Warrenjrphotography-SJ wrote:
Nice contribute and nice job trying to get me banned because you hate me but it isn't going to work as I never critiqued him.

I never critiqued him.

I said that he should delete the photos that do not fit the genre that he shoots.

I never said that his photos were good/bad or judged them I suggested that he DELETES the ones that DO NOT represent his STYLE.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
Ah, I don't know what you're talking about.
But, you are critiquing his MM portfolio and that isn't allowed here. So I'm letting you know that fact because you're new. You can observe the rules or not - your choice.

No John, he isn't...

What he is suggesting is what any creative consultant would advise.  Decide on a niche of work that you want to produce, delete all work that doesn't fit that niche (no matter how great it might be) and then go about producing more work that does fit that niche.  Some niches can be bigger than others, but the thread that connects the images should be identifiable. 

LAUBENHEIMER might go out tomorrow and take the hottest fetishy glam nude photo ever taken by man of the most gorgeous model ever to walk the earth.  It could be AMAZING. 

It still wouldn't belong in his port.

That is very different than a critique of his portfolio.

Marin Photography NYC wrote:
Just keep practicing and don't let the "I only work with experienced" photographer's statement fool you. It's just to keep the creeps and GWC's away 90% of the time.
If you write models give them your name so that they know you are a female. That in itself is less creepy. You will find them more receptive toward you!

Best of luck!

Ruben

Thanks!
And thank you to everyone else who replied to my post politely and honestly
It all really helped

Jo

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:
No John, he isn't...

What he is suggesting is what any creative consultant would advise.  Decide on a niche of work that you want to produce, delete all work that doesn't fit that niche (no matter how great it might be) and then go about producing more work that does fit that niche.  Some niches can be bigger than others, but the thread that connects the images should be identifiable. 

LAUBENHEIMER might go out tomorrow and take the hottest fetishy glam nude photo ever taken by man of the most gorgeous model ever to walk the earth.  It could be AMAZING. 

It still wouldn't belong in his port.

That is very different than a critique of his portfolio.

I think he definitely was.

OP wrote:
Hey, I am a relatively new photographer and I find myself losing confidence in my work and also when looking at Model's pages that say they require 'professional' photographers and 'high quality images'

Seems like a lot of pressure being placed on someone who incidentally loves to try new things and may fail from time to time but ultimately loves his/her work.
I guess what i am asking is how do photographers stay positive and confident about their work that they feel strong enough to approach any model, no matter what their experience is

Thanks

In response to that the person in question replied

My #1 tip and I know this will work for you is to first delete most of the photos on your profile and only show off the ones that you style represents.

If he had talked in generalities as you suggest, but he didn't.
He specifically critiqued the OP's portfolio and suggesting specific corrections to improve that specific portfolio. That's a critique by MM standards, even if it isn't specifically targeting a single image. It's critiquing the OP's portfolio specifically.

The OP did not ask for a critique of his MM portfolio, nor did he post this in the critique forum. He's asking how to keep one's spirits up to have the confidence to approach models.

That Italian Guy wrote:
Thinking your work sucks is actually a very good sign that maybe it doesn't, or at least that it will improve relatively quickly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2 … ger_effect

Don't be discouraged, and keep shooting!




Just my $0.02

Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

I wouldn't go as far as thinking that ones work "sucks" because that could be way too discouraging.

I think the key point is to know what you're already good at and what needs work and follow through with improving on what needs work while also honing what you're already good at but doing so with a positive mindset.

That way you keep a positive mindset and don't end up like one of those photographers or musicians that quit because everyone tells them that there's too much wrong with their work or they compare themselves to people that have been doing it for half their lives.

Really the only competition that anyone has is against themselves.

When you take a "bad" photo it was you that did it and if you take one that is "amazing" it was also you did that did it making the photographer the only limitation in all of this.

So it comes down to how bad do you want to be a great photographer? The only competition that you have is against yourself OP........

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:
No John, he isn't...

