Just received an e-mail from Danny Green, where he says that he is now considering no longer post images on this forum.
Danny made two mistakes.
1. He spoke the truth as he saw it, and he was right.
2. He was trying to help others.
For his pains, his comment was attacked in such a way as to try and demean them. To my mind this says more about them, than it ever could about Danny.
I also commented in the thread that Danny initiallyu did, and as I write this I have yet to read what has been written after me, as I unlike Danny, I know what to expect. I’ll do it now tho’. Curiosity and all that.
Surely when a comment is made, where it is an attempt to demean either someone else’s comment, work or themselves, it is far better to remove the individual comment concerned, rather than lock the thread.
Bottom line, the forum has apparently lost a quality member who’s only fault was that he tried to help, but the root cause of the problem still persists.
Posted by Jeroen Stel on January 25, 2009 at 7:24 AM
I think Danny was right saying his opinion on the ISO matter.
Truth or no truth anybody should be entitled to speak their mind on a posted image as that is what a forum is for as long as everybody stays polite.
It's a shame the topic was closed as allthough i am not too big of a fan of long discussions i think it is an important technical issue on how to handle ISO in images.
I think it all comes down to what your final goal is with an image. When you only post a 720 pixel image on a forum, using higher ISO's in combination with a good handling of a noise reduction program is fine, but when your images are being sold at stock agencies and you are a pro (like Danny for instance) then your images should be of the highest possible quality and using lower ISO's is a must.
The goal for all of us in the end is to make fine images so there Danny has a point in using lower ISO's.
Hope Danny will still be posting/ commenting over here as i think he is a real asset to this forum!
Surely it would have been better to start a seperate topic on the matter!!!
Tom was correct in closing the post nobody was commenting on what was a good shot of a Jay in difficult lighting conditions.
Today is another day lets move on!!!!!!!
I would just like to say that its a shame that we have to be treated like naughty school boys by the "Mods", I thought that the discussion was very good, and hopefully if it had been allowed to continue,it would have reached some useful conclusion,but alas we were not give that opportunity....Shame.
With regard to the original comment, I feel that as Danny had said that the camera at the 800iso setting was "Crap" meant that he was saying that the image was also "Crap".Well may be he did not mean this to be the case, but that's how I read it!! If Danny had been just a little more controlled in his opinion then all this would never have got this far. I still think that the image was clean and sharp, and we can all learn a lot from people that use high ISO's,and I for one would be glad of any little gem of wisdom.Lets hope the "Mods" see the error of their ways and let THIS post come to a conclusion..........
Stewart......
Posted by David Kjaer on January 25, 2009 at 8:51 AM
The thread was locked by the moderators as it had become diverted from the critique of the image - which was fair comment.
Re. 'speaking the truth or not' that is not a problem and constructive views have always been encouraged. However when you give an opinion you should expect that other forum members may not agree and are also entitled to voice their opinions and it is then for the reader to decide what they feel is good advice.
I have great respect for Danny as a photographer and his work speaks for itself and for you to say 'his comment was attacked in such a way as to try and demean them' is not right. It was just others voicing there opinion in a constructive manner or are we not allowed to do this when certain forum members speak!
In the Jay thread Brian did give his reasons for using 800 iso and from his perspective it was the right thing to do and I felt pehaps the thread should have ended there.
The reason I entered the thread was that I felt Danny had come out too strongly against high iso settings and I wanted to balance the argument 'for & against' with my views and this is what others were doing. My feeling is that as Wildlife Photographers and NOT just Photographers, are main concern should be to capture the moment even if it is technically less than perfect - if you get both it is a bonus!
I don't think in all my comments on this forum I have rarely if ever commented on noise in another persons image. I either don't see it because I am too interested in the content or I am blind to it after shooting many rolls of Kodachrome 200 which hade the digital equivilant of noise - grain. I can also assure you that when it comes to Picture Researchers the last thing they look for is noise as there main concern is image content with most wildlife driven articles.
Having said all this file quality is very important but in my view secondary to capturing the moment. On the subject of high iso settings remember to try and get your exposure right as having to make large adjustments in RAW will degrade your file to a greater degree than if you had shot at a lower iso.
