Originally Posted by rolandogomez
My most effective critiques, as I was becoming a better photographer, came from those that ripped my stuff to shreds, without the sugar coating. Those I never forgot, but I've forgotten about 99% of those "that a boy's" when I knew they were more "good enough for government" types just trying to be nice--when it's "good enough" it's the same as saying, just average, passable. I prefer slap me in the face with a harsh critique, but identify what is wrong, so I work better at getting better. Let's not forget, we are all students of photography as technology changes every Monday when the Board of Director's meet. Thanks, rg.
I agree. This just seemed like a departure from what I thought I had observed earlier.
One reason I do not say much anymore is because I have to be careful about being too harsh sounding.
My experiences are somewhat different than many (I believe). I am used to extremely "critical" critiques.
Anyway, I just thought the bluntness was a little unusual.
By the way, I believe the images fall more into a "candid" category than anything else. So with that in mind, they are suitable for candids. It is not as if the photographer had any way to control posing; and about the only light he could use was strobe on camera, or just a quick shot with available light.