Florid Reflections - a question for Marc and others
Discussion
6 replies
Posted by John Clulow on November 27, 2012 at 7:41 PM
I'm new here. One thing I've noticed, as someone new here, yet someone not at all new to photo forums, is something that seems to be going on with the category structure here.
My experiences here have led me to reflect upon the comments I've received, many of which indicate that the images I thought fit into certain categories, would be much better placed in others.
What I am about to tell you is about me. I am your customer, by the way.
I have come to understand the importance in a nature photography forum, that is, a forum which is fundamentally unique in that it is dedicated to nature photography, of having a discrete set of forum categories which are kept relatively clean, pure, and with integrity of intent.
In these forums, I can see that this would include the basic ones like Avian, Flora, Landscape, and Wildlife. Why this principle is important, I've come to figure out recently as a result of my experience here, is that in the core practices of nature photography, you have folks who devote a lot of time and effort to developing very specific technical skills. This, I think, is perhaps most clearly expressed in the Avian forum, but it is also apparent in the others I've mentioned.
Now, for folks like me who tend not to focus upon a particular discipline but rather to go where the winds blow and constrantly try new things and to push the boundaries, if we place images in a forum where those images deviate significantly from the centroid expectation, they that causes problems for the core devotees there, and I think that that feeling could be justified for the aforementioned reasons.
There are other forums, however, whicn one would think were put there specifically to take the spill over from people like me. And those forums would be, for example, POP, Man and Nature, and, yes, even maybe Photo Art.
Of the handful of images I've posted (and if you haven't noticed, my ratio of critique to image posts is probably positive), I've received an extradinordary number of suggestions on a proportionate basis, that I should have posted in a different forum.
While I was preparing to offer a mia culpa regarding a few, like the squirrel silhouette, the milkweed, and the most recent florid reflections one, I just say that I take rdical exception to Moderator Marc Ward's suggestion that my post, made some time ago, entitled "switchgrass" doesn't belong in his "Photo Art" forum.
The problem I see, folks, is that if we have forum moderators that are going to sort of have territorial "issues" that bring the nature of the catetories we can post in up to a level of consciousness that is higher than that of the actual processes we have in making images, then that will not be acceptable to me.
Let me put it another way; I want to take nature photographs and post them to share with others. If how they are catogorized within some set of arbitrary set of criteria becomes too important, I'm afraid I will have to move on. That's not while I'm here.
My suggestion would be this: I can see how it is important to have integrity and purity in a core set of forum categories: Wildlife, Flora, Avian, Landscape. Why then not allow a few other categories to have more expansive boundaries so that folks like me who like to explore don't have to piss off the purists.
Those would be, first and foremost, "Photo Art". Note that that term does NOT say "photo manipulation"; it says "Photo Art". Then POP, Man and Nature, Macro/Close up, and so on.
If there is no "Photo Art" that does not involve photo manipulation, then isn't there something missing here???
Bottom line, folks, while I'm very happy with the quality of work here and the critique and, I'm getting incresingly disturbed by the suggestions that posts I make belong in someone else's forum.
To me, this should not be about, and WILL not be about figuring out how to catagorize my images. I'm just saying.
Posted by David Chauvin on November 27, 2012 at 8:34 PM
Hey John,
There's no doubt that each forum falls into a pattern and a certain amount of group think is inevitable. My experience here has been that the forum mods are not being purists guarding territory but rather suggesting that a particular image might get more feedback in a different forum. They are more aware of how an image will be received by the forum "regulars" and rather than letting an image languish it may be better received and responded to by a different audience. This might not always be the case but I think it is the majority of the time. Many members never stray from the forum of their particular passion. So just keep on putting them where ever you think they best belong and I for one hope you decide to stick around. We need more cranks like you.
John, have you read the guidelines for the posts in each gallery.? To me, they are very clear and not "arbitrary" at all. All photo sites have basic rules nd guideline for posting.
When people comment (as I did recently)that a photo Should be in a different category, it is not to keep the galleries "pure" but to have your photo get th most views and more helpful comments.
Sandy
I'm a has-been moderator John, but I'll confirm what others have said about suggested moves. That was certainly my motive when I did so. It's not offered as criticism, rather it's support and encouragement. Moderators talk among themselves sometimes about how to be more effective at the job, and attempting to enhance viewer responses was always the motivation. As Sandy suggests, check the guidelines again. They're not rigid, but they do give pretty good clues to the kinds of viewers that are likely to hang out in each gallery.