What he is suggesting is what any creative consultant would advise.  Decide on a niche of work that you want to produce, delete all work that doesn't fit that niche (no matter how great it might be) and then go about producing more work that does fit that niche.  Some niches can be bigger than others, but the thread that connects the images should be identifiable. 

LAUBENHEIMER might go out tomorrow and take the hottest fetishy glam nude photo ever taken by man of the most gorgeous model ever to walk the earth.  It could be AMAZING. 

It still wouldn't belong in his port.

That is very different than a critique of his portfolio.

I think he definitely was.

OP wrote:
Hey, I am a relatively new photographer and I find myself losing confidence in my work and also when looking at Model's pages that say they require 'professional' photographers and 'high quality images'

Seems like a lot of pressure being placed on someone who incidentally loves to try new things and may fail from time to time but ultimately loves his/her work.
I guess what i am asking is how do photographers stay positive and confident about their work that they feel strong enough to approach any model, no matter what their experience is

Thanks

In response to that the person in question replied

If he had talked in generalities as you suggest, but he didn't.
He specifically critiqued the OP's portfolio and suggesting specific corrections to improve that specific portfolio. That's a critique by MM standards, even if it isn't specifically targeting a single image. It's critiquing the OP's portfolio specifically.

The OP did not ask for a critique of his MM portfolio, nor did he post this in the critique forum. He's asking how to keep one's spirits up to have the confidence to approach models.

Why are you trying to derail the thread?

If you hate me so much take it to the PM's and be mature about it instead of trying to lie and get my account suspended (very immature on your part).

If you read the last part that you quoted I said that he should LEAVE IN THE PHOTOS THAT HIS STYLE REPRESENTS......if you do not understand what that means I'll go over it for you.

It means that if he has photos that are "alt" or "vintage" but he wants to shoot modern fashion than he should delete all of the alt & vintage photos no manner how good they are and leave in only his best modern fashion photos as this will give a greater impression to models that want to work with photographers that specialize in modern fashion.

You also missed the part where basically everyone was telling him to pay for a model and I gave him a solid alternative that costs $0 that actually works.

If he follows the advice of me and others of specializing his confidence will also go up as he will have only cherry picked photos on his port page of the genre that he wants to shoot in.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:
No John, he isn't...

What he is suggesting is what any creative consultant would advise.  Decide on a niche of work that you want to produce, delete all work that doesn't fit that niche (no matter how great it might be) and then go about producing more work that does fit that niche.  Some niches can be bigger than others, but the thread that connects the images should be identifiable. 

LAUBENHEIMER might go out tomorrow and take the hottest fetishy glam nude photo ever taken by man of the most gorgeous model ever to walk the earth.  It could be AMAZING. 

It still wouldn't belong in his port.

That is very different than a critique of his portfolio.

I think he definitely was.

OP wrote:
Hey, I am a relatively new photographer and I find myself losing confidence in my work and also when looking at Model's pages that say they require 'professional' photographers and 'high quality images'

Seems like a lot of pressure being placed on someone who incidentally loves to try new things and may fail from time to time but ultimately loves his/her work.
I guess what i am asking is how do photographers stay positive and confident about their work that they feel strong enough to approach any model, no matter what their experience is

Thanks

In response to that the person in question replied

If he had talked in generalities as you suggest, but he didn't.
He specifically critiqued the OP's portfolio and suggesting specific corrections to improve that specific portfolio. That's a critique by MM standards, even if it isn't specifically targeting a single image. It's critiquing the OP's portfolio specifically.

The OP did not ask for a critique of his MM portfolio, nor did he post this in the critique forum. He's asking how to keep one's spirits up to have the confidence to approach models.

It's convenient that in quoting him you left out the prefatory statement which informs the part you quoted. 

And, by the way, he's right. 

Just one more reason why the "OMG WE CAN'T EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANYBODIES WORK EVER!!11XX!!" concept is inherently flawed.

