As long as they spell our name right. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=13484090

Read 3,860 times

Reply 

From baba/David (33,005) on May 17, 2005 12:32:09 AM CDT You calling out the posse? Reply

From sheena/SheenaWilkie (12,817) on May 17, 2005 12:37:59 AM CDT lol No. Reply

From lyn/Lyn (21,466) on May 17, 2005 1:21:47 AM CDT why was the first posting about this deleted? Reply

From sheena/SheenaWilkie (12,817) on May 17, 2005 1:24:13 AM CDT Uh there was no other posting about this that I saw. If there was it was deleted by whoever posted it. Reply

From chess7/Charles (32,815) on May 17, 2005 1:55:48 AM CDT Yeah, a few of us jumped in on the fun. One of the revered regulars over there is quite an intellectual snob and told the original poster to avoid sig "like the plague". You of course know what a few of them think about the admins here. :-) Reply

From sheena/SheenaWilkie (12,817) on May 17, 2005 2:05:43 AM CDT I find it amusing, especially since some of their info is abit out of date. It's interesting too that they expect a critique site to be full of excellent work. Wouldn't give us much to critique. And then there are the disgruntled that were asked to leave still holding a grudge. Ah well it's a great big internet and lots of room for their views and others. However, I sure hope that guy has the owner's permission of those photos he has posted. Reply

From deleted060612/Deleted (5,306) on May 17, 2005 4:09:35 AM CDT "some of their info is a bit out of date" You are getting quite generous Sheena. -- How long is it since Andrew wore a pointy hat?? Reply

From imp/Sharie (9,111) on May 17, 2005 4:29:30 AM CDT About a yr or so I think Reply

From deleted060612/Deleted (5,306) on May 17, 2005 4:53:24 AM CDT Got to be longer Reply

From dieaxt/Andrew (11,843) on May 17, 2005 8:01:44 AM CDT Wrapped it up at the end of '03. Very nice to know that I frightened some of the Euro-thumbers well enough that they're still hesitant to come back and check the place out. Reply

From robinlmorgan/Robin (15,586) on May 17, 2005 8:30:31 PM CDT Walk softly and carry a bix Axe. My champion. Reply

From burn1138/James (1,328) on May 17, 2005 5:44:27 AM CDT i still think we should throw down with them, or worse tell andrew what they said about him. Reply

From revival/Brent (1,278) on May 17, 2005 7:03:15 AM CDT Andrew loves nothing more than a good insult! I think the only thing he actually will take offense of is the fact that he is a Leica collector! Ducking for cover... Reply

From dieaxt/Andrew (11,843) on May 17, 2005 7:50:19 AM CDT Two bodies and one lens does not a collector make. The only worthwhile reference over there was the "thug" line, but... (Oh, gotta go, here's the mailman with my new switchblade.) Reply

From revival/Brent (1,278) on May 17, 2005 8:27:21 AM CDT Yeah, but I know they both sit in a glass case, taken out daily to be polished and aired, while you really shoot everything we see here with the Rollei. Just admit it! Reply

From deleted89135/deleted (2,385) on May 17, 2005 7:32:29 AM CDT ya know I needed that good laugh after a long nights work! I had no idea I was viewed as such a meanie. *grin* Reply

From satu/Susanna (3,959) on May 17, 2005 8:03:26 AM CDT THANK YOU 'charlesh' and 'Tim Johnstone'. Thank you fellow siggers - during the short while I've been here, even a blind can see that I've learnt tons just by looking at some of the first and last shots in my portfolio. I will rest my case and happily continue to camp in this little community. :) PS. And every now and then we do need some strong women with a leather whip with a knot at the end... oops too uncivilised language... maybe I'll be forced to withdraw my last sentence... ;~) Reply

From deleted119173/deleted (3,012) on May 17, 2005 2:22:30 PM CDT "...every now and then we do need some strong women with a leather whip with a knot at the end..." Never a truer word...... Reply

