Marc Damon wrote:
What an ass.
I hope you had the courtesy to delete the comment.

Oh of course.

Every time this happens.

Koryn Locke wrote:
I wanted to puke all over the screen.

"Gee, thanks, Grand Wizard Of The Lens... now my Outer Goddess is completely covered with what were, as of a few seconds ago, my Inner Goodies..."

Two Pears Studio wrote:
Was it a critique of the photo or a slam on the photographer? I have seen lots of images that models have up that hurt their port that they as a model did a great job, but the lighting was off or etc... and by having that image up it changed their port.

If they make a personal attack on the photographer... CAM them or delete their ass!

Besides I have seen your port the photography is all really good!

The one that spurred this was a little critique that's like... I dunno, it's usually like a critique that's meant to create a "teehee" between the two of us at my photographer's expense.

It insults my soul.

Not every photo in my portfolio is perfect but I don't know why telling me about that is any less rude than just critiquing my shit in a tag or something.
Why insulting my photographers will make me suddenly like you. Soooo not accurate.

Koryn Locke wrote:
I wanted to puke all over the screen.

Well, he did say inner goddess. I wasn't aware there was a goddess of barf though.

Damianne wrote:
relevant:
http://oglaf.com/ (18+)

Perfect!

Two Pears Studio wrote:
Was it a critique of the photo or a slam on the photographer? I have seen lots of images that models have up that hurt their port that they as a model did a great job, but the lighting was off or etc... and by having that image up it changed their port.

If they make a personal attack on the photographer... CAM them or delete their ass!

Besides I have seen your port the photography is all really good!

Doesnt matter, simply having the picture in your portfolio is not asking for it to be critiqued. And just like in the critique forum, youre supposed to critique the efforts of the one asking, not their collaborator. If I post something you can tell me my modelling sucks but you cant go "this photographer didnt know what the fuck they were doing, what a shitty photograph, heres all the things wrong with it.... oh but you look fine"





Regardless, if the model put it in her port, SHE obviously thinks the photography is fine (or something else about it makes it useable) or it wouldnt be there, so neither the photographer nor her are going to care for your critique

Damianne wrote:
relevant:
http://oglaf.com/ (18+)

OK, now I'm not having sex anymore.

Damianne wrote:
comment on a model's pictures with a compliment to her and then some shitty cut at the photographer

Seriously.


PSA.

ya for sure, fuck freedom of speech, fuck it!!!!

sdgillis wrote:
ya for sure, fuck freedom of speech, fuck it!!!!

lolwut.

You can still do it, the government won't arrest you or kill you for it.
I'll just delete the comment.

You're welcome to go to your own page or make a blog and post it however you want.


It's a bit marginalizing of real freedom of speech problems to act like this is at all connected, don't you think?

Marc Damon wrote:
What an ass.
I hope you had the courtesy to delete the comment.

I initially read that as meaning "Wow, what an ass you have!", so I was expecting the rude comment about the photographer to follow.

Laura UnBound wrote:
And just like in the critique forum, youre supposed to critique the efforts of the one asking, not their collaborator.

Depending on the way it's worded, it could be in poor taste but this is not, in principle, a bad thing. 

There are times when it is likely that a given model or photographer (for lack of a better phrase) might not know any better.  They might not understand why a photo as a whole might not be benefitting them and sometimes (frequently, I'd say) it's totally relevant to educate someone on the ways the photo doesn't work because in the end a better ability to judge photos means that the person (be it photographer or model) will have a stronger image selection. 

I'm not saying that the person who commented on Damianne's picture what doing that; I'm specifically addressing the notion that it might be categorically out-of-place or unproductive to comment on something you didn't do in a photo you chose to display (because in that act you are telling us it's worth seeing in your mind).  Plenty of instances where that's precisely what one should comment on.

Kincaid Blackwood wrote:
Depending on the way it's worded, it could be in poor taste but this is not, in principle, a bad thing. 

There are times when it is likely that a given llama or photographer (for lack of a better phrase) might not know any better.  They might not understand why a photo as a whole might not be benefitting them and sometimes (frequently, I'd say) it's totally relevant to educate someone on the ways the photo doesn't work because in the end a better ability to judge photos means that the person (be it photographer or llama) will have a stronger image selection. 