Danny I do hope you will not stop posting as I for one find your images a joy to view and often very insperational - after all threads of this nature are only about people agreeing to disagree and I am sure we all benefit in different ways!
Believe me, we always see (and hear about) the error of our ways . A topic usually gets locked permanently or temporarily if things start getting personal in it or diverge away from topic. If someone feels they've been wronged, then there's always the other moderators that they can grump to. Danny is perfectly capable of starting a topic, sending an e-mail or picking up the phone - ie speaking for himself, and hasn't said anything to me, and AFAIK, neither has he said anything to Phil.... I'm sure he doesn't need others to speak for him.
Come on boys & girls, falling out over ISO 400 or ISO 800... at the end of the day they're simply opinions, neither one or other is right or wrong. Aren't there better things to take issue over .
It would have been simply forum etiquette (and easy enough) to break the discussion out into another topic - that way you could critique Brian's shot, and also discuss the 1001 uses of ISO - separately! The Mods aren't here to censor anyone, just keep the house in order...
Sorry you feel that way (it was not my intention) but I have a job to do and did it. The thread was off the original topic and IMHO was turning slight personal with infra-digs; it was my judgement call and I closed it. Was I right or wrong? It's hard to say other than to point out that I have recieved no other complaints.
T
Posted by stewart canham on January 25, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Tom
You have to do what you think is right at the time,I understand that,and respect your decision, how ever I personally don't agree with you,but if we all agreed on every thing the world would be a very dull place.No hard feelings.. None Taken - Tom
Stewart.................
Posted by Andy Astbury on January 25, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Well I've just been chatting to Danny trying to get him to put his 'sensible' head on and to continue to be an active forum member.
To be honest this whole episode had completely passed me by - playing catchup this morning has been something of a revelation to put it mildly
Dan can be his own worst enemy at times - at times a little less erudite than the situation may perhaps dictate.
As an ex (thank God) 1DmkII user I am entirely in agreement with him - 800 iso is exponentially bad when compared to lower iso settings - BUT we are talking full res images here that most likely will then have to be put through the interpolation process to bring them up to minimum agency specification on file size.
Brian was more concerned with 'getting the image' - as are the majority of folk and rightly so if that is what 'floats their boat'.
The necessity for flawless full res imagery does NOT apply at a critical level to all members of this forum - thank God too, or half of them would be over-spending on new gear and the other half would be committing suicide
A good number of forum members would do well to remember the 'unseen' and less obvious pressures with regard to image quality that full-timers have to cope with.
AND full-timers really do need to understand that a slightly less forthright attitude can go a long way - it's not called the "art of critique" for nothing!
My response to Brian would have been along the lines of going for 1 stop less on the shutter to trade against the 1DII's better 400iso performance - but that's only my opinion, and only valid if Brian would feel comfortable doing so given the circumstances he found himself in.
Some of us REALLY do know how to chase perfection in an image - but we should never be seen to thrust this knowledge where it's not been asked for - and even though it is a CRITIQUE forum and in truth ALL images posted are fair game for constructive criticism, good critique is done with subtlety NOT a hammer..........
Brian did exceptionally well to get the Jay shot - and he's both big enough and competent enough to make his own decisions and understand their implications.
But "Short Stuff" was absolutely correct in his statement FROM a full-timers point of view - though a slightly less bull-ish attitude might have been the better option..
But that's Dan - look, we've all got our short-comings (apart from me 'cos I'm perfick ) and we are a community of like-minded individuals with lots of common ground and VASTLY different skill levels.
Everyone is here to learn something or to help others learn what they know - if an individual is at odds with that then perhaps they should vacate the forum post haste.
But Danny has been over-criticised and personally insulted in this case - and that's not a good thing, especially on a publicly viewable forum.
I hope my little pep talk with him has worked and he'll be back posting soon - then I'll have some images to critique
Posted by stewart canham on January 25, 2009 at 10:37 AM
Well I'll second that Andy,you have summed it all up very well,I think a job in the United Nations beckons??
Stewart............