From deleted89135/deleted (2,385) on May 17, 2005 3:17:12 PM CDT "oops too uncivilised language... maybe I'll be forced to withdraw my last sentence" If that were the case most of my sentences would be deleted :D Reply

From zal/Zal (5,569) on May 17, 2005 8:26:28 AM CDT My favorite post from that thread: "I agree Petteri ! I used to post there, too. Your observations are right on the money. Also, last time I was there ( 2003 or so ) the moderator(s) were thugs...." LOL--maybe someone should tell her that Andrew is no longer a moderator...:-) Reply

From tomas/Tomas (1,442) on May 17, 2005 9:05:02 AM CDT From the posts in that thread I think some of those guys think that any admin that points out "no, you can't be an asshole in here and revenge-rate, regardless how successful you are in real life" is a thug. Reply

From philg364/Phil (1,421) on May 17, 2005 9:08:50 AM CDT Boy, some of the people over there really have an "axe" to grind. Congratulations, Andrew, for being called a thug. I could see the picture in your profile grinning at that one. I've looked around at other critique sites, and I'll stay here. I'll take one, informative critique (good or bad) over twenty that just pat me on the back. Reply

From dieaxt/Andrew (11,843) on May 17, 2005 9:58:54 AM CDT I was equated to Hermann Göring by one ex-Sig member a few years ago; we all know where that leaves Willis. Reply

From gui/Gui (6,142) on May 17, 2005 9:31:30 AM CDT Well, that was interesting. I wish I had known this was where I was supposed to post my "high-quality" images only - like an idiot I keep posting things I want help on, looking for (and receiving) feedback to help me become a better photographer. What a waste of my $25. Reply

From clchick/Cl (3,562) on May 17, 2005 9:40:56 AM CDT Holy Jeebus!! I've found myself actually defending this place. I gotta' go lie down... Reply

From sheena/SheenaWilkie (12,817) on May 17, 2005 10:25:10 AM CDT Man that guy is still going on about photoSIG. Does anyone remember him? Oh and he says he doesn't like photoSIG, but he logged into his account this morning ;-) Reply

From revival/Brent (1,278) on May 17, 2005 11:14:22 AM CDT Dunno, but I'm thinkin' the guy got a red thumb on one of his superb images - you know, not one of the ones he simply took to get Sig thumbs -and then complained about it in the forums, which met (thankfully) with the admins telling him to grow up, so he rationally decided to just go be a baby somewhere else... or something to that effect. Reply

From tomas/Tomas (1,442) on May 17, 2005 1:25:56 PM CDT Among the other ego-filled babies at dpreview you mean? ;-) Reply

From deleted.61873/deleted (152) on May 18, 2005 4:54:41 AM CDT Hiya, folks -- Wow, I never imagined I'd get all this attention here. If it makes you feel better to think that I left Photosig because I got red thumbs or got into a tiff with the moderators, there's not much I can do to discourage you. All I can say is that that's not the case. My photos did just fine here; a few got a fair number of TU, others got ignored. I don't actually remember getting TD, but I can't say for certain that that never happened either. In any case, the reason I left Photosig was the one I stated at DPReview -- I found that the reward/punishment system was steering my photography towards things I thought would score TU's here, instead of things I personally wanted to shoot. Moreover, I was seeing the same thing happening to a number of photographers I had associated with and followed from the time they first joined Photosig. As you'll see from my forum profile, I wasn't exactly much of a forum participant. I certainly didn't complain there about critiques, nor did I ever get into fights with admins. As I said, if it makes you feel better to think that I feel this way because of interpersonal issues or not getting enough TU's, there's not a whole lot I can do to prove you wrong. But I would respectfully ask you to at least consider the possibility that my actual reasons for quitting Photosig are the same as my stated reasons for quitting Photosig. Surely that's at least a possibility? /Petteri Reply