As to your larger point about shooting for particular categories, doing so has never occurred to me in my own shooting. I shoot what I'm drawn to, and only after the fact do I consider which gallery would be the best fit for a photo.
For example, we stopped yesterday to check out the elephant seals on California's central coast. The longest lens I had was 120mm, so no whisker-and-fang shots for me. Undaunted, I had a ball shooting "landscape" shots featuring patterns made by snoozing seals. Wildlife? Certainly, but whisker-and-fang shots get the best response in that gallery. Landcape? Half the respondents will direct me back to Wildlife. Since my interest was all about pattern and shape, I'm more inclined to post to Photo Art, but guess what the regulars there will suggest? No one is saying the photos do not belong in either Landscape or Photo Art, rather they're suggesting I'll get more and perhaps more informed responses in Wildlife.
See the distinction?
Posted by Keith Bauer on November 28, 2012 at 2:19 PM
Hi John:
The spirit of NPN is one of camaraderie and help. I looked at the thread in Photo Art that prompted this thread. I'm surprised that you somehow arrived at the conclusion that moderators have territorial issues with images posted in their galleries. As a moderator in the Avian critique gallery, my volunteer job is to make sure that people follow the posting guidelines for the forum, provide critiques on images just like any other NPN member, and be helpful and respectful. We are all here to learn, and support the art and craft of photography. Arriving a conclusions which are unfounded (as has already been pointed out) is not helpful. As a moderator I have moved images from Avian to other galleries that were clearly placed in the wrong place to start with, and suggested movement of others to help the photographer gather additional comments. I saw absolutely nothing in the comments on your image that would have warranted this type of response. Seems easier to ask questions and seek clarification, rather than starting an accusatory thread of territorial behaviors.
I'm just saying
Posted by Phil Pogledich on November 29, 2012 at 3:28 PM
Goodness John, you asked "did I post in the right forum" in your introductory comments to "Switchgrass," so why take exception to Marc's very polite (and entirely accurate) response that the shot would have been better suited for POP or Flora? Seriously...
Posted by David Bostedo on November 29, 2012 at 4:55 PM
John - I think one issue may be with how you are interpreting the term "Photo Art". It IS essentially a "photo manipulation" gallery. It is perhaps not the best name for the forum, in that there may be a perceived implication that it means the other forums are not art or artistic. It is not at all meant that way.
Instead the implication is that it is primarily photo-based creations, and not "straight" photos; I.e. photo based work that has had more drastic manipulations that the usual tones/color/brightness/contrast/sharpening/etc. Note that these don't have to be manipulations done after the fact - they could be done in camera, or even just be a result of the way the photo was taken and what the subject was (i.e. some abstracts would probably best fit in Photo Art even if they are straight photos).
In my opinion, whether any given post is considered art or not is up to the creators and viewers, and could potentially apply or not apply equally to everything posted on the site.
Discussion
6 repliesMy experiences here have led me to reflect upon the comments I've received, many of which indicate that the images I thought fit into certain categories, would be much better placed in others.
What I am about to tell you is about me. I am your customer, by the way.
I have come to understand the importance in a nature photography forum, that is, a forum which is fundamentally unique in that it is dedicated to nature photography, of having a discrete set of forum categories which are kept relatively clean, pure, and with integrity of intent.
In these forums, I can see that this would include the basic ones like Avian, Flora, Landscape, and Wildlife. Why this principle is important, I've come to figure out recently as a result of my experience here, is that in the core practices of nature photography, you have folks who devote a lot of time and effort to developing very specific technical skills. This, I think, is perhaps most clearly expressed in the Avian forum, but it is also apparent in the others I've mentioned.
Now, for folks like me who tend not to focus upon a particular discipline but rather to go where the winds blow and constrantly try new things and to push the boundaries, if we place images in a forum where those images deviate significantly from the centroid expectation, they that causes problems for the core devotees there, and I think that that feeling could be justified for the aforementioned reasons.
There are other forums, however, whicn one would think were put there specifically to take the spill over from people like me. And those forums would be, for example, POP, Man and Nature, and, yes, even maybe Photo Art.
Of the handful of images I've posted (and if you haven't noticed, my ratio of critique to image posts is probably positive), I've received an extradinordary number of suggestions on a proportionate basis, that I should have posted in a different forum.
