Microstock Photography Forum - General > Off Topic

Reviewer

<< < (2/2)

sharply_done:
There are many people who enjoy looking at and critiquing photographs who cannot, no matter how hard they try or how many courses they take, make a 'nice' image. Just because this reviewer is a member of that crowd doesn't necessarily mean that he doesn't know what he's doing.

To put it more succinctly "Those who can't do, teach."

sharpshot:
I read that they get paid about 2 cents per image reviewed.  You won't get Daivd Bailey reviewing for that :)

Good photographers would probably lose a lot of money if they took time from photography to review other peoples photos.

rjmiz:
"To put it more succinctly "Those who can't do, teach."

Are you aware that this is meant and said usually in a derogatory way. However I don't think you meant it that way.
I certainly would not want to be operated on by a surgeon who was taught by a sub-par performer.
Or that was taught in a school in Mexico because they were not accepted into med schools in the USA.

There has to be a love of labor, to enjoy reviewing. I certainly don't expect any successful photographers
to be working for pennies on a microstock site.

a.k.a.-tom:

--- Quote from: sharply_done on May 25, 2007, 09:36 ---There are many people who enjoy looking at and critiquing photographs who cannot, no matter how hard they try or how many courses they take, make a 'nice' image. Just because this reviewer is a member of that crowd doesn't necessarily mean that he doesn't know what he's doing.

--- End quote ---

Sharply has a point.   Maybe it can apply this way.  I enjoy classical art of all forms.   I couldn't mold a decent looking human nose out of a piece of play-doh.  But I can look at  Michelangelo's work and tell if it's anatomically accurate.   About all I can paint is my house,  but I know the difference between a Monet and a van Gogh and something my kid did in 1st grade (some of the kid's stuff was better...LOL).  Likewise, a reviewer wouldn't necessarily need to be a great photog themself to know what the agency that employs them wants in it's portfolio.
   
     Then again, maybe that's a bad analogy....  I'm flexible... LOL   8)-tom


...but to FortuneFame's point....   we've all had pix rejected that absolutely shouldn't have been,  leading to question the ability ..or integrity,  of a reviewer.

Karimala:

--- Quote from: sharply_done on May 25, 2007, 09:36 ---There are many people who enjoy looking at and critiquing photographs who cannot, no matter how hard they try or how many courses they take, make a 'nice' image. Just because this reviewer is a member of that crowd doesn't necessarily mean that he doesn't know what he's doing.

--- End quote ---

Being a "Bouncer" myself at LO, I can agree with Sharply's assessment.  There are several areas of photography where I'm still struggling (lighting in particular), but that doesn't mean I can't decipher the quality of another person's photo in the areas where I can't get it right as an artist. 

And to follow along Tom's theme, I also used to be a copy editor at a daily newspaper.  Copy editors aren't always the best writers, but they can easily recognize a mediocre sentence or paragraph and tweak it to bring out the best.  Ironically, it was while I was a copy editor that I learned how to review photos, because I had to work with the photo editor and photographers daily, so I had my reviewing skills even before I knew how to operate a camera!  :-)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page