From chess7/Charles (32,815) on May 18, 2005 5:21:35 AM CDT I knew you would pop over here. I did look at your history and saw that you were actually part of the problem here, rewarding all of those "perfect" scores. So you became enlightened and are now a better person because you left sig. That's great, and I'm happy you are the revered philosopher you've become over at that site filled with techno-babble and nonsense forums. You don't need to PROVE anyone wrong, and again, your arrogance shines through in that you are the know-all about the evils of this site. To me, you are preaching to a deaf audience. Oh, yes, I attacked your photography because it was the photography on this site which you felt was beneath you and the others on dpreview, with "blandification" as your cutsey catch-word. How about letting adults make up their own minds as to what is good photography and which site works for them. This reward/punishment system, as you call it, didn't work for you. That's great. Others don't see it that way. Who made you more right than the thousands of others who enjoy this site? Hmmm? If I seem to be a rabid defender of the site...let's just say that I like the site, detest people who try to push their views on others. As I said before, and which you apparently don't understand, you talk the talk, but sure have trouble walking the walk. Reply

From deleted.61873/deleted (152) on May 18, 2005 5:44:47 AM CDT Hi, Charles -- I'm not stopping anyone from making up their minds. I'm just stating my opinion. Everyone else is free to make up their minds about it. You're free to defend the site. Hell, you're even free to make personal attacks on the motives, photography, history, and character of anyone disagreeing with you. And, yes, I do feel terribly embarrassed when I'm reading those critiques I wrote. I was part of the problem... even though I did write more than the occasional TD critique as well, especially towards the end of my stay here. I talk the talk but don't walk the walk? I'm sorry, Charles, but I can't really help that I'm not terribly talented as a photographer. The only thing I can do is try to work with the small amount of talent I have, and hope that perhaps in another 20 years something better will have come out of it. But I do know for certain that conforming to the tastes of "the thousands of others who enjoy this site" isn't the way to get there. If you're happy here, then more power to you... but I do find it curious that you find it necessary to descend to such a personal level when defending this site. Usually people do that if they feel seriously threatened by someone or something. Surely a no-talent blowhard pseudo-intellectual from a techno-babble nonsense forum can't be such a threat to you? Unless, just possibly, there might be a grain of truth in something that he says? Just a thought, Charles. Just a thought... /Petteri Reply

From chess7/Charles (32,815) on May 18, 2005 6:48:28 AM CDT I'll respond just to the last paragraph, then I'm finished responding on this thread, as well. Please believe that I am not threatened by your or anyone else's work or words. I am not eloquent, nor am I one of the pseudo-intellectuals. What I am is someone who has been through a lot in his life and am now one who values life and the lives of my fellow man. If I sound like I am over-zealous in defending something as insignificant as a website on the Internet, then that's fine. People come here for different reasons, among them, learning how to improve their skills. And just as you felt the need to "advise" others by condemning sig, I felt the need to defend what I feel is a good site visited by good people, beginner and pro alike. Yes, there are people here with different motives, just as there are an abundance of trolls and intellectual snobs on dpreview, but we all have choices to either ignore or get sucked up into the bad things. I ignore them. But what I don't ignore...and again this comes from my many tough life experiences, are people, like yourself and your comments in dpreview, who try to push their high-brow opinions on others. Avoiding sig "like the plague" and your term "blandification" were enough for me to categorize you as the intellectual snob I think you are. If I am wrong, that's OK, too, because it really doesn't matter to me in the grand scheme of things. Just as it shouldn't(and doesn't) matter to you if I offer vehement counterpoint to your comments. That's it, and just like on dpreview, you can get the last word in because I really don't care. Reply