Posted by Edwin kats on January 25, 2009 at 10:52 AM
I was quite shocked when I heard Danny quits posting on UKNP. If he does UKNP will miss a great man, photographer and teacher.
I don't see myself as a great photographer and I'm learning every day because of comments like Danny makes. I often learn the hard way and I do learn from my mistakes. I'm glad people like Danny say when you are doing something wrong or how to do it better. Even when he says it in a slightly different way. I learned a lot from this great little fart although I never tell him.
Danny.... think about it, swallow your pride and start posting again.
Ed
Posted by John Robinson on January 25, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Danny made two mistakes.
1. He spoke the truth as he saw it, and he was right.
2. He was trying to help others.
Apart from all the hoo haa about high ISO problems (which very often only comes out if you dowload the image and blow it up which some on this forum must be doing !! ), I find the above statement a little strange.
If you speak the truth as you see it, are you never wrong ?
Is it not the same as "I never argue unless I am right !"/
Posted by Brian Phipps on January 25, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Also can it be pointed out where on the forum he was personally insulted?
Posted by Andy Shepherd on January 25, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Hi Craig / Brian,
I think Andy Astbury may be referring to a comment I made on a different thread, I used the term "ISO police" on John Robinsons Siskin post and though the comment was made in jest Danny didn't take it in that sense.
I've spoken to Danny this afternoon and apologized for the comment.
Andy...
Posted by CLICKMAN38 on January 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM
I'm not an NPN member or indeed a professional photographer so I shall not comment on the rights or wrongs of high ISO pictures, but I must say that Andy Astbury's contribution strikes exactly the right note in this "controversy". Let's all behave as grown-ups and not throw the toys out of the pram when somebody says something we disagree with. I value this forum for the contributions people like Danny, Andy, Mark H, John R and others make to improving my own knowledge of photography and the natural world. This forum manages to strike a good balance between encouragement and criticism, so please let it continue in this vein.
Tom James
Posted by Craig Nash on January 25, 2009 at 3:11 PM
I think very few people speak the truth on the forum. I am also to blame here. As in who am I to critique this photo etc When I come on I first of all look at views and then amount of comments. When I see 75 views and three comments I almost know that it is going to be a duff photo. When really this is the photograph that should have lots of comments suggesting improvement, rather than a beautiful image posted by say Danny that has 87 views and 16 comments all saying wow that is brilliant.
I think the greater percentage ,who are regular visitors, don't say anything and sometimes those that do make constructive criticism can be shot down themselves. I dont see the moderators doing a great deal of critique on the photos that need critique either.
The trouble is this forum seems to be one where, in general, photo's of a very high standard get lots of comments and average or below average shots tend to get over looked. This is very true when compared to many other forums out there where all photo's tend to get a good deal of feedback. part of the reason for that is, I think, because we have pro shooters amongst our members. If I'm going to be brutally honest I think that gives the foruma a degree of unspoken snobbery in that shots that aren't of 'a certain standard' are left to vanish off the front page and in to the much ignored second page and beyond. Our pro shooters raise the bar quite high for everyone else, but it does make it very intimidating for new comers, especially if they post an image and it gets 1 or 2 comments then is gone from the front page. I wish this forum bumped a post back to the top when a comment was made, that would help!
This is not the first forum I'd suggest to a new comer to photography and in some ways, this is THE forum I should be sending them too so they can get the benifit of advice from the pro's!
I'm guilty too in that I only tend to comment on shots that really grab me, when I should post on shots that don't, and explain why so that the poster has more information to build on when out shooting next time.
With regards to all this high ISO talk, to say you should use the lowest setting you can is true but to say you shouldn't use high ISO is silly. I'd rather have a slightly grainy sharp shot than a smooth clean blurry one. And, I think unless I'm there at the time the photo was taken and can see the light conditions, the circumstances the shot was taken in and the shooters lens technique, I'm not really in a position to judge their settings but instead just appreciate the photo for it's content rather than it's exif... but that's just me
If it's any help to you, you can view the forum by latest reply, rather than by topic order - there is a link at the top right of the forum topic list that - 'sort by post or reply'. You can also use your forum preferences to set the default for when you view the forum.
