XtremeCamera

There is much discussion and controversy lately over the concept of critiquing within these webpages we like to call XtremeCamera. The difficulty of some members to adopt the guidelines for critiquing is bringing to light what I consider to be a serious problem with the way in which the Internet has been both a friend and an enemy to the photographer.

If we, XtremeCamera, are eventually successful in our efforts to change the way people react to photographs they see on the Internet we (the collective ‘we’) will all be better off for it. If we fail then most certainly we are in for more of the same; lame photographs being praised and becoming the norm (if they haven’t already), not only on the Internet, but also in print and every other way photographs are used.

The Internet is unarguably the single biggest method for the spread of photos all over the globe. Never before have people had this much access to photographs, but also the ability to spread their own photographs over the globe. If I wanted to photograph my cat this minute with the intent of having someone half way around the world look at it and say something nice about it I can do so in seconds. This is the magnificence of the Internet, and although I have my doubts about the overall ‘good’ of the net, you cannot argue that as a communications tool it is the ‘ultimate’ tool.

Unfortunately the Internet has inadvertently played a large part in the mass distribution of lousy photographs. Lousy photographs from photographers that believe they are good, or great, at their craft because of the feedback they receive from people all over the world.

Follow me as I illustrate my point.

Let’s pretend that ‘Joe’ lives in Australia, and considers himself a hobbyist photographer. During one of his many web surfing sessions he stumbles upon a gallery on Flickr by another photographer we’ll call ‘Bob’, a gallery that contains photos of New York City. Having never been to NYC Joe completely disregards the quality of the photographs by Bob and is intrigued and delighted by seeing photos of Ground Zero, The Empire State Building, The Chrysler Building, or the Apple Store in Manhattan that are being displayed on his computer screen. For Joe, being born and raised in Australia’s outback, seeing NYC in this gallery is probably an amazing experience.

Now, being intrigued, Joe decides to leave some very positive feedback for Bob, the US photographer, letting him know that he thinks the photos are amazing. In turn, the US photographer Bob thanks Joe for the comments and Bob walks away from his computer thinking that his work touched someone half way around the world, and he buys into those positive comments instantly and begins to believe he’s a damn fine photographer. He must be, he been validated.

After a few weeks or months on Flickr and many positive comments from people outside of NYC Bob takes the next logical step and joins a website that specializes in photography. He believes that since so many people believe his work is great, he believes he’s ready to turn pro, or at least good enough to begin to instruct others on how to become a good photographer, like himself. “A website specializing in photography is where I belong” he thinks to himself.

Dependent upon which photography site Bob joins he will either have his ass handed to him for his ‘lack of skill served up with a plate full of bravado’ (a terrible combination), or he’ll have even more smoke blown up his butt from the comments he receives on the site he joined, thus inflating his ego even more and giving him the validity he needs for all that bravado he’s carrying around.

For the sake of this scenario let’s all assume Bob joins a photography site that continues to stroke his ego, leave comments like “Awesome!” “Great shot!” and others just like it. Since 99% of all photography sites do just that, its far more likely that Bob has joined that sort of site. (read my footnote for why this is)

Taking this scenario to its final conclusion, the photographer creates more and more photographs, his galleries get larger and larger, and he finds rational reasons for spending hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars on better and better cameras, lenses, and accessories. Eventually he turns pro, builds a website for business, fills that website with his photos, and includes pull quotes from the sites where his work was praised.

To top it off, Bob never bothers to work very hard on becoming a better photographer because he continues to receive great comments on the photos he uploads to his gallery. Why fix that which is not broken?

Photography no longer requires any skill. All it takes to become a photographer these days is a digital camera, a computer, an Internet connection and, most importantly, the validation from others. To get that validation all you or anyone else needs to do is choose the right website to display your work. From the mindless, purposeless sites like Flickr or Buzznet, or those sites owned by, or sponsored by advertising from camera makers, lens makers, or the dozens of companies that make accessories for cameras.

Skill is no longer a requirement for photography, what an amazing statement to make, no? Show your photos to enough people and you are bound to find many that think your photography is ‘awesome’, ‘great’, or even ‘flawless’. The Internet has turned photography into a volume game. A game that you cannot lose, if you spread your photos around the Internet.

XtremeCamera, rightly or wrongly, is trying to force photographers to think like a photographer. We might be too late, after all we began our development in 2004, and were not very fortunate when it came to getting the site built and launched in a timely manner. Even so, we’re moving forward, and if we fail, which at times seems likely at this point, it won’t be from a lack of will.

I think it’s evident by now that we are bucking the trend that is firmly in place on the Internet. Instead of allowing our members to continue with the distasteful practice of validation and praise, we are forcefully trying to get our members to think like the photographers of old, before the Internet, before the volume game.

I think there is a real possibility that one morning I may wake up, log into XtremeCamera, and the place will be empty. No photos in the gallery, no members, just page after page of incredibly cool code and graphics and nothing more. I believe this is a real possibility because it is much easier, and cheaper, to find the validation and praise elsewhere, and people may tire of the hard work involved in becoming a better photographer, or the harsh critiques by an Admin, and may think “Why am I knocking myself out when I can simply post my photos on XYZ site and get my validation there? I don’t need this crap anymore!”