From deleted.61873/deleted (152) on May 18, 2005 7:18:33 AM CDT For your information, I'm not offended by your counterpoint at all: it takes a lot more than that to offend me. But the personal nature of the counterpoint did call for a response of my own. Moreover, I think that you would have gotten your point across better by attacking the claim rather than the person making the claim. Perhaps something to remember the next time you feel compelled to defend Photosig? Moreover, I'd like to point out that I wasn't the one who started the discussion on DPReview. Someone else was advising people to go to Photosig to improve their photography. I happen to feel differently about it, and said so. When you, Tim, and certain others fell on me like a ton of bricks as a result, I defended myself. How is that "pushing their high-brow opinion on others?" Don't belittle yourself, Charles. Your writing is quite good, and you're clearly intelligent. You have a rich vocabulary and make use of complex grammar in a very expressive and, dare I say, eloquent way. (Hm. Does that make you a pseudo-anti-intellectual?) Stick with it, and you might have a future in talk radio. :-) Peace? /Petteri Reply

From revival/Brent (1,278) on May 18, 2005 9:11:38 AM CDT "But I do know for certain that conforming to the tastes of "the thousands of others who enjoy this site" isn't the way to get there. If you're happy here, then more power to you... but I do find it curious that you find it necessary to descend to such a personal level when defending this site. Usually people do that if they feel seriously threatened by someone or something. Surely a no-talent blowhard pseudo-intellectual from a techno-babble nonsense forum can't be such a threat to you? Unless, just possibly, there might be a grain of truth in something that he says? Just a thought, Charles. Just a thought... Again... and again, and again, and again, add infinitum, your claims have no facts whatsoever to back them up! If you can't find a photographer here... uh, let me rephrase... many, many, photographers here, that are not conforming and working for the "Sig-a-wards" like a few of the others (shallow people like you who have yet to "see the light" and join you on dpreview), you have to be blind in one eye, and not able to see out of the other! The fact is that those who are here for the points, and willing to do anything to get them, are looked down upon in a big way, and they are continually being "saved" from their shallow and self destructive ways. Who knows? If you had stayed maybe you could have been as lucky. You admit that you need what Sig has to offer when you say, "I'm sorry, Charles, but I can't really help that I'm not terribly talented as a photographer. The only thing I can do is try to work with the small amount of talent I have, and hope that perhaps in another 20 years something better will have come out of it." Yeah! Or, you could open your eyes and, with a little crow for lunch, let the Photosig community educate you on both photography and a fairly good helping of humility! And, remember, you absolutely did start this! You may have left for the reasons you stated, but they were reasons that you came to based on a false premise. If you found yourself allowing the site to "blandify" you, you could simply have rearranged your priorities and motives, and allowed your Sig experience to become what it is for most of us, which is very productive, gratifying, and valuable. Then you wouldn't have had to say something like, "...steer clear of Photosig like the plague...", which is what all of this is about. Reply

From deleted.61873/deleted (152) on May 18, 2005 11:22:18 AM CDT Brent -- if you want to actually discuss this with me, please cut out the insults. OTOH, if you just want to insult me, go right ahead, but don't expect to have a conversation. /Petteri Reply

From revival/Brent (1,278) on May 18, 2005 12:06:46 PM CDT I called you shallow, and you use that one little dig to justify not responding? Sounds like I'm getting to the root of the problem. There was an awful lot of meat on that bone, Petteri, so using that as an excuse is pretty, uh, well... (insert choice adjective here) __________. Reply

From deleted.61873/deleted (152) on May 18, 2005 12:22:43 PM CDT Fair enough. First off, you're right about most points in your post: that there are many non-conformist photographers here, and that I did in a sense "start this" with my over-the-top "avoid photoSIG like the plague" advice. It was bad advice, and I won't do it again. Again, you're right that I could have rearranged my motives and thereby improved my photoSIG experience. In fact, I could still try to do just that, and consciously try to avoid falling into the thumb-chasing trap. And you're right that I could benefit from the experience. Perhaps I will do just that, one of these days. But you're wrong about my motives: I did not leave photoSIG because of interpersonal issues or because I couldn't take negative critiques. My reasons for leaving were the ones I stated. Perhaps they were the wrong reasons; however, I think I may have been too lacking in confidence as a photographer at the time to be able to do that successfully, and going cold turkey may have been the best thing to do at the time. But perhaps, had I been more on my guard, I would never have fallen into the trap to start with. /Petteri Reply