While I was preparing to offer a mia culpa regarding a few, like the squirrel silhouette, the milkweed, and the most recent florid reflections one, I just say that I take rdical exception to Moderator Marc Ward's suggestion that my post, made some time ago, entitled "switchgrass" doesn't belong in his "Photo Art" forum.
The problem I see, folks, is that if we have forum moderators that are going to sort of have territorial "issues" that bring the nature of the catetories we can post in up to a level of consciousness that is higher than that of the actual processes we have in making images, then that will not be acceptable to me.
Let me put it another way; I want to take nature photographs and post them to share with others. If how they are catogorized within some set of arbitrary set of criteria becomes too important, I'm afraid I will have to move on. That's not while I'm here.
My suggestion would be this: I can see how it is important to have integrity and purity in a core set of forum categories: Wildlife, Flora, Avian, Landscape. Why then not allow a few other categories to have more expansive boundaries so that folks like me who like to explore don't have to piss off the purists.
Those would be, first and foremost, "Photo Art". Note that that term does NOT say "photo manipulation"; it says "Photo Art". Then POP, Man and Nature, Macro/Close up, and so on.
If there is no "Photo Art" that does not involve photo manipulation, then isn't there something missing here???
Bottom line, folks, while I'm very happy with the quality of work here and the critique and, I'm getting incresingly disturbed by the suggestions that posts I make belong in someone else's forum.
To me, this should not be about, and WILL not be about figuring out how to catagorize my images. I'm just saying.
There's no doubt that each forum falls into a pattern and a certain amount of group think is inevitable. My experience here has been that the forum mods are not being purists guarding territory but rather suggesting that a particular image might get more feedback in a different forum. They are more aware of how an image will be received by the forum "regulars" and rather than letting an image languish it may be better received and responded to by a different audience. This might not always be the case but I think it is the majority of the time. Many members never stray from the forum of their particular passion. So just keep on putting them where ever you think they best belong and I for one hope you decide to stick around. We need more cranks like you.
David
When people comment (as I did recently)that a photo Should be in a different category, it is not to keep the galleries "pure" but to have your photo get th most views and more helpful comments.
Sandy
As to your larger point about shooting for particular categories, doing so has never occurred to me in my own shooting. I shoot what I'm drawn to, and only after the fact do I consider which gallery would be the best fit for a photo.
For example, we stopped yesterday to check out the elephant seals on California's central coast. The longest lens I had was 120mm, so no whisker-and-fang shots for me. Undaunted, I had a ball shooting "landscape" shots featuring patterns made by snoozing seals. Wildlife? Certainly, but whisker-and-fang shots get the best response in that gallery. Landcape? Half the respondents will direct me back to Wildlife. Since my interest was all about pattern and shape, I'm more inclined to post to Photo Art, but guess what the regulars there will suggest? No one is saying the photos do not belong in either Landscape or Photo Art, rather they're suggesting I'll get more and perhaps more informed responses in Wildlife.
See the distinction?
The spirit of NPN is one of camaraderie and help. I looked at the thread in Photo Art that prompted this thread. I'm surprised that you somehow arrived at the conclusion that moderators have territorial issues with images posted in their galleries. As a moderator in the Avian critique gallery, my volunteer job is to make sure that people follow the posting guidelines for the forum, provide critiques on images just like any other NPN member, and be helpful and respectful. We are all here to learn, and support the art and craft of photography. Arriving a conclusions which are unfounded (as has already been pointed out) is not helpful. As a moderator I have moved images from Avian to other galleries that were clearly placed in the wrong place to start with, and suggested movement of others to help the photographer gather additional comments. I saw absolutely nothing in the comments on your image that would have warranted this type of response. Seems easier to ask questions and seek clarification, rather than starting an accusatory thread of territorial behaviors.
I'm just saying
Instead the implication is that it is primarily photo-based creations, and not "straight" photos; I.e. photo based work that has had more drastic manipulations that the usual tones/color/brightness/contrast/sharpening/etc. Note that these don't have to be manipulations done after the fact - they could be done in camera, or even just be a result of the way the photo was taken and what the subject was (i.e. some abstracts would probably best fit in Photo Art even if they are straight photos).
In my opinion, whether any given post is considered art or not is up to the creators and viewers, and could potentially apply or not apply equally to everything posted on the site.