I have watched all of this develop with both interest and dismay and have now just registered with NPN so I can attempt to state the bleeding obvious. This seems to me an absolutley classic example of how some constructive criticism/technical query has been completely misinterpreted and what is most baffling is that the question was an absolutely 100% legitimate question to ask. As a professional myself I frequently notice people making minor errors with their photography, whether compositionally/technically or with their fieldcraft. You can then simply say nothing and offer no advice even though you have a wealth of experience, or as DG has done you can ask some questions to see if there is anything they could do differently. This is what DG did, correctly so. BP then explained, correctly, why he couldn't and that is that. As someone who works with Danny more than he should (I taught him everything!) you're talking about someone who left school as a foetus and communicates only in grunts and whistles. If he wasn't one of the best photographers in the country (remember I taught him everything so imagine how good I am!) he'd still be living in a cave, foraging for grubs and shoots. Criticising him for the bluntness of his language is like asking a bear why it smells so bad! a) pointless and b) he can't help it. I personally welcome it when he tries to improve my photography, when I've stopped laughing that is, and at the end of the day, unless I'm mistaken, this is a discussion forum. Question asked, bluntly, question answered bluntly. And if you do see Danny out photographing remember two grunts followed by one whistle means 'he want cake' but two grunts followed by two whistles means 'he want biscuit'
Posted by John Robinson on January 25, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Some good points raised.
As I have said before it is not just the good/attractive pics that get the comments or views. It is also the photographers names.
It would seem fairly logical that if someone sees a pic with 150 views then they think " I'll have a look too ". Also as I have remarked in the past,the difficulty of the subject is often ignored completely.
I find the business of posting comments quite a nightmare because I am on dial up and it gets to the stage when I am spending too much time trying to keep everyone happy..
Not easy to pick and choose.
I too have noticed that the mods don't post very often, but they probably have the same problem . Where do you stop?
There is a good way out of this though for people who don't get many comments- just pretend that the viewers can't find any faults !!!
JohnR
Edit after seeing the above post
Andrew
Yes it's very easy to laugh at someone's bluntness etc etc, - but everyone doesn't know him like you apparently do,and some of us are a little old fashioned
JR
Posted by Edwin kats on January 25, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Andrew: Thanks a lot for wetting my pants but you are for 1000% right on this one.
Edwin Kats
Posted by jack chapman on January 25, 2009 at 6:08 PM
not quite sure i understand the chain of events that led to this, i think i missed that post, but it would be a real shame if Danny decided to stop posting, i know i for one have found his advice and support invaluable and i'm sure many others on this forum would agree with that
Jack
Posted by Rob Ashton on January 25, 2009 at 6:20 PM
I've not been around here too much lately and came across this thread so had to look back for the original Jay thread that started it all.
Much as I admire Danny's work and his obvious skill and professionalism, his initial reply to Brians post was downright rude. There is constructive criticism and that is fine. There is expert advice and instruction, and that is fine too. But Danny was just plain rude. If he now has gone off in a huff because some people disagreed with his opinion (or more likely the way he put it) then let him go cool off. Hopefully he will see sense and return as he will be missed here and his images and advice are usually much appreciated.
Rob
Posted by Graeme Lee on January 25, 2009 at 6:45 PM
Yup, ISO 800 on the 1d2 is crap........
.....but sometimes you need it (but as an amateur I don't need to get the image that badly!)
Now lets all get back to viewing some great images You too Danny
Posted by Paul Gibbs on January 25, 2009 at 7:13 PM
i'll put my semi pro 2p in... i think you have to tread the line between when you think is right or wrong, and pointing someone in the right direction.
Stating an image is rubbish as someone used a certain iso is going to be taken very differently to someone stating that the image may of been improved by a lower iso.
I think it would be a shame if Danny left over this, but at the end of the day its up to him.
Posted by Danny Green on January 26, 2009 at 4:30 AM
Hello Everyone
First of all I am a little embarassed by this thread and I think what Rob Ashton said has hit home so thanks for his honesty, I don't want to mention anything too about high ISO settings as I think we have had enough of it by now. I would like to say that I never said the image was crap as I would never say that against a fellow photographer just that the camera he used which is the MK 11 is at this high ISO as I have had one for the past four years. If I have offended anyone then I am deeply sorry and no offence was meant.
