's easy to take constructive critique personally, become defensive and 'fight back'.
-written communication is tricky, period. tone is easily misinterpreted, and a simple misunderstanding can quickly escalate.
-and of course, some people are just miserable bastards and see the opportunity to criticize as a chance to flex their jackass muscle. the anonymity of the internet makes it easy to be an ass. people who thrive on chaos can belittle, torment, and harass others with relatively little repercussion. and that, friends, is why some of us choose to remain just a screen name to all but a few trusted individuals. (you know i adore you jeremy but this is a point where we disagree - one crazyass cyber-stalker was enough for me thankyouverymuch.)
i guess the last thing would be to talk about praise. tell me again why appreciating the work of our peers and telling people how fabulous they are is a bad thing?
make no mistake that critique and praise serve two entirely different functions, but we're such an all or nothing society (even around here) that we can take a positive thing - celebrating someone's success - and turn it into a negative - by labeling it as undeserved and unproductive. lovefests and pats on the back are a GOOD THING when offered with sincerity. positivity fosters positivity and contributes to the continued growth of our community. that warm fuzzy is only a bad thing if we're all so busy smooching each other's behinds that we get stagnant, fail to challenge ourselves, stop pushing the boundaries of art and innovation, and quit growing.
and yea. that's what i think. damn, that was long.
good talk y'all.
oh - and AMEN MAURICE.
i have a great deal of respect for people who can not only dream big, but execute big. however, when your brand gets too big for your britches, you've lost me.
|
