Clarification 1:
Since when did I mention what style a person shd take. If it is with reference to LeeJay's comments, unless your comprehension ability is bad, i said that it is subjective.
My quote,
"The pros are trying to guide u to a commercial style. Your shots are more lifestyle shots which has turned commercial like NBYN. This can be very subjective at times."
Did I force? No! I only ask him to give credit to those who tries to guide him even though their guidance may not be what they want.
My quote,
"Agree on the guidance part. But cannot blame the helpful pp there lah. Training him to earn money mah"
And what is wrong with commercial style if the artist likes it? My quote
"Since when I said that everyone is here to learn photography to earn $$$? Even if the pros is out to guide pp to commercial style, what is wrong with that? It means that the images are nice and that is why it has commercial value. Of course, it must be nice to u at the same time lah.
If u look thru the recent postings, u will noticed that many wannabes have got into freelance jobs. What is wrong with getting assignments to support own hobbies?"
My conclusion is have I in any of these post forced pp to my opinion on styles. NONE OF THESE STATEMENTS SAYS U MUST HAVE COMMERCIAL STYLE! Art as what I believe is subjective and I will never impose what type of the style the person shd take.
However, the only thing that I insisted was technicalities. I said that those are seldom subjective. Not absolute by the use of the word seldom!
My quote,
"However, for technicalities wise, it is not subjective most of the time though."
Why seldom? If an image is intended to be blur, it has to be blur. If an image is intended to be clear, it must be clear. These are technicalities. What is wrong with telling pp what they cannot see due to their lack of exposure. When I first started off, I dun know that my photos has a strong brown cast until I met pp who told me and showed me samples what is a neutral image. From there, I sharpen my sense of colours. What is wrong with that?
Clarification 2:
As to the "Is it Okay?" thread, I dun know what happened to my images. Just went blank and since I already received certain constructive feedback, I removed it cause it does not make sense to put it there anymore without the images.
Clarification 3: To be continued once I send something
How the hell did it, from a thread to comment and critique YLSX's photos, turn into a tit-for-tat comparison war with one another? You guys really love each other man!
student... if u want to get togehter with DP... seeing as u have such a hard on for him.. il repeat my offer to arrange an introduction.
The way you replied is a total mess! I wll not read through your mess!
Y, my apologies for the OT. But this originated from some posts talking about respecting models, and implying that if the pictures are "not nice" then the photographers are not being "respectful". I think this nonsense needs to be corrected.
Bob, you do not need to reply to this.
I know you will try to protect your models. Good for you. This should be the first concern for all organisers for such shoots.
What you had written here is even worse than "disrespectful". It is plain exploitation, and should be denounced in the strongest terms. If one wishes to make such photographs, (and I am not so prudish that people cannot make such photographs) then please get the appropriate models.
"Respect" means treating models as human beings. As people with dignity and feelings. Paying a model for fashion shoots does not mean that one can ask the models to do things which are not appropriate. Respect means making sure the models do not get dehydrated during shoots in the sun, and ensuring proper rests in between,
However "respect" does not mean that the photographers have to make pretty pictures. I am talking about paid shoots. I am not talking about a client who pays me to shoot. "Art" is making a biography about the subject at hand. And if that biography is not something pretty, it is not being disrespectul. The fundamental basis of a model's duty is to lend her face, etc to the photographer for him to make his story.
#1 For your information, I had photographed with DP twice.
The last time I even held his oversized reflector for him!!
#2 C, you are not in different league with him. As far as I am concern, from the pictures you showed ("Is this Okay?" - assuming it is from you), both your images are equally sterile.
How the hell did it, from a thread to comment and critique YLSX's photos, turn into a tit-for-tat comparison war with one another? You guys really love each other man!
Oh by the way, just to make u happy with a "soulful" pic.
![]()
This is one image that DP won't take probably. But it is one of my fav pic.
Keep our brain cells alive loh. Can dig up each other's fallacies including my own. See it as a self improvement process so that I won't be so stick in the mud. Or else old already will be like my daddy and mummy who always say that they eat salt more than I eat rice.
i won't comment on the pic exposure and wb
but u dun have post this pic just to spite other.....
this debate should be done in a kopitam thread![]()
Am I being spiteful or am I proving some pp's extreme opinion and statement wrong? Maybe my method of presentation is wrong in terms of sarcasm. Thanks for the note.
Moderators, can u move this current discussion to Kopitiam. I very bad to TS. Thousand apologies to the TS for OT so much. :embrass:
this thread should stay here. those who wish to debate should move their discussion to kopitam.
If I am correct, I remember that the admin can shift part of the thread to Kopitiam.