I'm not saying that there are many destructive criticisms here.
However, if you come across any targeted at you post... juz take it or leave it.... helpful or not, at least they bother to post their comments.
CS "critics" suck?
- Thread starter Pablo
- Start date
- Status
I'm not saying that there are many destructive criticisms here.
However, if you come across any targeted at you post... juz take it or leave it.... helpful or not, at least they bother to post their comments.
But the point of this thread, as far as I can understand so far (so correct me if I'm wrong), is whether or not CS's critics 'suck'. Not on how to deal with sucky criticisms right?
Sorry bro, I know all these quoting and replying makes it seems like I'm engaging you on some kind of parry, but I'm not. I'm just trying to understand the point of this thread. Because I do see an issue with critics on CS. Not a serious one, and not necessarily bad at that. So I find this thread worthy of participation.
Of course, any one can just take a situation as it is, and leave it as it is. But we're not on the topic of how to deal with negative criticisms?
yeah. I know where you are coming from. But I tot it's rather a fact.... not only in CS but most other "Art" critics too. It's a norm... look at the music/movies critics reviewers.
It's all in the receiver's own preception of what's the critics intention, good or bad only the critics themselves know.
Put it this way... life sucks too. So it's not important why life sucks, be it a some point or another. But rather, how you handle your life.
Sigh, this is gonna make my online persona look bad again, but DP taught me moral courage. So... My point, and I'll try to make it just once, and hope to be understood as far as possible.
Ekin has made a lot of good and strong points, which I'll like to take on from. And I'll try to keep it simple and not have to explain myself again. Though I know I'll be misunderstood/misinterpreted somehow.
1) Critiques refer to critical analysis of a piece of work. It can be positive or negative.
2) Negative criticisms can be constructive. Positive crticisms can also be constructive.
3) There are many "comments" (borrowing from ekin) made, voiced, worded and articulated as if they are "critiques".
4) The word "critic" seem to have earned some kind of cult status, and everyone tries to be one, and make their comments sound like one. It's fine to just pass a comment you know?
5) The framework adopted be critiques or pseudo critiques are narrow, and largely confined to exposure, colours, sharpness, and occasionally, details and composition.
6) Comments like "nice" and "suck" are both (surprise surprise) not tolerated, even if they can be extremely helpful. They help learners understand what kind of photos appeal to what kind of audience.
7) There seems to be an overwhelming greater proportion of negative critiques as compared to positive ones (which are by and large reserved for scantily claded pretty models)
8) Contrary to popular belief, a lot of the negative (pseudo) 'critiques' aren't all that helpful. They sound high-handed, but often fall short of saying anything of use.
9) There's a vast potential for CSes to be (much) more perceptive and open-minded. Both towards positive critiques and negative critiques.
Just my personal take on the state of 'critics' and 'critiques' on CS. They don't really suck. But there's room aplenty for a happier family. It doesn't always have to be the stereotypical kungfu master (see Gordon Liu in Kill Bill) who's only way to teach is to be harsh using the rod and be obscure about what you're saying. And of course, it's perfectly ok to comment on a photo without trying to pretend to be making a critique, or a kungfu master.
Ekin has made a lot of good and strong points, which I'll like to take on from. And I'll try to keep it simple and not have to explain myself again. Though I know I'll be misunderstood/misinterpreted somehow.
1) Critiques refer to critical analysis of a piece of work. It can be positive or negative.
2) Negative criticisms can be constructive. Positive crticisms can also be constructive.
3) There are many "comments" (borrowing from ekin) made, voiced, worded and articulated as if they are "critiques".
4) The word "critic" seem to have earned some kind of cult status, and everyone tries to be one, and make their comments sound like one. It's fine to just pass a comment you know?
5) The framework adopted be critiques or pseudo critiques are narrow, and largely confined to exposure, colours, sharpness, and occasionally, details and composition.
6) Comments like "nice" and "suck" are both (surprise surprise) not tolerated, even if they can be extremely helpful. They help learners understand what kind of photos appeal to what kind of audience.
7) There seems to be an overwhelming greater proportion of negative critiques as compared to positive ones (which are by and large reserved for scantily claded pretty models)
8) Contrary to popular belief, a lot of the negative (pseudo) 'critiques' aren't all that helpful. They sound high-handed, but often fall short of saying anything of use.
9) There's a vast potential for CSes to be (much) more perceptive and open-minded. Both towards positive critiques and negative critiques.
Just my personal take on the state of 'critics' and 'critiques' on CS. They don't really suck. But there's room aplenty for a happier family. It doesn't always have to be the stereotypical kungfu master (see Gordon Liu in Kill Bill) who's only way to teach is to be harsh using the rod and be obscure about what you're saying. And of course, it's perfectly ok to comment on a photo without trying to pretend to be making a critique, or a kungfu master.