Anyway, I like you and I like you're work, but I have to believe either you're just being argumentative because of the poster or you don't really understand the difference, and I find that hard to believe.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:
No John, he isn't...

What he is suggesting is what any creative consultant would advise.  Decide on a niche of work that you want to produce, delete all work that doesn't fit that niche (no matter how great it might be) and then go about producing more work that does fit that niche.  Some niches can be bigger than others, but the thread that connects the images should be identifiable. 

LAUBENHEIMER might go out tomorrow and take the hottest fetishy glam nude photo ever taken by man of the most gorgeous model ever to walk the earth.  It could be AMAZING. 

It still wouldn't belong in his port.

That is very different than a critique of his portfolio.

I think he definitely was.

OP wrote:
Hey, I am a relatively new photographer and I find myself losing confidence in my work and also when looking at Model's pages that say they require 'professional' photographers and 'high quality images'

Seems like a lot of pressure being placed on someone who incidentally loves to try new things and may fail from time to time but ultimately loves his/her work.
I guess what i am asking is how do photographers stay positive and confident about their work that they feel strong enough to approach any model, no matter what their experience is

Thanks

In response to that the person in question replied

If he had talked in generalities as you suggest, but he didn't.
He specifically critiqued the OP's portfolio and suggesting specific corrections to improve that specific portfolio. That's a critique by MM standards, even if it isn't specifically targeting a single image. It's critiquing the OP's portfolio specifically.

The OP did not ask for a critique of his MM portfolio, nor did he post this in the critique forum. He's asking how to keep one's spirits up to have the confidence to approach models.

i'm not a mod.

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:

It's convenient that in quoting him you left out the prefatory statement which informs the part you quoted. 

And, by the way, he's right. 

Just one more reason why the "OMG WE CAN'T EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANYBODIES WORK EVER!!11XX!!" concept is inherently flawed.

Anyway, I like you and I like you're work, but I have to believe either you're just being argumentative because of the poster or you don't really understand the difference, and I find that hard to believe.

Well, I didn't do anything for convenience as you suggest.

However, I don't necessarily disagree that the
"OMG WE CAN'T EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANYBODIES WORK EVER!!11XX!!" stance is flawed. But right now on MM, the no unsolicited critque and critiques only in the Critique forum, is what it is.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
This is not the critique forum - Critiques are not allowed in this forum.

Warrenjrphotography-SJ wrote:
Nice contribute and nice job trying to get me banned because you hate me but it isn't going to work as I never critiqued him.

I never critiqued him.

I said that he should delete the photos that do not fit the genre that he shoots.

I never said that his photos were good/bad or judged them I suggested that he DELETES the ones that DO NOT represent his STYLE.

You won't get banned.

He is a she.

I believe that one has to experiment before specializing.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
Well, I didn't do anything for convenience as you suggest.

However, I don't necessarily disagree that the
"OMG WE CAN'T EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANYBODIES WORK EVER!!11XX!!" stance is flawed. But right now on MM, the no unsolicited critque and critiques only in the Critique forum, is what it is.

Ok, I'll take you at face value:

You are completely misunderstanding him.  He was saying what I said in my post.

Here, I'll translate:

Dear OP,

You have some nice work! If you want to have greater confidence in approaching models, the best thing you can do is hone in on one particular style that you enjoy and can deliver on consistently.  Then, make sure that, for now, you only show work in that style and make sure you are only showing your best work.

This will achieve two things:

1) Because you've narrowed your focus to what you know you excel at, you will inherently have more confidence in your shooting.  Also, since you will have the technical aspects of that style down, it will free you up to better engage with your model, and your confidence will show and serve to make her comfortable. 

2) You won't have to worry if she'll like your work, because you've only shown her work you know you can produce to a very high standard and she's already proved that she likes it (by virtue of sitting for you). 

Then, after you've done that, towards the middle or end of the shoot, you can experiment with different ideas/styles.  If it works, great.  If not, don't worry, because you've already delivered on what she had wanted/anticipated.