From revival/Brent (1,278) on May 18, 2005 12:44:52 PM CDT Sounds good. Breaks from Photosig aren't a bad thing. Even good ole' Sig lover, Tim, took a long one. Reply

From sheena/SheenaWilkie (12,817) on May 18, 2005 11:18:28 AM CDT but I do find it curious that you find it necessary to descend to such a personal level when defending this site. Usually people do that if they feel seriously threatened by someone or something. And your continued bad mouthing photoSIG a year after you left and following people over here to bad mouth them says what about you? Petteri, seriously, you need to occupy yourself more constructively, try photography. Reply

From deleted.61873/deleted (152) on May 18, 2005 11:28:03 AM CDT Sheena -- Exactly where am I bad mouthing people here? I came here because Tim was posting some pretty personal attacks over at DPReview (falsely suggesting that I left Photosig because I got TD's on my photos and got into fights with moderators). I wanted to if not set the record straight at least give my side of that issue. How about this for a deal: you guys cut out the personal attacks, and I'll get out of here (again)? Moreover, I find it very offensive that you label me as doing "continued bad mouthing photoSIG." If I recall correctly, my "Meh..." post on that thread on DPReview was the first thing I said about the topic in years. Is your type of behaviour really characteristic of moderators here? If so, I can't help feeling that Melanie & co were right on the mark! /Petteri Reply

From sheena/SheenaWilkie (12,817) on May 18, 2005 11:31:43 AM CDT Excuse me? First you bad mouth our site on another site, then you come to our own forums to bad mouth us and then you have the nerve to request that I somehow should moderate another web site's forum? My behaviour? Unbelievable. Reply

From deleted.61873/deleted (152) on May 18, 2005 11:47:32 AM CDT I plead guilty as charged on bad mouthing your site, but I plead not guilty to bad mouthing *you* (plural). You, on the other hand, just accused me of coming here to bad-mouth photoSIG users, and of repeatedly/continuously bashing photoSIG elsewhere. These accusations are baseless, and in my opinion it does not befit a moderator to make baseless accusations directed at individuals. I think an apology would be in order. /Petteri Reply

From deleted119173/deleted (3,012) on May 18, 2005 12:28:51 PM CDT "I came here because Tim was posting some pretty personal attacks over at DPReview (falsely suggesting that I left Photosig because I got TD's on my photos and got into fights with moderators). I wanted to if not set the record straight at least give my side of that issue." He said there was a rumour. Don't shoot the messenger... Reply

From deleted.61873/deleted (152) on May 18, 2005 12:35:21 PM CDT Fair enough. I came here because Tim said there was a rumour here falsely suggesting etc. etc. /Petteri Reply

From clchick/Cl (3,562) on May 19, 2005 7:35:14 PM CDT Goooooooooooooo Charles! Reply

From john2/John (6,717) on May 18, 2005 1:25:34 PM CDT Truth be told if you are changing your style of photography so as to garner more thumbs on a web site I suspect the problem is with you rather than the site. Reply