Maybe members should refrain from using "suck" as it has become too controversial..... :thinkotential words to replace "suck" :
unspeakable, unutterable, appalling, disagreeable, indescribable, terrible, horrid, distasteful, incommunicable, indefinable, ineffable, inexpressible, nameless, atrocious, awful, dreadful, frightful, ghastly, grisly, gruesome, hideous, horrendous, horrifying, lurid, macabre, monstrous, nightmarish, shocking, bloodcurdling, dire, direful, fearful, fearsome, forbidding, formidable, frightening, hair-raising, terrifying; abhorrent, deplorable, disgusting, loathsome, nauseating, obnoxious, offensive, inconceivable, incredible, unbelievable, unimaginable, unthinkable; characterless, featureless, nondescript, repugnant, repulsive, revolting, sickening; abominable, evil, foul, heinous, noxious, odious, vile :sweat:
So for example, if one wants to say: your images suck ... maybe should rephrase to: your images are indescribable, or .......
Hi Canonised,
I am taking your post to ride upon as it sort of relates to what I said in another thread about finding a less crass way of discription.
Having read most of this present thread I find that there are many on each side of the fence.
Both with fair views on the subject.
But if we go with the idea that to describe a persons work "sucks" as being Ok, how long will it take before
(due to freedom of speach) it is ok to say a persons work is "fuc*ed" :dunno:
Maybe there is the odd person out there that post's cr*p photo's to see what response they create, but generally
I think that many that do post, in most cases are honestly looking for advise and assistance.
If someone has been posting their photo's for the last 12 months and reguardless of offered help they still have no clue, let them know !
But to judge every submission as if the critique is looking at submissions for their $million magazine is wrong.
Sorry for riding on your post but it was a good one
Oh, just as a point on a particular thing mentioned back somewhere in this thread....
Along the lines of "if a photo is hurtfull to my eyes, then I should say it sucks".
Why ?
That is only your point of view. Why not simply use ignore button and not see the photog's work again, move on :dunno:
No one is making ANYBODY view their work, you view it because you choose to.
If you can't be bothered taking the time to be constructive, why waste the time being insulting.
Along the lines of "if a photo is hurtfull to my eyes, then I should say it sucks".
Why ?
That is only your point of view. Why not simply use ignore button and not see the photog's work again, move on :dunno:
No one is making ANYBODY view their work, you view it because you choose to.
If you can't be bothered taking the time to be constructive, why waste the time being insulting.
maybe its the culture, or maybe it what a person had been exposed throughout the years. with my limited english, i am still able to find other words to say how or why the photo is not good. for those that i cant understand, i just look at it and go on to the next. have not reason what so ever to post rude / insulting remarks.
I didn't comment, noneed thank me lar..
I only bookmarked this thread, just to read all the entertainment. ;p
.
I only bookmarked this thread, just to read all the entertainment. ;p
.
Cheesecake
Senior Member
You got it right on!! Too many useless 1 liners with no reference, a click on any threads, easily spot some,
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showpost.php?p=2499113&postcount=16
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showpost.php?p=2499108&postcount=17
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showpost.php?p=2369744&postcount=11
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showpost.php?p=2503752&postcount=13
Works better if there are some sample pictures.
Just my 2 cents.
wait a minute. Those were comments, NOT critiques. Those comments are not being said acting as a "critic". Those were only comments, not criticism from a critic's perspective. Neither were there condemnations/sarcasm made towards the photographs or the photograhers like what many critics here did.
A comment is different from a critique. A comment can be made without offering anything else and by necessary with authority. But a critique is a "detailed review" made with serious examinations and with authority like our critics here and that should be followed up with solutions or recommendations.
If you do not understand the differences, please take some time to understand the differences first.
First we have twisted comments like "if we apply your rather twisted logic. that means..
no point reading movie reviews, if the reviewer cant point to a movie he directed.
no point reading car reviews, if the car reviewer cant show us a car he made.....
"
And now-
we have one who cant understand the distinction between a comment and critique. I hope the critics here are not the same persons with comprehension deficiencies.
A comment is different from a critique. A comment can be made without offering anything else and by necessary with authority. But a critique is a "detailed review" made with serious examinations and with authority like our critics here and that should be followed up with solutions or recommendations.
If you do not understand the differences, please take some time to understand the differences first.
First we have twisted comments like "if we apply your rather twisted logic. that means..
no point reading movie reviews, if the reviewer cant point to a movie he directed.
no point reading car reviews, if the car reviewer cant show us a car he made.....
"
And now-
we have one who cant understand the distinction between a comment and critique. I hope the critics here are not the same persons with comprehension deficiencies.
There is no "critic" title in CS. So who are you referring to when you say "critics"?
So student and DP have to be treated as critics and you can be treated as a commenter only? If you give a one liner you can get away by calling it a just a comment, and then when someone else says "bad exposure" or "bad composition" they are labelled as "critics" that "suck"?
If by your definition "a critique is a "detailed review" made with serious examinations and with authority" then when DP says the pictures "suck" then he is only making a comment right?
Please tell me how to differentiate between a "critic" and a "commenter" from your perspective, because from my perspective your logic is indeed twisted.
hmmm... U're getting yourself into deep sh!t liao.
Hey buddy, just abandon this nick and use your old nick lah. no one else will know who u r.
.
Sion
Senior Member
2006 : CS "critics" suck
2007 : CS "comments" suck
2008 : CS ???
how about the past 2003 ? 2004 ? 2005 ? :dunno:
- Status
Similar threads
