![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumSo, I went to join a critique group at flickr. They tout themselves as being for the working, or dedicated, photographer, who, "wants to move to the next level" (which is really ugly wording, but sadly typical).
This is one of those groups which wants (nay, demands) that one give comments on specific other photos; when posting a photo, and leave that photo up for a week so anyone else who wants to may comment. This doesn't prevent anyone else from looking, or commenting, but it does give a focus.
I was rejected. Apparently my photos didn't meet the standards of the group. I will take them at their editorial word and assume that "we reviewed your photostream" and not a single guy.
I wonder what the criteria are? I have guesses (based on the rest of the pool). It's not really my ability. I have photos at least as technically competent as most of the photos.
It's that I am not shooting the sorts of things they like. Perhaps it's that my stream isn't nothing but that. They are afraid; because of just how I've combined the various things I shoot, that rahter than this:
Or this:
Which are both very much in keeping with the photos being offered up.
I'll offer up somthing like this:
Which isn't.
But, since they managed to be as dismissive as they were, not so much the rejection, but rather the, "you aren't good enough to even try to help/benefit from our critique," tone of the letter, I don't think I'll repetition for membership.
This is one of those groups which wants (nay, demands) that one give comments on specific other photos; when posting a photo, and leave that photo up for a week so anyone else who wants to may comment. This doesn't prevent anyone else from looking, or commenting, but it does give a focus.
I was rejected. Apparently my photos didn't meet the standards of the group. I will take them at their editorial word and assume that "we reviewed your photostream" and not a single guy.
I wonder what the criteria are? I have guesses (based on the rest of the pool). It's not really my ability. I have photos at least as technically competent as most of the photos.
It's that I am not shooting the sorts of things they like. Perhaps it's that my stream isn't nothing but that. They are afraid; because of just how I've combined the various things I shoot, that rahter than this:
Or this:
Which are both very much in keeping with the photos being offered up.
I'll offer up somthing like this:
Which isn't.
But, since they managed to be as dismissive as they were, not so much the rejection, but rather the, "you aren't good enough to even try to help/benefit from our critique," tone of the letter, I don't think I'll repetition for membership.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-07-11 12:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-11 01:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-11 02:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-11 02:06 am (UTC)To border on the patronising... it's of a class/school/style of photography about line, and shape.
That photo is about the way the line, and the curves, and the edges, and the empty space all relate to each other.
It's a lot more, "inside baseball" sort of photo than most of mine; but more in keeping with the things that group really cares about.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-11 02:47 am (UTC)