|
guidoanselmi posted:i think the most obnoxious critic for landscapes (which i'm guilty of having given, too) is 'you should have waited for another time of day [morning/sunset]' Except that often this is a pretty valid critique. A great composition with poo poo light won't be a good photo, plain and simple.
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 18:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
oh sure, but who the hell want's to schedule an entire day while traveling around a photo. i always think that while traveling 'gee the light at this *mountain, etc* would be great at X time' but rarely, if ever, have i planned a day around a shot. we're not all ansel adams and most people here aren't getting significant cash, if any, for their prints.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 05:04
|
|
|
I've planned plenty of trips around a single photo. I don't sell them, I do it as a hobby, but I'm still going to put the work in to make sure it comes out as good as it can, and in landscape photography, that means going out at the right time to get the right light. It's like telling someone who likes taking portraits of friends that they shouldn't take a flash anywhere because that's too much effort for a hobby.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 05:58
|
|
|
It's also still a perfectly valid criticism. Especially if I don't know your intent and whether it was a quick vacation snapshot or a honest try at a solid landscape. Sounds like we're getting really picky on what's "good" critique. With the dorkroom's track record of giving critique, we should be happy it's being given outside pad at all. I don't think we need to start specifying what counts as good critique and unacceptable critique outside of pad. Unless you're being like a super dick about it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 16:17
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm not gonna go around being the arbiter of what is and is not "acceptable" critique, but if you post something really really dumb (see 'all teeth no tits' in portrait thread for details), I'm probably just going to decide it's bad by anybody's definition and probate you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 18:12
|
|
|
Bump for more concise rules in the OP, go have a look.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 00:20
|
|
|
Edit: Hey, there was a post here but I took it away because I didn't read something all the way through and I'm an idiot, so this doesn't need to be here anymore. It now serves as a secondary bump!
Mannequin fucked around with this message at 08:31 on Sep 21, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2012 08:29
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:Edit: Hey, there was a post here but I took it away because I didn't read something all the way through and I'm an idiot, so this doesn't need to be here anymore. It now serves as a secondary bump! Well uh... glad you found what you were looking for!  In case it was somehow related to the updated rules post... y'know, you folks CAN suggest rules if there's some trend I'm not aware of that's getting annoying for people. I basically just do the rules as what I think is a good idea and/or funny. EDIT: gently caress I almost just edited your post instead of quoting you, I need a Chrome extension that throws up some 'are-you-sure' message when I go to edit someone else's posts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 02:40
|
|
|
probations for pictures not taken with a Pentax ME Super, tia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2012 17:52
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:probations for pictures not taken with a Pentax ME Super, tia. Ban if all photos are not of Pentax ME Super's.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 18:08
|
|
|
Musket posted:Ban ... ME .... Just reading between the lines.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 23:39
|
|
|
I banned him like a month ago.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 08:06
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:I banned him like a month ago. Happy one month Musket banaversary.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 09:18
|
|
|
We have "CRITIQUE PROHIBITED" in the title of the low-effort thread, how about "CRITIQUE MANDATORY" in PAD's title?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 15:29
|
|
|
Yes, if only we could find ways to have less discussion on these forums.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 17:47
|
|
|
aliencowboy posted:Yes, if only we could find ways to have less discussion on these forums. I don't actually know what you're talking about, since the suggestion had nothing to do with the pre-existing no-crit thread with those words already in the title.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 20:02
|
|
|
David Pratt posted:We have "CRITIQUE PROHIBITED" in the title of the low-effort thread, how about "CRITIQUE MANDATORY" in PAD's title? As for this, I don't really think it's necessary, since PAD has been mandatory-critique since the dawn of time. It's only on the other thread because it's a relatively new thread/idea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2012 02:46
|
|
|
Bump to note the addition/reinforcement of rule 2a.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2012 02:45
|
|
|
I feel the desire to post low effort critiques somewhere. Things like, "I like this" or "Meh" or "  ". I think it is important for people who post their photos to know what pictures other people just plain old like and don't like. Is there a place for this type of thing without breaking rule #4?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 17:41
|
|
|
Saint Fu posted:I feel the desire to post low effort critiques somewhere. Things like, "I like this" or "Meh" or " Most people use flickr. You can always go fave their shots, which is what I do in this scenario.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 18:59
|
|
|
Yea same. Most people provide click throughs to their flickr pages. Or the other option is to take a photo out of the Low Effort thread and comment on it in the PAD thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
Santa is strapped posted:Yea same. Most people provide click throughs to their flickr pages. I'd have to say this is the best option. It's sorta become apparent in the past couple years that low-effort-critique threads are one of the nice things we can't have. Of course, there's no rule against low-effort critique in themed threads (film, portrait, etc).
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 22:44
|
|
|
If I feel the need to thank a poster for their photographic efforts in a casual fashion I just pretend one of my couch cushions is them and like high five it. Working out pretty well so far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 05:33
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:If I feel the need to thank a poster for their photographic efforts in a casual fashion I just pretend one of my couch cushions is them and like high five it. Working out pretty well so far. You should probably hug it too, since couch cushions are soft and the poster would feel even more appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:You should probably hug it too, since couch cushions are soft and the poster would feel even more appreciated. If I hug a couch cushion my anime pillow waifu might get the wrong idea. I don't know how you filthy Canadian sex perverts do things but in 'murica once you have made a solid commitment to a stuffed girl, it's for life. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 05:43
|
|
|
how about low-effort critiques allowed in PaD, but they don't qualify you to post your own photos?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:how about low-effort critiques allowed in PaD, but they don't qualify you to post your own photos? That leaves me as the arbiter of what is and is not 'low effort', which is not really a position I want to be in, but if people actually post "this is low effort so it doesn't count", I'm okay with that. I'm just not going to probate someone for posting photos if their critique wasn't up to whatever the hell arbitrary standard I have.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 01:43
|
|
|
Just a suggestion, maybe we can merge the "Taints" thread and the the "bros before ISOs" thread? They are both general dorkroom chat type threads.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
Pls merge all bros with taints. TIA.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:Just a suggestion, maybe we can merge the "Taints" thread and the the "bros before ISOs" thread? They are both general dorkroom chat type threads. I'm not sure it's a PROBLEM per se, but you're right, the threads do at this point serve roughly the same purpose. We have the gear thread for gear, the Best Thread for chatting poorly, and... yeah, two threads for general chat. Does anybody have any objection to me closing taintchat?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:I'm not sure it's a PROBLEM per se, but you're right, the threads do at this point serve roughly the same purpose. We have the gear thread for gear, the Best Thread for chatting poorly, and... yeah, two threads for general chat. Will we still be able to discuss taints?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 20:43
|
|
|
Dread Head posted:Will we still be able to discuss taints? Well obviously.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 22:13
|
|
|
Not that I have a particular attraction to either one, but taints seem more popular than general photography questions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
I was thinking of starting a thread about abstract, minimalist & banal photography. Is this groovy and does anyone even give a poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
Make the thread, if it works it works if it doesn't work it'll get archived on it's own when noone posts. No reason not to make it!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Make the thread, if it works it works if it doesn't work it'll get archived on it's own when noone posts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
I'll start working on it then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
Bump for the addition of rule 18. It's getting really annoying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
I'd like to suggest stickying the Awesome Photos thread right up there next to PAD, its a great point of reference as to what our photography should be aiming for.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 03:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
Spedman posted:I'd like to suggest stickying the Awesome Photos thread right up there next to PAD, its a great point of reference as to what our photography should be aiming for. It is, but I think it gets enough activity to never drop to page 2 without having Yet Another Sticky.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 03:32
|
|