Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/10/31

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] PAW -- Criticism or Stroking?
From: "Phong" <phong@doan-ltd.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 04:14:43 -0500

Well said Sonny
Hear ! Hear   to the Men o'  PAWs
:-)

[or is it Here ! Here ... ?)

- - Phong

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of (SonC)
> Sonny Carter
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 9:11 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] PAW -- Criticism or Stroking?
> 
> 
> Joe, my reaction to filling out a form each time I comment on a picture...
> well, I guess you don't wanna hear it. I work at a state university, and the
> profusion of forms is just downright silly.
> 
> I don't often comment out in the open LUG.  If I do, it is rare, or an
> accident, or I think I can offer something that others might need.
> 
> I just don't think that a critique form is very valuable, especially in my
> way of shooting, which often is from the hip.  I take a tiny moment to
> compose, and often until I have seen the proofs, I have no idea which shot
> might be THE one.  I  sit down and brutally throw away contenders until I
> have something that I consider the best shot of the week.
> 
> For every PAW, I shoot about 80 shots.  I rarely post alternates.  If I have
> something else I want to share, I wait  and post it as a separate shot.
> 
> As far as classification in the headers?  Go look at my web site and try to
> classify my PAWs.   If you can make them fit into some dandy little
> categories, I'll buy a five gallon jug of your lens cleaner.  (I might do
> that anyhow, even if you don't classify them.)
> 
> In my mind, the PAW project is not broken.   Seems the only folks who want
> to fix it are those who are not shooting and posting.
> 
> Sonny
> (who posts at http://www.sonc.com)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joseph Codispoti" <joecodi@clearsightusa.com>
> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:47 PM
> Subject: Re: [Leica] PAW -- Criticism or Stroking?
> 
> 
> > My reasoning for the "submission form" is to solicit a more complete
> > appraisal of the picture being viewed.
> > The picture may be awesome, but to the individual who is trying to learn
> the
> > intricacies of composition, lighting, depth of focus, center of interest,
> > etc, awesome does not have much meaning.
> >
> > In the last 8 hours two questions have been asked that to some may be
> > routine but to the novice may be daunting: "the sunny-16 rule" and
> > "short/broad lighting".
> > These are individuals hungry to learn. Maybe many those who post photos
> > deserve to have more complete descriptions of our reaction to their
> > offerings.
> >
> > Joe Codispoti
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Phong" <phong@doan-ltd.com>
> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 3:19 PM
> > Subject: RE: [Leica] PAW -- Criticism or Stroking?
> >
> >
> > > I on the other hand oppose the form suggested by Joe.
> > > Not knowing Joe, at first I thought he was kidding.
> > > The scales suggest an order, a consistence and a
> > > permanence which  to me do not exist.
> > >
> > > I much prefer the free format; if you have something to
> > > say, then say it; if you don't, don't.  As simple as that.
> > > If you are moved to say Wow, then Wow is it.  We
> > > don't need no stinking submission form.
> > >
> > > The left brain should know when to leave the right
> > > one alone.
> > >
> > > - Phong
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > > > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Andrew
> > > > Amundsen
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 12:45 PM
> > > > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > > > Subject: Re: [Leica] PAW -- Criticism or Stroking?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Joe, I really like this approach you have suggested. I hope others
> will
> > pick
> > > > up on something along these lines.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerly, Andrew Amundsen
> > > >
> > > > >From: "Joseph Codispoti" <joecodi@clearsightusa.com> wrote(snip):
> > > > > I think that if the photographer is submitting a photo for
> criticism,
> > the
> > > > > submission announcement could/should be accompanied by a form
> > requesting
> > > > > criticism.
> > > > > The form, to be filled by respondents, should say, at a minimum:
> > > > >
> > > > > Title:
> > > > > Strong Points:
> > > > > Weak points:
> > > > > Points to improve:
> > > > > Overall artistic rating (1-10):
> > > > > Overall technical rating (1-10):
> > > > >
> > > > > With such a form (or similar), the criticism would cover much of
> what
> > a
> > > > > picture is about. Furthermore, the critic would be compelled to
> cover
> > all
> > > > > points and not just "awesome".
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > To unsubscribe, see
> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html