Snapshot |ˈsnapˌ sh ät|
noun
1 an informal photograph taken quickly, typically with a small hand-held camera.
There\'s no need to be so defensive. If you don\'t want comment and criticism, don\'t ask for it.
I don\'t know if there is there a story behind the image that would help explain your rough treatment, but personally, I don\'t care for the image. She looks sweaty and startled, but not like in a Weejee photo where the startled subject creates drama in the picture. Here she simply looks like the subject of a snapshot.
I\'m not being defensive. At least not that I can tell. Think about it.
Informal,
OK, what\'s formal? A studio setting or highly contrived set?
--->
OK, that defines about 90% of the shots on this site - perhaps more.
Taken quickly.
So like, not night photography? What does that mean, \"Taken quickly\"? Well, it doesn\'t mean anything. If it\'s not describing exposure time then I have to ask: What photographer spends more than a few seconds \"Taking\" the shot? Positioning? Well I spent several hours on mine. Getting there... into position, with the intent to photograph people, at that specific event. If we think about it existentially we all have spent our entire lives setting up and getting into position for every photograph we\'ve ever taken.
\"With a small handheld camera\".
OK, who here is NOT using a small handheld camera? Raise your hand.
See? no one!
But all seriousness aside if that to you implies taken with a camera smaller than a typical SLR / dSLR then my shot (above) doesn\'t fall into that classification.
No, \"snapshot\" on a site like this used as an adjective without ample extended explaination is a bogus and meaningless term that contains no discernible or constructive content within a critique. It is in fact a proverbially extended middle finger and nothing more. I doubt Sam intended to flip me off but without thinking that is indeed what he did. I\'m not upset or defensive over that. I have friends that flip me off every time we meet. That\'s fine. But here, and in that context? Umm, no. it was a poor choice of words and doesn\'t classify as constructive critique of any kind. It is quite exactly what people say when they want to say \"it sucks\" but don\'t want to or can\'t qualify the remark with any real critique.
While I do wish to call Sam on that so he doesn\'t get into too much trouble or hurt the feelings of an aspiring noob or something, I really don\'t want to make such a big deal over it.
BTW, she always looks \"sweaty and startled\" that\'s her basic nature. Her eyes are naturally black with no detectable iris - it\'s a japanese thing. I would go on with a critique of her personality but I don\'t think it would be kind - so I won\'t.
Nov 06, 2008 at 05:28 PM
Previous versions of Bifurcator's message #6354795 « Boo! »
---> 
What does that mean, \"Taken quickly\"? Well, it doesn\'t mean anything. If it\'s not describing exposure time then I have to ask: What photographer spends more than a few seconds \"Taking\" the shot? Positioning? Well I spent several hours on mine. Getting there... into position, with the intent to photograph people, at that specific event. If we think about it existentially we all have spent our entire lives setting up and getting into position for every photograph we\'ve ever taken.