Danny
Posted by Rob Ashton on January 26, 2009 at 4:57 AM
Thanks Danny, we all have moments of madness where we post comments that may not come across the way we intend. I'm glad you're still around as we would miss you here and your presence is a great inspiration to us. I, too, own the MkII(n) and the IQ above iso400 is not as good as it could be, but some situations do merit its use. Happy shooting and lets put this minor incident behind us all.
Rob
Posted by F.DESMETTE on January 26, 2009 at 5:15 AM
I just been reading all this....incredible, it is like if we were in a School yard! The other thing I also learn is that some people think a bit too much of themself to said the least !!!
Best wishes
Frederic
Posted by Major Gilbert on January 26, 2009 at 6:08 AM
Looking from the outside in as I am doing now it all looks abit sad.
Hope you get yourselves sorted out.
Major.
Posted by John Robinson on January 26, 2009 at 7:11 PM
Some of us REALLY do know how to chase perfection in an image -
I have to concur with Major over this - it is all a bit sad looking! Danny has been man enough to publicly apologise - we should all shuffle our feet in embarrassment for creating such a brouhaha, then be courteous enough to accept his apology, and shake hands and move on.
Playtime's over class , lt's time to get back to lessons and today's task - constructive critique of images .
Topic closed. Anyone wanting to re-open it will get lines ... anyone arguing back over that will get detention .
Discussion
32 repliesDanny made two mistakes.
1. He spoke the truth as he saw it, and he was right.
2. He was trying to help others.
For his pains, his comment was attacked in such a way as to try and demean them. To my mind this says more about them, than it ever could about Danny.
I also commented in the thread that Danny initiallyu did, and as I write this I have yet to read what has been written after me, as I unlike Danny, I know what to expect. I’ll do it now tho’. Curiosity and all that.
Surely when a comment is made, where it is an attempt to demean either someone else’s comment, work or themselves, it is far better to remove the individual comment concerned, rather than lock the thread.
Bottom line, the forum has apparently lost a quality member who’s only fault was that he tried to help, but the root cause of the problem still persists.
Truth or no truth anybody should be entitled to speak their mind on a posted image as that is what a forum is for as long as everybody stays polite.
It's a shame the topic was closed as allthough i am not too big of a fan of long discussions i think it is an important technical issue on how to handle ISO in images.
I think it all comes down to what your final goal is with an image. When you only post a 720 pixel image on a forum, using higher ISO's in combination with a good handling of a noise reduction program is fine, but when your images are being sold at stock agencies and you are a pro (like Danny for instance) then your images should be of the highest possible quality and using lower ISO's is a must.
The goal for all of us in the end is to make fine images so there Danny has a point in using lower ISO's.
Hope Danny will still be posting/ commenting over here as i think he is a real asset to this forum!
Greetings,
Jeroen Stel
Tom was correct in closing the post nobody was commenting on what was a good shot of a Jay in difficult lighting conditions.
Today is another day lets move on!!!!!!!
Craig
With regard to the original comment, I feel that as Danny had said that the camera at the 800iso setting was "Crap" meant that he was saying that the image was also "Crap".Well may be he did not mean this to be the case, but that's how I read it!! If Danny had been just a little more controlled in his opinion then all this would never have got this far. I still think that the image was clean and sharp, and we can all learn a lot from people that use high ISO's,and I for one would be glad of any little gem of wisdom.Lets hope the "Mods" see the error of their ways and let THIS post come to a conclusion..........
Stewart......
Re. 'speaking the truth or not' that is not a problem and constructive views have always been encouraged. However when you give an opinion you should expect that other forum members may not agree and are also entitled to voice their opinions and it is then for the reader to decide what they feel is good advice.
I have great respect for Danny as a photographer and his work speaks for itself and for you to say 'his comment was attacked in such a way as to try and demean them' is not right. It was just others voicing there opinion in a constructive manner or are we not allowed to do this when certain forum members speak!
In the Jay thread Brian did give his reasons for using 800 iso and from his perspective it was the right thing to do and I felt pehaps the thread should have ended there.
