Don't you just hate it when...

[Jack]

Decided to share a few of my pet image processing peeves -- fortunately we don't see very much of them on GetDPI, but they seem to be everywhere else on the net

First gripe is a horrible mask job with obvious horizon halo. Mostly I see it with sunset or sunrise captures, but now more and more I'm seeing it on many landscape image with a skyline.

Second one is tone-mapped anything. For whatever reason it seems nobody can do it with a gentile touch.

/rant Those are mine, what are yours?

 

[AlanS]

I can't stand tone-mapping!

 

[MartinN]

Well, there was another thread where it was supposed a photo has to be shocking or overly beautiful to have impact. Therefore I deduce that something done with a touch is not eyecatching enough. As a photographer you have to drag those sliders to the extremes. I objected to this kind of polarization, and I can’t really feel the extremes are the supposed product of photography. Garish.

 

[MGrayson]

Detail everywhere. Just because shadows CAN be lifted doesn't mean they SHOULD be. Give some thought to where you want the viewer's eye drawn, and in what order, accentuate and suppress accordingly. (Don't you hate it when cliches suddenly become meaningful - "sharp picture of fuzzy concept" is absolutely right, dammit.)

 

[Jack]

and I should have included "heavily over-sharpened."

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Blurred backgrounds. Not all blurred backgrounds of course. Sometimes blurred backgrounds are very beautiful, even those where you can't see what the background actually is. However, if a photographer wants to tell a story... there is no story in a totally blurred background.

I once went to an exhibition by a photographer who had become relatively famous for travelling to remote places around the world taking portraits of people typical for those locations. In the end, I had to conclude that all the photos could as well have been taken in a studio in some big city. Not a single one of them showed any context, no background, no hint about the environment that people live in, the environment that made the clothing, make-up etc. a part of their lives.

Unfortunately, sometimes I get the feeling that it's a lack of composition skills. Buy an 85mm f/1.2, shoot wide open and become famous. And every camera fondler on the planet will say "Love the DOF" with tears in their eyes.

 

[pegelli]

I hate nothing other photographers produce.

My guiding principle is that "the artist is always right" but on the other hand I'm not obliged to like it. And looking for "so called" technical flaws is mainly done by photographers and not the broader audience, and therefore I'll try to ignore those observations when judging a photograph (not always easy).

 

[Bugleone]

I hate when people with no artistic background or ability buy themselves a camera and assume that they have 'paid' to make satements about 'art' and pass criticisms on sites like this about things they know nothing about......

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I hate when people with no artistic background or ability buy themselves a camera and assume that they have 'paid' to make satements about 'art' and pass criticisms on sites like this about things they know nothing about......

That's the nature of the internet. But strictly speaking, everybody has the right of an opinion.

 

[Knorp]

meh - I hate this thread ...

 

[Jack]

Geesh. Apparently we need to add "Curmudgeon" as a tagline somewhere on this site to keep Dante company...

 

[Jack]

I hate nothing other photographers produce.

To be clear, I don't hate the artist or the art, though I may "hate" the process(ing) an artist used in their attempt at said creation. There is a difference...

My guiding principle is that "the artist is always right" but on the other hand I'm not obliged to like it. And looking for "so called" technical flaws is mainly done by photographers and not the broader audience, and therefore I'll try to ignore those observations when judging a photograph (not always easy).

At the end of the day, the art needs to stand on its own, check. If you like it and I don't, that's awesome for both of us, check. But glaring technical flaws are frequently the reason for *me* not liking something. But then I also understand that if one is overly PC or too thin-skinned, they tend to take offense at the drop of a hat over any criticism, even a constructive one...

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

We live in a world of "Like". People seem to become increasingly intolerant to criticism. It's become a democratic right to display one's art without becoming subject to negative comments. It's a "My incompetence is as valuable as your knowledge" attitude. While this may create fewer losers, it probably also creates fewer Beethovens and Picassos, fewer Cartier Bressons and Ansel Adams, and even more important; fewer will strive to improve. The floor keeps rising, partly with the help of technology, while the ceiling comes crushing down.

We see it most clearly in the music industry. The great stars from the fifties and the sixties not only maintained the quality of their work until they died from old age, but kept improving till they dropped, while one-hit-wonders seem to be the rule of the 21st century. You win America's Got Talent, you have a couple of computer enhanced hits promoted by the industry and then you are forgotten. It's all about "feel good" and shallow success stories.

If I am going to improve as a photographer, I need criticism, and if my work isn't good enough, that criticism should be negative, but hopefully constructive. If I make "horrible mask job with obvious horizon halo" and publish it, it's probably because I don't see the flaw myself. So somebody will hopefully tell me. And if I see an obvious flaw in a photo that I've posted and I get 15 likes and no comments, I won't trust you guys anymore

 

[pegelli]

We live in a world of "Like". People seem to become increasingly intolerant to criticism.

