From the most recent advertisement for the company where I work: "Follow us on Facebook and like us as well."
Facebook is perfect for someone who wants to advertise and not spend money. Personally, I don't need to advertise.
"She's always out making pictures, She's always out making scenes.
She's always out the window, When it comes to making Dreams.
It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up."
From It's All Mixed Up by The Cars
"oh look, a turd on the beach", yes I'm a shit photographer
Well consensus of opinion showed him to be wrong about Atget.
Originally Posted by semi-ambivalent
“The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”
Originally Posted by batwister
Yes. I had people not agree with my assessment of some of my images. On the flip side, I don't like some of Ansel Adam's images or that of other famous photographers.
I often liken art to food. There are many times I went to restaurants with rave reviews and did not like the food at all. I've also had ones I liked get reviewed badly.
If I was selling my art or own a restaurant, it's a lesson. Namely, my product isn't meeting the majority opinion. Since I am not, I only have myself to please - especially on images that I did for myself.
I think you should listen to all of your critics and evaluate it yourself. Some of the criticism are valid. It helps to get other's point of view. Many aren't. Many aren't even qualified to comment. My recommendation is to shrug off the defacing of the image though. It's just part of being in public view in digital age.
Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?
Facebook, like everything else, is what you make of it. I've reconnected with friends I haven't seen in decades, and kept up with friends scattered around the world. I have a page for my photography, not for advertising, but to let friends (and people who have purchased my work) keep up with what I'm doing. I don't spend much time there, and do know a few "addicts" (people with 1,000 FB friends, but 3 in real life...), but I find it useful.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I really don't consider facebook a place for artistic photography, (unless you are friends with a bunch of other like minded photographer on facebook.)
I put up a mix of photos there and by far the most popular ones (in terms of likes or comments) are family photos of cute kids. People don't care much about tones or abstractions or composition. It's a social/family connection first and foremost.
To let other people see it. The same as any other internet presence.
Originally Posted by benjiboy
"People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.
I agree on the whole. Uploading pictures to Facebook is a bit like showing your prints at a night club. Having said that, there are many published photographers uploading there and even Twitter. I think the consistent positive response they get is interesting, as a social experiment. The people who comment and like their uploads are, in reality, a minority - the photographer being an 'artist'. But there is the illusion (to the outsider) from the consistent 'likes' and 'shares' of the die hard fans following them on Facebook, that the photographer has popular status. Which isn't the case in the real, exhibiting, publishing, world of hard copies. Many of my favourite black and white photographers, whose books I own, don't even have websites. There's a stubbornness with some traditional photographers about presenting work online. It's unfortunate that a generation may miss out on ever seeing their work, because they certainly won't see their exhibitions. How would they know if they had an exhibition if they didn't announce it online? That sounds silly, but believe me, it's the mentality of people my age.
Originally Posted by jp498
Thought about it, but they aren't heavy rain clouds, it's a clearing overcast sky which doesn't look 'natural' hanging heavy. I prefer a tracery of detail. Nevertheless, this isn't an image I'll be printing.
Originally Posted by paul_c5x4
I made this photograph on an impulse and uploaded it in the same manner, which is why I feel my friend's joke was a hard lesson. I should say that I think of this image as a 'ditty', which is why I uploaded.
Relating to above about 'artistic photography', I never upload challenging images; abstracts or anything too aesthetically led because I know there won't be a response.
This picture is literal enough to draw attention, regardless of its depth as an image. So I guess I have altered my practice or at least my editing to appeal to the masses.
Sometimes I upload photos of my prints, in this manner (but usually without my reflection) http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-WLxlOwuxrB...to%2827%29.jpg, which again, as a social experimenting I find interesting. Always met by positive comments and likes, simply because I think the print has these connotations; completion of work, accomplishment, exhibition, potential for more socialising, FRIEND! FRIEND! LIKE! LIKE!
Last edited by batwister; 10-19-2012 at 07:32 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Shrug it off. Dump Facebook. Then don't repeat the mistake.
All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.
I wonder if it's just a question of different circles. I hang out on some photography forums, and there pictures are sacred. On one or two there's a special tag to put in your profile if it is OK for other users to do manipulations of your pictures, the general expectation is that it is verboten.
On the other hand, I'm a member on a music forum. When someone posts a picture there it is seen as an expression of friendliness to make a manipulation of the picture, possibly inserting avatars of other users in it.
So maybe you saw your friend's action from a photographer's perspective. While he acted with a non-photographer's view. And no harm was ever intended.