I'm not saying that the person who commented on Damianne's picture what doing that; I'm specifically addressing the notion that it might be categorically out-of-place or unproductive to comment on something you didn't do in a photo you chose to display (because in that act you are telling us it's worth seeing in your mind).  Plenty of instances where that's precisely what one should comment on.

It's not appropriate to do that publicly, or to critique someone who isn't going to see it.
If you have something to say like that, send it in a message.

Laura UnBound wrote:

Doesnt matter, simply having the picture in your portfolio is not asking for it to be critiqued. And just like in the critique forum, youre supposed to critique the efforts of the one asking, not their collaborator. If I post something you can tell me my modelling sucks but you cant go "this photographer didnt know what the fuck they were doing, what a shitty photograph, heres all the things wrong with it.... oh but you look fine"





Regardless, if the model put it in her port, SHE obviously thinks the photography is fine (or something else about it makes it useable) or it wouldnt be there, so neither the photographer nor her are going to care for your critique

what about the models who ask for opinions on their new shots in the announcement section?

I understand random photography critiques are just that random.

But not telling the truth when asked for it, seems like lying.

Two Pears Studio wrote:

what about the models who ask for opinions on their new shots in the announcement section?

I understand random photography critiques are just that random.

But not telling the truth when asked for it, seems like lying.

You havent asked anything that I didnt already answer.

Damianne wrote:
It's not appropriate to do that publicly, or to critique someone who isn't going to see it.
If you have something to say like that, send it in a message.

Kincaid Blackwood wrote:
I'm specifically addressing the notion that it might be categorically out-of-place or unproductive to comment on something you didn't do in a photo you chose to display (because in that act you are telling us it's worth seeing in your mind).  Plenty of instances where that's precisely what one should comment on.

Reposted for clarity through repetition.

Laura specified that such a thing was inappropriate in the critique forum.

Kincaid Blackwood wrote:

Damianne wrote:
It's not appropriate to do that publicly, or to critique someone who isn't going to see it.
If you have something to say like that, send it in a message.

Reposted for clarity through repetition.

Laura specified that such a thing was inappropriate in the critique forum.

Per site rules, (ie it wasn't necessarily a person opinion)  for more clarity.

Laura UnBound wrote:

You havent asked anything that I didnt already answer.

I guess you told me.

Kincaid Blackwood wrote:

Damianne wrote:
It's not appropriate to do that publicly, or to critique someone who isn't going to see it.
If you have something to say like that, send it in a message.

Reposted for clarity through repetition.

Laura specified that such a thing was inappropriate in the critique forum.

As in, only critiquing the photographer when a model asked for the critique is still pretty classless.
"Your portfolio seems to be stagnating and perhaps you should consider upping the quality of the photographers you work with"
or
"You're doing great here, but the image isn't working as a whole and perhaps you should leave it out" with clarification in private if requested.
Those are fine.

"You're great, but the focus is off, here's how I would retouch it, the camera is a stupid camera, blargher blagh blergh" going off on the photographer when they aren't involved in the thread and certainly didn't ask for a critique, not cool.

It's a valid point.

Sha-Lynne wrote:
I'm sorry...I thought that if I trashed the photographer that you worked with you would better appreciate my artistic genius and beg me to bang shoot you.

Those would be two unrelated truths.
- You trashing the photographer
- Me wanting to bang shoot with you.




*sexy springheel face*

Damianne wrote:

Those would be two unrelated truths.
- You trashing the photographer
- Me wanting to bang shoot with you.




*sexy springheel face*

Damianne wrote:
*sexy springheel face*

Damianne wrote:
I feel like saying Springheel in a thread calls him from the ether.

Its like you flip my Batsignal

SPRINGHEEL  wrote:

Its like you flip my Batsignal

I hope that's sexual.

Damianne wrote:

I hope that's sexual.

C'mon, this is me we're talking about here....

SPRINGHEEL  wrote:

Yeah...Baby!

Damianne wrote:
Bumping to remove hidden thread from SF2 preview.

Whaddadouche

Uh oh, what did I miss?