Most generalisations tend to be hyperbolic (including mine here )

I agree that there are people that can't stand criticism and I agree that those will have difficulty to improve. I'm posting on a few different photo fora and must say that in general if criticism is constructive it will be accepted and maybe even agreed with. On the other hand I've been lambasted for pointing out simple things like dust bunnies or a crooked horizon and if people are not willing to hear those things I just consider it their loss and move on. If it happens more than once I'll just forget about that person and stop commenting on their photos.

 

[Jack]

Jorgen, very well said!

 

[Shashin]

But then I also understand that if one is overly PC or too thin-skinned, they tend to take offense at the drop of a hat over any criticism, even a constructive one...

I think it is a little more complex than that. We don't offer unsolicited advice here for a number of reasons. How long did it take you to develop the skill you have, not only in processing, but also how to recognize those errors? A lot of people are on that road. They are learning and figuring things out. And these mistakes are common because they happen on that path. And some people can't see what is obvious to you or may not care. It is a hobby for most of us, no matter how involved we are in photography.

As far as taking offence, well that is really hard, especially when what you post is something you are proud of. Learning to separate yourself from your work is probably one of the hardest things to do (fortunately, I am so brilliant that my work is above criticism, regardless of the occasional comment from people that don't have the refined taste to appreciate it ). And I am sure you understand that being an instructor. There is a balance between helping someone grow through criticism and letting them develop skills through practice. If the critical faculty is brought in too much, you are just too afraid to experiment. (I had a formal education in photography at RIT and I can tell you that crits were brutal, but then that was for a degree program. I am also pretty tenacious.)

I don't mind this thread. But I didn't join either. I do have pet peeves of my own, but obviously the people that peeve me off don't share that. But I recognize it value in showing how choices effect an image and impact the viewer's perception. Sometimes if it helps to point it out--sharpness and contrast can be confused, for example, where I recommended my students to solve for contrast before solving for sharpness.

Good discussion.

(Thank goodness you don't own GetDPI anymore and you can't ban me for commenting on your post! )

 

[Shashin]

We live in a world of "Like". People seem to become increasingly intolerant to criticism. It's become a democratic right to display one's art without becoming subject to negative comments. It's a "My incompetence is as valuable as your knowledge" attitude. While this may create fewer losers, it probably also creates fewer Beethovens and Picassos, fewer Cartier Bressons and Ansel Adams, and even more important; fewer will strive to improve. The floor keeps rising, partly with the help of technology, while the ceiling comes crushing down.

We see it most clearly in the music industry. The great stars from the fifties and the sixties not only maintained the quality of their work until they died from old age, but kept improving till they dropped, while one-hit-wonders seem to be the rule of the 21st century. You win America's Got Talent, you have a couple of computer enhanced hits promoted by the industry and then you are forgotten. It's all about "feel good" and shallow success stories.

If I am going to improve as a photographer, I need criticism, and if my work isn't good enough, that criticism should be negative, but hopefully constructive. If I make "horrible mask job with obvious horizon halo" and publish it, it's probably because I don't see the flaw myself. So somebody will hopefully tell me. And if I see an obvious flaw in a photo that I've posted and I get 15 likes and no comments, I won't trust you guys anymore

First of all, your view of the past is skewed. Talent contests have been around for a very long time. So have one hit wonders. Mediocrity is common to every period in time. There are extremely talented people today that work really hard. This is not unique to an age.

For the most part, this is an amateur forum. We come here because we enjoy photography. No one if going to lose their status because of a bad mask.

And "good enough" for what? Good enough to bring personal enjoyment?

But likewise, there are people here that are professionals. Their reasons for developing skills can be very different. They have a client base to cater too. (BTW, not all of them are very good at taking criticism.)

We are all coming to photography with different goals. Not everyone wants to become the next Picasso.

 

[MGrayson]

First of all, your view of the past is skewed. Talent contests have been around for a very long time. So have one hit wonders. Mediocrity is common to every period in time. There are extremely talented people today that work really hard. This is not unique to an age.

For the most part, this is an amateur forum. We come here because we enjoy photography. No one if going to lose their status because of a bad mask.

And "good enough" for what? Good enough to bring personal enjoyment?

But likewise, there are people here that are professionals. Their reasons for developing skills can be very different. They have a client base to cater too. (BTW, not all of them are very good at taking criticism.)

We are all coming to photography with different goals. Not everyone wants to become the next Picasso.

"It's a VERY tall ladder, and we're all somewhere on it." (Another one of my trite aphorisms. Up there with "It's suboptimal to optimize.")