From marshall/Marshall (10,516) on May 18, 2005 3:36:11 PM CDT I've read through this and to be perfectly honest I find a fair amount of reason on both side and a fair amount of blame for name-calling and failures of reason on both sides. I'm also not sure where in this thread my post belongs, but I'm sticking it here and hopefully that's ok. This isn't directly aimed at Petteri; it's aimed more generally. It's not my job, or maybe even worth any of our time, to argue the sides of this, and it might be best to let this die, but I'm not going to do that just yet. My personal opinion: name-calling of any kind, whether there is reason for it or not, is a good way to cede any high ground and undermine those points. Maybe not universally true, and some people deserve to be called *&*^*&#'s (we're all adults here), but I personally think you're more likely to be heard for what you are really saying if you skip over that stuff. Then again, I seem consistently proven wrong in many venues (not just SIG). Sensationalism and shouting are the order of the day in an increasingly connected world subsumed by so much content. Second, Petteri's main point isn't the whole story, but has merit and is worth thinking about by anyone, especially when receiving critiques they don't like for work they think is creative. How I interpret it: any sufficiently large, publicly open site, ultimately is somehow reflective of what I call mass-market tastes. This is true on every site similar to this one, and it is true here. The good thing is that on Photosig, that isn't the only thing one finds. There is some segment of the sig user base that is open to and capable of commenting on creative work that is outside the mainstream. At any rate, my read on Petteri's point was that he found himself being driven by tastes on the site and wasn't comfortable with the direction it was taking his photography. Whatever else he said, I'm going to take that point at face value. It's a matter of perspective whether making that point is bad-mouthing SIG. I think it's an imcomplete description of the site because it does not recognize the broader context of people who do grow in their photography thanks to this site. I'm also going to keep in mind that his experience of PhotoSIG is out of date. If there is any error he made, it is not recognizing that there have been changes here. I don't think we've solved every problem that exists in the photoSIGverse, but neither do I think we're any longer driven the same way that a site like photopoints is. I've read some other things that Petteri has written, and I have found them to be opinionated but thoughtful, and it is possible to gain by respectfully participating in such dialogue. But it's not my job to defend Petteri, and I do believe that he said things on that thread that overstated the case against SIG. That is, they were at least equally unreasonable in their condemnation of a site that offers real value to many of its participants. I think that there are good reasons people are defending PhotoSIG. In the (thankfully dieing) dpreview thread, shots were taken at the site and many personal shots were taken at admins here. Over time, some folks will have bad experiences with admins on online forums, and unfortunately it is not uncommon for those folks to make their feelings known elsewhere. I feel for Sheena and the other admins, who do a pretty good job under usually-thankless conditions, and face the end result that they personally get blasted sometimes here and sometimes even elsewhere. [It was respectful at least that people weren't naming names, but that's a silver lining - there's still a cloud.] Dpreview is itself an interesting study. It has what might be the most active forums online right now. It has a lot of knowledgeable people. It also has a lot of trolls, a lot of people who offer opinions but lack knowledge, a lot of people who will argue any point and who revel in offering up disrespect to others, protected by the internet's peculiar veil of anonymity. Many of the comments on that thread are reflective of the ugly side of dpreview. It's unfortunate that some of that was aimed at photosig and I understand why people who care about this site jumped in on that one. If you want to be mad at this post, please feel free to continue the discussion and I'll participate as well as I can. This is partly me just thinking aloud and at length and I'd understand if no one thought this worth reading all the way through. But remember that I also like SIG, like most of the people I know through here, and don't like seeing ill-sentiments heaped down from elsewhere. Reply

From chess7/Charles (32,815) on May 17, 2005 3:50:43 PM CDT Yeah, he likes to hear himself talk, doesn't he? I'm sure he's read this thread. Hi, Petteri!! Reply

From burn1138/James (1,328) on May 17, 2005 4:02:10 PM CDT i do believe he was the one always picking fights with the admins in the forums. he used to get all pissed when noone jumped on his band wagon. that is if he is the one im thinking of. Reply

From deleted89135/deleted (2,385) on May 17, 2005 5:20:35 PM CDT I think you are right but we've had a few like that so it's hard to remember for sure. If there were pics still in the gallery I'd be more apt to remember. Reply

From skiparvid/Clint (3,698) on May 17, 2005 10:27:04 AM CDT In common terms, I think that that string is what could be called, "A pissing contest". The only thing that one get out of it is wet shoes. Reply

From dieaxt/Andrew (11,843) on May 17, 2005 10:36:58 AM CDT And a few good laughs. Reply

