Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/10/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]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