Censorship and judgement on APUG and in the world...

[sehrgut]

So in your view, no photograph should have a title, because even "tree in a brook" tells you something about the image from the photographers mind, while without the title, someone might intemperate that as 'brook with a tree in it'. Therefore any image with a small title tag has lost some of it's power?

Not quite that far, but to a degree, you're on track with how I approach my own images. Titles are useful references, after all. However, when the message is not communicated without the title, you've entered the continuum of "text plus image" that goes all the way to "illustrated textbook". Where on that continuum a work is depends on the degree to which communication of its message depends on the accompanying text.

[StoneNYC]

Stone;

I had a 45, an M16 and orders to shoot in the 60s. That was in SEA. I also had a camera. Tell Mr. Dump (opps, Trump) to talk to me sometime. I used my camera. This entire thread IMHO is a piece of KRAP in the face of what I have seen on APUG. So, Forget it, close the thread and go back to have a nice nap.

Oh, BTW, I still have an M16 and a 45! No orders though. So, I will not.

PE

Not sure what to make of this, but I really did want to know what others thought because I want to post more, so I hope you voted.

[StoneNYC]

I think this is the sort of response you make which give people pause... You're very defensive in your response, and imply that you're more successful and talented than those that disagree with you. In fact, you all but say that anyone without a "background" which benefits you is useless to you.
My own interaction with you has been similar. You recently posted about your disappointment with your Grand Canyon trip infrared results. I wrote that it was unwise to use materials you hadn't worked with before, especially when you were on location (In fact, you didn't even have the proper filter with you). Your response was that you didn't care how the images came out. I left that discussion wondering why you had posted in the first place.

I have no doubt that you'd like to become a competent film photographer. You haven't been here long, and if you'd like to maintain the good will of members, you need to be less confrontational, especially in the threads you initiate.

With regards to the Grand Canyon IR comment, its out of context, I knew it was not exposed properly, I asked for advice on the grain characteristics of the film and you chimed in about something totally not helpful which was to tell me I shouldn't have shot in the first place. That's why I responded that way.

I didn't say those without a background are useless, that's what your'e reading into it, I didn't say anything about those without a background just that they aren't those we should take our best advice from, those are the people we can give advice too, this is how it works and how we perpetuate good "whatever" be it photography, art, philosophy, financial success, those who are strong in one area should help those who aren't (assuming those people are also willing to do the work and not just lazy bums). That's my opinion of it, but I didn't say all that, just because I leave something out doesn't mean you can infer that I mean something else.

You're right, I was a little harsh with Matt, at least he could see why I reacted the way I did and then of course responded in kind which made sense to me.

[StoneNYC]

Oh, I forgot in my last post.

The photo was not very good IMHO.

PE

No, the photo isn't very good, but I was happy to get some almost proper exposure on 40 year old film stock...

[StoneNYC]

Not quite that far, but to a degree, you're on track with how I approach my own images. Titles are useful references, after all. However, when the message is not communicated without the title, you've entered the continuum of "text plus image" that goes all the way to "illustrated textbook". Where on that continuum a work is depends on the degree to which communication of its message depends on the accompanying text.

I tried not giving things a title here and got criticized for that too haha, guess I'll never win

[eddie]

you chimed in about something totally not helpful...

See, you keep doing it. You complained about unsatisfactory results, I pointed out how that could have been avoided, but I'm "totally not helpful".

[MattKing]

haha, I liked the trump comment, really good point, though, he does have billions.. so... lol

still really like the moss

Thanks for the comment about the moss.

It is interesting to me, however, that you consider your comments as being "harsh". I have in the past sold my work and during that time it mattered if clients and potential clients liked my work, but in general it doesn't bother me if they don't.

FWIW, I like some of the photos in your APUG gallery (e.g. your subway station shot), but I usually don't get too excited about anything that isn't either a print or a projected transparency - the 2 mega-pixel or less fractions of images on a desktop screen, a dim and poorly projected digital facsimile or, please no, a phone screen tend to leave me unfulfilled.

Admittedly, "she" has an unfair advantage over you. I have had the opportunity of meeting her and have seen her Alternative Process work in person - cyanotypes, gum over arabic, lith and other interesting processes that give depth and colour and texture to prints that a computer screen cannot come close to replicating.

On the subject of Trump, I tend to think poorly of people who have run four separate companies that have used bankruptcy to avoid their debts - especially people with as little humility as Donald Trump apparently has. He tends to be the sort of person who runs companies who leave a whole bunch of smaller creditors (like photographers!) unpaid for their products or services.

[EASmithV]

i think only ansel adams landscapes should be allowed in the gallery
cause in the end that is the only photography that will be remembered.
nude women/ men, grande still lives, photographs showing the course harsh underbelly of the world
the gore of it all, it will all be forgotten and answell adaams landscapes will be the end.
for more than a generation ... (americans at least) when they see a photograph that isn't 100% in sharp focus
edge to edge, micro contrast out the wazoo well, it really isn't photography, its some photographer trying to make an "artistic statement", and a lame one at that !

i think the gallery should be scoured and only grand landscapes, and no artsy star trail stuff either, that is just a statement ...

the kittens goes too far, unless they are having tea.

[jnanian]

i know you are trying,
but this isn't photography, it is an attempt of "staging" .. its just fluff at this point ..
ephemera that is now "clip art" .. it doesn't compare to the majestic grand tetons
or the magic of some other big rock in the countryside.

[jnanian]

Someone once told me... I can't remember, I think it was Donald Trump, but I could be wrong about that, anyway someone once told me "never take advice from someone who isn't already more successful or talented than you" I'm paraphrasing but that was the gist of it.

sometimes the best advice you can get comes from someone who has nothing to do with the field you are in, they aren't successful
or as successful as you, and they just tell you how it is. DT is the last person i would take advice from ...

i can't remember who told me this advice but sometimes it is easier to attract more flies with honey not vinegar,
and the best advice i have ever gotten is to look before you jump off the log.