From deleted119173/deleted (3,012) on May 17, 2005 2:19:44 PM CDT It's just getting better now. I've been shooting food in the studio today, and all the while I've been looking forward to catching up with that very same thread. It's pointless, puerile and piss-takingly good fun. We need more wankers like that over here, frankly... Reply

From deleted24315/deleted (9,900) on May 17, 2005 11:57:52 AM CDT I learned several things reading through that. Sheena is a thug. Sheena makes people feel bad by slamming them with short smart assed replies. People still quiver at the sound of Sheena's name even on other sites. No one likes the Axeman. Of course most of it is unmitigated BS. Everyone knows Sheena is a pussycat and they were obviously jealous of the Axeman's talent. Reply

From clchick/Cl (3,562) on May 17, 2005 1:04:04 PM CDT No, the Axeman is a thug... ;-) Reply

From deleted119173/deleted (3,012) on May 17, 2005 2:21:02 PM CDT He's a soft shite. I'd whup his ass and eat his axe. Reply

From tomas/Tomas (1,442) on May 17, 2005 2:42:45 PM CDT And then you would get to work on him! paraphrasing that line from Ocean's Eleven... Reply

From dieaxt/Andrew (11,843) on May 18, 2005 8:20:26 AM CDT Look out for the knife in the off hand. Reply

From deleted119173/deleted (3,012) on May 18, 2005 12:23:43 PM CDT Ouch. You cut me... Reply

From robinlmorgan/Robin (15,586) on May 17, 2005 8:33:51 PM CDT But he's our thug! Reply

From deleted89135/deleted (2,385) on May 17, 2005 5:27:44 PM CDT Now see I learned different things. ALL admins here are mean but especially Andrew. They were members here got mad at whatever left here and 2 years later are still obsessing about here. They have no regard for copyright laws as one person posted other people's work in the forum. One member who is seen over there badmouthing the Sig is still an active member here, which makes me question if we are that bad, why? Last but definately not least, some of our wonderful members love us enough to defend us and for that Thanks guys! Reply

From lcesmoker/Barbara (2,297) on May 17, 2005 8:15:46 PM CDT Lmao (sorry Sheena) Very cute summary Gary. I linked over to the discussion and I like most others, love a good debate. I found from the posts I read, the poster lashes out without merit and would seem to do so only for the response.. and some of the responses from members here, were priceless. I haven't been a member (Basic) for very long. I enjoy the photos, forums, contests here. I have yet to post my first photo, but will soon. I hope to get honest critiques, be it TU or TD. I am pretty certain that once I begin posting photos I will upgrade to Premium, though I don't think that is the basis for the point system. I have seen good critiques given to Basic members as well. Great site guys/gals :-) Reply

From robertwallis/Robert (8,653) on May 17, 2005 4:29:31 PM CDT Their forum format sucks ;-) Way too tedious to follow. Definitely recognized a bunch of former names on there, and some were twits around here. A change of location didn't change their attitudes either. Funny reading in spots, and a bit hostile at times. The OP(edit: not the OP, it was the respondent) has nothing to brag about in his own work; it was competent but sorely missing in spark and vitality. He's still smarting, as best as I can tell, that our plebian masses didn't shout hurrahs for him as the next Elliot Porter. Reply

From peterblack/Peter (11,229) on May 17, 2005 4:52:02 PM CDT Having spent a lot of time reading the thread there, I'd just like to say Hi to Tim and glad he still pops by here. I've missed him in the Forums in particular, but see he still has it when it comes to an argument. Hell, I don't even grudge the points I lost when he left....LOL! Reply

From deleted119173/deleted (3,012) on May 17, 2005 5:35:07 PM CDT Peter, I think you'll find he's been back for a while now... ;) Reply

From peterblack/Peter (11,229) on May 17, 2005 6:22:23 PM CDT Hey, glad to here it. I'm afraid I hadn't recognised you without the ¬ Reply

From directory/Brandon (13,298) on May 17, 2005 6:44:21 PM CDT you want some real fun?.... go to the dpreview.com pro forum..and ask them how to get more business. say you a beginner and want to get started...then ask for some tips... they love that! --B Reply

