Amusing

[pecunium]

So, 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.

Comments

[songblaze.livejournal.com]

*rolls her eyes* I hate that kind of thought.

I mean, I look at your photographs and what I think to myself is 'I wish I had enjoyed photography enough to keep learning'. I think I expected to pick it up with the ease I usually pick stuff up, and when I didn't, it was just too much work. Ditto why I quit playing clarinet as a child, I suppose. One of the few pitfalls of being naturally good at a lot of things is that you don't have to learn much patience for those you aren't.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

One of the things digital has done is make it a lot easier to learn photography (and I am being a tad disingenous when I say, correctly, I have a second rate camera these days, but it's still a lot better; in a lot of ways, then most dSLRs on the market).

Because the ongoing costs are, practically speaking, nil, if you get a camera, you can take a huge number of pictures. Twenty some years ago, when I started, it was 20 bucks a roll for color, and about 6 bucks (because I could develop the film for free at school) for B&W.

Given the cost of digital cameras of decent quality, it's a lot cheaper these days..

So, there's nothing stopping you from trying your hand again. I'd be glad to answer questions.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

As I said to athenais I failed to mention that it's not real hate, but rather a turn of phrase, with a large kernal of respect in it; for something one wishes one could do, but knows not yet how.