There, I hope that helps.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:

Well, I didn't do anything for convenience as you suggest.

However, I don't necessarily disagree that the
"OMG WE CAN'T EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANYBODIES WORK EVER!!11XX!!" stance is flawed. But right now on MM, the no unsolicited critque and critiques only in the Critique forum, is what it is.

I never critiqued his port.

Look up the definition of critique.

"cri·tique 
/kriˈtēk/
Noun
A detailed analysis and assessment of something, esp. a literary, philosophical, or political theory.
Verb
Evaluate (a theory or practice) in a detailed and analytical way: "the authors critique the methods used in research"."

Reminds me of the time that my fiance went to a modeling agency (a scam basically) in PA and the head agent told me that she loved some of my photos and she removed the ones she didn't like and said it was a good critique and smiled at me and than they asked her for $2,000 to have a small page on her agency website I laughed because I knew that, that's not what critiquing is.

Neither you, or her, understand the definition of critique.

If you hate me, take it to the PM's.

If I went into the critique section and spmeone asked for a critique and I just told them to delete a few photos I would probably get laughed at by everyone and flamed because that is not a critique is.

Again, the definition of critique.

cri·tique 
/kriˈtēk/
Noun
A detailed analysis and assessment of something, esp. a literary, philosophical, or political theory.
Verb
Evaluate (a theory or practice) in a detailed and analytical way: "the authors critique the methods used in research".

Warrenjrphotography-SJ wrote:
I think the key point is to know what you're already good at and what needs work

Hence my link to the page about the Dunning-Kruger effect.

People who are bad at stuff tend to overestimate their abilities because they can't see the problems/flaws; people who are actually quite good tend to underestimate and hence be filled with doubt... which in turn drives them on to improve.

Why do you think that the people here who tend to be modest about their achievements often have the best work, whereas those who continually brag about how awesome they are and how they know everything and have it all figured out tend to have the worst?

Because the blowhards who are so confident of their own invincibility simply cannot see how awful their work is, so they think it's great.

The OP, on the other hand, is continually doubting her skills and feeling like her stuff isn't as good as others' work or as good as it could be.

To me, that's a very good sign of somebody who is likely to improve.



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Warrenjrphotography-SJ wrote:

I never critiqued his port.

Look up the definition of critique.

"cri·tique 
/kriˈtēk/
Noun
A detailed analysis and assessment of something, esp. a literary, philosophical, or political theory.
Verb
Evaluate (a theory or practice) in a detailed and analytical way: "the authors critique the methods used in research"."

Reminds me of the time that my fiance went to a modeling agency (a scam basically) in PA and the head agent told me that she loved some of my photos and she removed the ones she didn't like and said it was a good critique and smiled at me and than they asked her for $2,000 to have a small page on her agency website I laughed because I knew that, that's not what critiquing is.

Neither you, or her, understand the definition of critique.

If you hate me, take it to the PM's.

If I went into the critique section and spmeone asked for a critique and I just told them to delete a few photos I would probably get laughed at by everyone and flamed because that is not a critique is.

Again, the definition of critique.

cri·tique 
/kriˈtēk/
Noun
A detailed analysis and assessment of something, esp. a literary, philosophical, or political theory.
Verb
Evaluate (a theory or practice) in a detailed and analytical way: "the authors critique the methods used in research".

Well, that narrow definition is not the scope of the meaning, as it's applied by Model Mayhem. Maybe you should argue the "correct" definition with the mods. However, as it stands now, in practice, "critique" has a broader definition, than your cite, on MM.

That Italian Guy wrote:
Hence my link to the page about the Dunning-Kruger effect.

People who are bad at stuff tend to overestimate their abilities because they can't see the problems/flaws; people who are actually quite good tend to underestimate and hence be filled with doubt... which in turn drives them on to improve.

