gdanmitchell
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Interesting Reference Data on Dynamic Range - 5dsr | |
One of the oldest and most baseless, transparent distractions from addressing the validity of a person\'s point in a photography forum is to demean their photography. One tired old technique is to ask where their photographs are.
On the other hand, some of us make a lot of photographs using various kinds of gear and regularly share, exhibit, sell, license, and even write about the photographs. It is logically inconsistent to demean the arguments of a person who has not shared photographs here and then discount the same points of view when they come from people who have and who do. Even more ironically, such photographers\' posts may be discounted because they share photos and are thus distract from the important technical facts, occasionally with a reminder that this forum is for \"technical\" discussions and not aesthetics, subjects which are apparently regarded as unrelated.
On the subject of inconsistencies, we regularly see the point that \"Person X doesn\'t even use Camera A,\" both offered up by folks as a reason to discount Person X\'s point of view and \"liked\" by those who share that opinion. Yet the very people raising/liking the \"you don\'t own one!\" argument often don\'t own the other gear that is being compared! Do they not see the irony?
As to the purposes of sharing \"test\" images in the forum, I see two patterns:
- Some select and share images purportedly taken to \"test one camera against another or one technology against another,\" but with the obvious goal of demonstrating that the gear that others use sucks badly.
- Some of us share examples from our own photographs and equipment instead to demonstrate how the gear we use works and what it is capable of, with no interest in making other gear look awful.
Taking an obviously ironic and sardonic post here and there, among a much larger body of writing that attempts to be rational and objective, and then trying to mischaracterize a person on the basis of a willful misinterpretation of that carefully selected quote is a far different thing than seeing the general and obvious pattern in the positions and posts of another person. It is particularly odd coming from people who regularly/frequently use the same sort technique in their own posts. Kettle? Pot calling.
I occasionally use irony in a post, especially when it may be the fastest and most incisive way of pointing something out. In general, for the irony impaired and because I\'m chuckling to myself as I write it, I may include a smiley. Like this one --> ;-)
Inventing a point of view for a person you dislike and then arguing with the fantasy you invented (for example, the fiction that I and others here \"hate Sony\") is also an old, transparent, and odd tactic. It suggests that personalizing and arguing are more important than exploring facts and viewpoints for their validity. It also suggests an odd conflation of disagreeing and hating.
As to the \"problems\" on this forum, most of these discussions are usually reasonably civilized, as this one was in places, until a certain group shows up. Take a look at this thread to see if you can spot the pattern. Take a look at a lot of threads on the Canon boards. While you are at it — especially those who imagine that Canon-prefering folks hate Sony — take a look at the Sony board and see how that pattern differs, even when Canon using FM members visit those threads.
About the Canon folks who supposedly hate Sony, the truth is that many of us think that Sony gear is fine and even excellent. We even recommend it to some folks for whom it might be the best choice. I regularly read the Sony forum so that I can understand it better. We are not denigrating Sony, its equipment, or people who choose to use it, some of whom are good friends and colleagues. Some here even use Sony themselves, or use and like very similar camera systems.
Regarding the notion that some people are here to \"fight a DR battle\" here, I can only marvel and puzzle at the idea of such a strange and bizarre thing. A \"DR battle?\" Really!? Over dynamic range of camera brands? To use the old expression, \"that does not compute.\"
In the past week I have blundered in a few of my posts on more than one occasion. I misunderstood what someone else wrote and/or replied without carefully reading the message to which I replied. When I saw my mistake — and God knows I make my share of them — I engaged in a bit of reflection. In a couple of cases I apologized for my error in the thread where I made it. And these were not my first blunders or errors. I made my own share of personalizations early on in FM posts, some of which I still regret. For me, one lesson learned (eventually and imperfectly was to mostly \"not go there\" with the folks who set me off or whose posts are too often simply angry and argumentative. Yes, in this post I am \"going there\" — I\'m trying to say it all in one post and then go back to not interacting with them.
A bit of self-reflection and even an occasional apology can be a good and healthy thing, especially for the person doing the reflecting and making the apology. It acknowledges your recognition that there is a real person on the receiving end of your posts. It can be a powerful way to reduce the conflict and re-start on fresh ground.
Dan
|