The reason I entered the thread was that I felt Danny had come out too strongly against high iso settings and I wanted to balance the argument 'for & against' with my views and this is what others were doing. My feeling is that as Wildlife Photographers and NOT just Photographers, are main concern should be to capture the moment even if it is technically less than perfect - if you get both it is a bonus!
I don't think in all my comments on this forum I have rarely if ever commented on noise in another persons image. I either don't see it because I am too interested in the content or I am blind to it after shooting many rolls of Kodachrome 200 which hade the digital equivilant of noise - grain. I can also assure you that when it comes to Picture Researchers the last thing they look for is noise as there main concern is image content with most wildlife driven articles.
Having said all this file quality is very important but in my view secondary to capturing the moment. On the subject of high iso settings remember to try and get your exposure right as having to make large adjustments in RAW will degrade your file to a greater degree than if you had shot at a lower iso.
Danny I do hope you will not stop posting as I for one find your images a joy to view and often very insperational - after all threads of this nature are only about people agreeing to disagree and I am sure we all benefit in different ways!
David
Come on boys & girls, falling out over ISO 400 or ISO 800... at the end of the day they're simply opinions, neither one or other is right or wrong. Aren't there better things to take issue over
It would have been simply forum etiquette (and easy enough) to break the discussion out into another topic - that way you could critique Brian's shot, and also discuss the 1001 uses of ISO - separately! The Mods aren't here to censor anyone, just keep the house in order...
Sorry you feel that way (it was not my intention) but I have a job to do and did it. The thread was off the original topic and IMHO was turning slight personal with infra-digs; it was my judgement call and I closed it. Was I right or wrong? It's hard to say other than to point out that I have recieved no other complaints.
T
You have to do what you think is right at the time,I understand that,and respect your decision, how ever I personally don't agree with you,but if we all agreed on every thing the world would be a very dull place.No hard feelings.. None Taken - Tom
Stewart.................
To be honest this whole episode had completely passed me by - playing catchup this morning has been something of a revelation to put it mildly
Dan can be his own worst enemy at times - at times a little less erudite than the situation may perhaps dictate.
As an ex (thank God) 1DmkII user I am entirely in agreement with him - 800 iso is exponentially bad when compared to lower iso settings - BUT we are talking full res images here that most likely will then have to be put through the interpolation process to bring them up to minimum agency specification on file size.
Brian was more concerned with 'getting the image' - as are the majority of folk and rightly so if that is what 'floats their boat'.
The necessity for flawless full res imagery does NOT apply at a critical level to all members of this forum - thank God too, or half of them would be over-spending on new gear and the other half would be committing suicide
A good number of forum members would do well to remember the 'unseen' and less obvious pressures with regard to image quality that full-timers have to cope with.
AND full-timers really do need to understand that a slightly less forthright attitude can go a long way - it's not called the "art of critique" for nothing!
My response to Brian would have been along the lines of going for 1 stop less on the shutter to trade against the 1DII's better 400iso performance - but that's only my opinion, and only valid if Brian would feel comfortable doing so given the circumstances he found himself in.
Some of us REALLY do know how to chase perfection in an image - but we should never be seen to thrust this knowledge where it's not been asked for - and even though it is a CRITIQUE forum and in truth ALL images posted are fair game for constructive criticism, good critique is done with subtlety NOT a hammer..........
Brian did exceptionally well to get the Jay shot - and he's both big enough and competent enough to make his own decisions and understand their implications.
But "Short Stuff" was absolutely correct in his statement FROM a full-timers point of view - though a slightly less bull-ish attitude might have been the better option..
But that's Dan - look, we've all got our short-comings (apart from me 'cos I'm perfick
Everyone is here to learn something or to help others learn what they know - if an individual is at odds with that then perhaps they should vacate the forum post haste.
But Danny has been over-criticised and personally insulted in this case - and that's not a good thing, especially on a publicly viewable forum.
I hope my little pep talk with him has worked and he'll be back posting soon - then I'll have some images to critique
Stewart............