Why do you think that the people here who tend to be modest about their achievements often have the best work, whereas those who continually brag about how awesome they are and how they know everything and have it all figured out tend to have the worst?

Because the blowhards who are so confident of their own invincibility simply cannot see how awful their work is, so they think it's great.

The OP, on the other hand, is continually doubting her skills and feeling like her stuff isn't as good as others' work or as good as it could be.

To me, that's a very good sign of somebody who is likely to improve.



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

I posted this in another thread, but I think it's equally applicable here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI23U7U2aUY

Definitely worth a watch (actually, all four segments are).

Understanding that, even though your skill set may be lacking, your taste is still killer is very helpful.

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:

I posted this in another thread, but I think it's equally applicable here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI23U7U2aUY

Definitely worth a watch (actually, all four segments are).

Understanding that, even though your skill set may be lacking, your taste is still killer is very helpful.

Although I agree that talent and taste are not inextricably linked. The ability to direct a correction, has a closer tie to talent.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:

Although I agree that talent and taste are not inextricably linked. The ability to direct a correction, has a closer tie to talent.

Yes, but everyone goes through this gap (99.99%). 

Ultimately, I believe this to be the answer: doing a huge volume of work, on deadline for someone who can critique you appropriately.  That is the value of education, not simply the books you read...

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:

Well, that narrow definition is not the scope of the meaning, as it's applied by Model Mayhem. Maybe you should argue the "correct" definition with the mods. However, as it stands now, in practice, "critique" has a broader definition, than your cite, on MM.

Trying to undermine, and refute the evidence that I brought to the table and failing to admit that you're wrong.

I can;t say that I didn't expect it!

That Italian Guy wrote:

Hence my link to the page about the Dunning-Kruger effect.

People who are bad at stuff tend to overestimate their abilities because they can't see the problems/flaws; people who are actually quite good tend to underestimate and hence be filled with doubt... which in turn drives them on to improve.

Why do you think that the people here who tend to be modest about their achievements often have the best work, whereas those who continually brag about how awesome they are and how they know everything and have it all figured out tend to have the worst?

Because the blowhards who are so confident of their own invincibility simply cannot see how awful their work is, so they think it's great.

The OP, on the other hand, is continually doubting her skills and feeling like her stuff isn't as good as others' work or as good as it could be.

To me, that's a very good sign of somebody who is likely to improve.



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

Well to be fair for you photography is an art.

Some like nudes, some hate them, some like the look of primes with narrow DOF, some don't, some like weird shadow that some would consider bad, some love them.

Some would actually take photos of turds in a toilet and consider it beautiful art, some would say that it's just crap.

One persons garbage is another mans treasure.

It's quite possible that the photographers that you speak of that brag about their work endlessly are truly in love with their work (nothing wrong with that) and that their final vision of what makes a beautiful photo is complete for them and that the others see flaws while they see the flaws as what they're aiming for?

That's a big possibility.

Also, achievements in art could just mean that a large majority of the people like their work so they share a common "taste" if you will with most of the other photographers judging their work and they could be modest because they are not happy with their current vision.

No matter the case, personally I believe that my work will always be improving and evolving as that is what my personality is but I will never hate my work because you can;t love yourself if you're always chasing something far off into the future.

People need to learn how to love themselves and their work and see the 999 good bricks without being blind to their own "bad" bricks.

If someone is hugely egotistical about their work and does not ask for critique they can still improve as long as they are a good self critic and know what want and are constantly learning, comparing, and working at it.

I have seen this with real world people that are not successful professionals. They always loved themselves no manner where they were at in their respected field and I contribute that largely to their success as it's much easier to want to photograph & learn when you're positive vs being discouraged or negative by always dogging on whats "wrong with your photos.

It's important to be happy with whats right in your photos and be happy with whats wrong with them.

Lacking confidence can be shown as an indulgence in negative thinking (irrational thinking) or the inability to be happy with your own work no manner if theres stuff wrong with it or not.

Just my $0.02 on the philosophy behind improving.