Gracie in The River
That wasn't personal insult. I was talking about your comment not you. There is a difference.
And again I never said they had to be 100% objective. I did say we should try and be more objective and less subjective. I know you didn't read this so I will post it again. It is close to how I feel about that matter.
https://theaestheticist.com/the-truth-unfolds-objective-evaluation-of-art/
Well once you have started typing a critique you have become a critic. Wouldn't it be nice to be honest and say something that actually gets to something real? Because these things are real. I didn't make this stuff up. The funny part is once you start understanding more, if it is actually there in work, the more you start seeing in pieces that you had never noticed before. The more fluent you become the more it can start showing up in your own work. I say to achieve more content in our work should be a goal of all of us as photographers.So having those tools doesn't make one some kind of BS critic. It just makes one more informed.
And again I never said they had to be 100% objective. I did say we should try and be more objective and less subjective. I know you didn't read this so I will post it again. It is close to how I feel about that matter.
https://theaestheticist.com/the-truth-unfolds-objective-evaluation-of-art/
Well once you have started typing a critique you have become a critic. Wouldn't it be nice to be honest and say something that actually gets to something real? Because these things are real. I didn't make this stuff up. The funny part is once you start understanding more, if it is actually there in work, the more you start seeing in pieces that you had never noticed before. The more fluent you become the more it can start showing up in your own work. I say to achieve more content in our work should be a goal of all of us as photographers.So having those tools doesn't make one some kind of BS critic. It just makes one more informed.