I began to think it was possible that we may fail several weeks ago, and even more so over the last few days. It seems inevitable that some people simply cannot, for whatever reason, think like a photographer, to see a photograph as a photographer, to use their knowledge in their evaluation. Worse still, some members will little or no skill insist that their opinion of a photograph is the same as a thoughtful critique. I love to work with people who are just beginning their long ascent up the learning mountain, but if they are already so damaged as to think it doesn’t take much to judge a photograph or think like a photographer there isn’t much I, or anyone else, can do.

To think like a photographer means putting aside your subjective tendency to react to the subject matter alone and instead study the execution of the photograph. The exposure, the composition, the EXIF data, and all the other technical aspects of photography, as well as the photographers success or failure in delivering the intent of the photograph are all vital elements to consider in both creating the photo and critiquing the photo. It isn’t easy, it doesn’t happen overnight, and it takes a lot of commitment from the photographer. Just how many people are willing to put up with all this is an unknown quantity, but my gut tells me there aren’t many.

In today’s messed up world it seems more important to amateur photographers to receive validation for the photos they create instead of criticism. It also seems much easier to critique another photographers work by simply reacting to the subject matter and to hell with all the other crap that should be considered.

Many people feel that it is preferable to post their work on websites where their work is looked at by the unskilled, and given praise by the same because the unskilled viewer wants to “be nice”, “lift someone’s ego”, “make them feel better”, and my favorite, “I like handing out stars”. It’s why these sites have so many members. People seeking validation can find it easily in websites like these.

They often beg the question, “Why should you allow your work to be honestly critiqued when all the praise you desire can be found on another site, for free?”

We most certainly have members that truly wish to master photography and I love every one of them . Many that are willing to take a long hard look at their work and focus on how it could have been better. These members are never satisfied with their level of knowledge and are always looking to learn more.

Sadly, for some members, even though the desire is there and the commitment is there, the effects of the Internet practice of looking at other peoples work in a nice, friendly, non-judgmental way, accompanied by the kneejerk reaction to hand out kudos instead of constructive criticism seems hardwired and very hard to overcome.

In the coming weeks when our classroom studies begin, we hope that we are successful in teaching members how to use their camera and lens effectively, while at the same time teach them how to think like a photographer and how to survive without false praise, and how to properly critique the work of others. How successful we’ll be is anyone’s guess, but we’ll try.

The generation of children raised by parents that wanted nothing to do with competition, who insisted that every kid in class be awarded ribbons for just about any reason, and believed that keeping score in a sports game was detrimental to the children playing those sports, have grown up and are engrained with the desire for praise, earned or not. Both the parents and the children of those parents are what XtremeCamera is up against. It will not be easy. Then again, anything worth doing is never easy. Or so I was taught.

Welcome to the 21st century where, thanks in large part to the Internet, the only thing that matters is having your own existence acknowledged.

Julia Barnes
Admin
——————-

Footnote:

Camera makers own some of the photography sites on the Internet. Those that are not owned by camera makers are supported by them, or a myriad other companies that make thousands of products for digital cameras and the people that use them. Nearly every photography site is dependent on advertising to pay the bills, and that’s fine. But, most sites pay the price of integrity n exchange for those advertising dollars.

In order for the website to be successful so that it can remain viable, alive, and even grow, the advertising must be effective. Effective for this situation means selling more product, and in order to sell more product the website must encourage its members to continue their photography hobby/career no matter what, and to understand that buying its product, or the products advertised on the site, will help them become even better than they already are.

Both types allow and encourage supportive commenting of other people’s photographs regardless of the skill demonstrated by the photographer. I know what you’re thinking, “What’s wrong with being supportive?” … Nothing. See below.

My point is this; most photography sites actually discourage honesty in its members commenting. They do this to keep them there. And of course, many or most of the people involved are also part of the same generation(s) that go around encouraging the fact that it’s not about the skills; it’s about the fun. The XtremeCamera way is “It’s ALL about the skill, and if you have fun while increasing your skill level then that’s great.”

Footnote of the footnote: Of course being supportive plays a part in helping others become better photographers. But supportive means something totally different than it used to even 10 years ago, when all this non-competitive bullshit was limited to the schoolrooms and not yet let loose upon the world and through the Internet. Supportive doesn’t mean ignoring all the faults, or ANY of the faults of a photograph. Supportive means acknowledging someone’s attempt to do better, period.

I read an email last week that made me want to cry. It read, in part, “I was taught that if you have something negative to say about a photograph (or anything really) you should even out the criticism with something positive. In other words, if you have 3 things you want to say that are critical, say 3 things that are positive as well. I believe you will catch more flies with honey this way”
I about threw up, but it convinced me that there were some people who are forever lost to the “there are no losers, there are only lesser winners” crowd.