From robinlmorgan/Robin (15,586) on May 17, 2005 9:01:25 PM CDT Well, you guys really cheered me up. After reading all that (and I couldn't get all the way down) I felt really put down. Like the teachers in the Teachers' Lounge were laughing at the students' contest entries behind our backs. Don't they realize that if we're not as good as the professionals that's why we need the professionals here? They don't have to wow us with their work, but someone helped them get started, shouldn't they pay it forward? If we fawn over their work, well, what else would one expect; but if we find something to take issue with we're idiots and don't know perfection when we see it. Well, I don't want a "teacher" talking down to me when I'm doing the best I can. It was so discouraging, and I think that's how they wanted to sound. Condescending, ya know? They bump up their own egos by putting us down. That narrowminded view doesn't see past their own noses. Creativity means diversity. So there's no one like them. That means there's no one like us. Go Sig!!! Reply

From robertwallis/Robert (8,653) on May 17, 2005 10:59:41 PM CDT Some of the griping and complaining was done by folks who have some serious issues. One person has been a non-contributor for a long time around here, and makes comments in the forums occasionally. Too bad they've never done a single crit or photo submission. The main complainer in that forum has their work stuck at a mass-circulation photo magazine level; competent, colorful, and imminently lacking in soul. Intellectualized with no blood as it were. The original poster made a telling comment as they described too many of the DPR submissions as being a showcase for equipment specs. I found it interesting that no one took that statement to task. I wouldn't be discouraged by their snippiness at all. As you said, it's a matter of some people trying to reassure themselves that they're good by making others look bad. It only works in their little minds, nowhere else ;-) Reply

From clive/Kiwi (4,005) on May 18, 2005 12:24:43 AM CDT Well, it made my day reading all that trivia. I pity the poor buggers. If you have nothing good to say it is better to keep ones mouth shut, is my philosophy. Reply

From deleted.61873/deleted (152) on May 18, 2005 12:00:52 PM CDT I'm sorry, folks, but this is getting really depressing. I realize now that my comments on DPReview were unnecessarily harsh and offensive to a large number of people. I should have realized that. I sincerely apologize for any hurt feelings. I've also thought more about the subject, and changed my opinion about a number of things. First, I still believe that there is a trap inherent in the reward/punishment system here -- that is, that of starting to steer your photography into directions that would yield more TU's, and therefore towards a greater conformity with convention and away from individuality. I believe this because I personally fell into the trap, and witnessed others fall into it as well. However, I was wrong to claim that this trap is inevitable, and the only solution is to "avoid photoSIG like the plague." The variety of critiques available here can be genuinely useful no matter what your photographic ambitions may be. As others pointed out, the considerable number of genuinely talented and individual photographers active here is ample evidence for that. The trick is to remember who's in charge, take advantage of the good while ignoring the bland and indifferent. This shouldn't even be too difficult, if only you watch out for it. In the future, should the topic come up, I will try to remember to bring up this side of it too. "PhotoSIG -- to be consumed responsibly." Once again, I'm sorry for causing so much offense. God knows there are more important things to fight about than photography: this should be something that's fun and enjoyable, and something that we all have in common. For the time being, I'm pursuing it off photoSIG, but who knows, perhaps I'll be back one of these days. All the best to everyone, /Petteri Reply

From sheena/SheenaWilkie (12,817) on May 18, 2005 12:06:55 PM CDT Thank you. Reply

From john2/John (6,717) on May 18, 2005 1:29:04 PM CDT "PhotoSIG -- to be consumed responsibly." I couldn't have put it better myself. Reply

From deleted89135/deleted (2,385) on May 18, 2005 2:22:44 PM CDT Thank you and please know that you are welcome back whenever you want to come. Suzi Reply

From marshall/Marshall (10,516) on May 18, 2005 3:55:45 PM CDT Well put. Reply

Return to forum