I don't see myself as a great photographer and I'm learning every day because of comments like Danny makes. I often learn the hard way and I do learn from my mistakes. I'm glad people like Danny say when you are doing something wrong or how to do it better. Even when he says it in a slightly different way. I learned a lot from this great little fart although I never tell him.
Danny.... think about it, swallow your pride and start posting again.
Ed
Apart from all the hoo haa about high ISO problems (which very often only comes out if you dowload the image and blow it up which some on this forum must be doing !! ), I find the above statement a little strange.
If you speak the truth as you see it, are you never wrong ?
Is it not the same as "I never argue unless I am right !"/
John Robinson
Craig
Hi Craig / Brian,
I think Andy Astbury may be referring to a comment I made on a different thread, I used the term "ISO police" on John Robinsons Siskin post and though the comment was made in jest Danny didn't take it in that sense.
I've spoken to Danny this afternoon and apologized for the comment.
Andy...
Tom James
I think the greater percentage ,who are regular visitors, don't say anything and sometimes those that do make constructive criticism can be shot down themselves. I dont see the moderators doing a great deal of critique on the photos that need critique either.
Maybe its time to tell the TRUTH.
This is not the first forum I'd suggest to a new comer to photography and in some ways, this is THE forum I should be sending them too so they can get the benifit of advice from the pro's!
I'm guilty too in that I only tend to comment on shots that really grab me, when I should post on shots that don't, and explain why so that the poster has more information to build on when out shooting next time.
With regards to all this high ISO talk, to say you should use the lowest setting you can is true but to say you shouldn't use high ISO is silly. I'd rather have a slightly grainy sharp shot than a smooth clean blurry one. And, I think unless I'm there at the time the photo was taken and can see the light conditions, the circumstances the shot was taken in and the shooters lens technique, I'm not really in a position to judge their settings but instead just appreciate the photo for it's content rather than it's exif... but that's just me
If it's any help to you, you can view the forum by latest reply, rather than by topic order - there is a link at the top right of the forum topic list that - 'sort by post or reply'. You can also use your forum preferences to set the default for when you view the forum.
HTH
As I have said before it is not just the good/attractive pics that get the comments or views. It is also the photographers names.
It would seem fairly logical that if someone sees a pic with 150 views then they think " I'll have a look too ". Also as I have remarked in the past,the difficulty of the subject is often ignored completely.
I find the business of posting comments quite a nightmare because I am on dial up and it gets to the stage when I am spending too much time trying to keep everyone happy..
Not easy to pick and choose.
I too have noticed that the mods don't post very often, but they probably have the same problem . Where do you stop?
There is a good way out of this though for people who don't get many comments- just pretend that the viewers can't find any faults !!!
JohnR
Edit after seeing the above post
Andrew
Yes it's very easy to laugh at someone's bluntness etc etc, - but everyone doesn't know him like you apparently do,and some of us are a little old fashioned
JR
Edwin Kats
Jack
Much as I admire Danny's work and his obvious skill and professionalism, his initial reply to Brians post was downright rude. There is constructive criticism and that is fine. There is expert advice and instruction, and that is fine too. But Danny was just plain rude. If he now has gone off in a huff because some people disagreed with his opinion (or more likely the way he put it) then let him go cool off. Hopefully he will see sense and return as he will be missed here and his images and advice are usually much appreciated.
Rob
.....but sometimes you need it
Now lets all get back to viewing some great images
Stating an image is rubbish as someone used a certain iso is going to be taken very differently to someone stating that the image may of been improved by a lower iso.
I think it would be a shame if Danny left over this, but at the end of the day its up to him.
First of all I am a little embarassed by this thread and I think what Rob Ashton said has hit home so thanks for his honesty, I don't want to mention anything too about high ISO settings as I think we have had enough of it by now. I would like to say that I never said the image was crap as I would never say that against a fellow photographer just that the camera he used which is the MK 11 is at this high ISO as I have had one for the past four years. If I have offended anyone then I am deeply sorry and no offence was meant.
Danny
Rob
Best wishes
Frederic
Hope you get yourselves sorted out.
Major.
Crikey !!
JohnR
Playtime's over class
Topic closed. Anyone wanting to re-open it will get lines