Here are my opinions.

As I have said in another thread, I would definitely like to see a cure for the recent watering down of the main PENTAX issues with all the photo critique posts. Each picture submitted usually takes up pages of critiques, rebuttles and multiple posts of the same or similar tweaked photo.

I personally would find it a lot less inconvenient to click on a link to see a picture than I do scrolling back and forth to read the text after someone has posted an inapproriately large photo. If photos in the body of the post are allowed then we need a rule about maximum size.

I agree with John Riley that the sister site Ephotozine is the proper place to show off your photos, why duplicate it here? Yes I know, this is a photgraphy forum and photos are what we produce, but it is primarily a forum about all things PENTAX so IMO unless it specifically has something to do with the PENTAX brand why is it being posted here? There are probably hundreds of other places on the web to share your photos and get or give critiques. However, if the P-UK members choose to continue to share their good works here then I do vote YES purely to provide a seperate space for it.

BTW, I can't find the place to submit my vote for the coupon system George.

Regards

Drew

Liam: Hope you vote in the new poll posted in the General Chat category where you can see more comments that address some of your good arguments.

PeteKD: I totally agree with ChrisA that you take criticism "incredibly well". To say the least!! You have quickly grown the skin of an elephant Pete and GOOD FOR YOU!!

Don: No "point" intended towards you. Not sure if I agree that it never got ugly but it certainly has improved greatly. Just look at the civilised talk in this topic alone. A model for other forums that is for sure.

I LOVE P-UK!! (and not afraid to shout about it)

Regards

Drew

Don, I agree with almost EVERYTHING you say especially;

This whole forum has changed in the last few months with quite a few members (especially new ones) posting pictures more and more, and seemingly for approval rather than for actual critique. I am not against this per se but I have seen this go sour on other forums where the posters get much more than they bargained for and it is usually other members that take great exception to the response the poster gets and it turns into a crapfest. I think a lot of the problem lies with the opinions expressed are usually biased towards how the person posting is perceived as to whether they are just boasting and looking for an "attaboy" or whether they are honestly looking for advice.

If you are going to ask for critique, first you must grow about 3 more inches of skin thickness. Secondly, if somebody gives their honest brutal opinion, the poster will learn nothing if the poster's "friends" slams the critiquer. The same goes for John Riley's excellent insight that gratuitous compliments are meaningless as well. When either of those conditions happens, nothing is gained by the poster looking for an honest critique and trying to learn from it. It is up to the poster to determine what opinions are valid and which are not, not.

(No inflection intended on you Don - very valid points, and no inflection on you ChrisA - that is your opinion and IMO very valid too.)

Quite a few months ago a question was posed as to our opinions of having a new category made for photo critiques. I voted NO at the time because I have seen that category turn ugly on other forums and did not want to see this great forum turn into that. Slowly photos have started to be posted for critique (or otherwise) in several categories and that brings up another point. Why are most photos submitted for critique under the Digital SLR category just because the member owns a digital SLR? Unless it is specific to the PENTAX Digital SLR topic shouldn't it presently be posted under the General Chat category? In fact, many posts lately seem to be mis-categorized. I remember not long ago when the moderators would move posts to the correct category. What happened to that? I would officially like to change my vote for making a Photo Critique category to a YES so I can skip all these daily pleas for approval and if I want to read about PENTAX Digital SLRs or Digital Chat that is all I will find in those categories.

Another thing, shouldn't a rule be made about how big a photo can be pasted into a post so we don't have to scroll back and forth to read the text on topics with huge pictures included?

This forum is still fantastic but I would sure like to see it mature into more high quality posts like the one Ben made about "Getting into my Biz". Tons of interesting and intelligent information posted there and that beats all this quibbling over "snapshots" and bad magazine reviews. I think that people that don't have the confidence in their skills should post their photos for critique elsewhere like; www.photo.net or http://www.ephotozine.com/gallery/critiquegallery.cfm because usually the photo really has nothing to do with PENTAX specifically does it?

My opinion anyway.

Regards

Drew

Pete

First of all let me congratulate you on your well written and meaningful post. It was great to read your appreciative feedback regarding all the help you have received on this Forum so far.

I admit I certainly was critical of you, I also did make it personal a couple of times, and I apologize for coming down heavily on you. I, like everyone one else, would like nothing better than to help a novice with his questions but I think I was not alone in being dismayed at how dramatically things changed here on January 17, 2007 when a newcomer named PeteKD began making over 8 posts a day in every conceivable topic that popped into his head. This forum is one of the best on the web and I don't remember ever seeing any kind of previous talk here like "I dont see you posting any pictures so keep your sarcastic comments to yourself. " and that pretty much formed my opinion of you in your first week here.

I was dismayed at how the forum was quickly going downhill from good natured chat and advice to a great deal of personal sniping and chastising. I think George however correctly diagnosed the problem as just your overwhelming ENTHUSIASM!!

It is great to see you are such a quick study Pete and that most of the above seems to have changed dramatically. You have come a long way in a very short time and I think some of the blunt criticism has actually helped that along. Your manner has become a lot more subdued and your writing has definitely improved. (oh and… thanks for the capital I’s by the way. ) I am sure you will notice if you take the time to make a decent post like the one you have made here it will reflect the quality and quantity of the replies to your questions.

Thanks again for your post, it has changed my mind about you Pete.
Now excuse me while I choke down the rest of this dry piece of humble pie.

Regards and apologies.

Drew

Copied from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
--------------------------------------------------
Pedant

A pedant, or pædant, is a formalist or precisionist in teaching or scholarship. The corresponding female noun is pedantess. The term comes from the French pédant (1566 in Darme & Hatzfeldster's Dictionnaire général de la langue français) or its source Italian pedante "teacher," schoolmaster, pedant. (Compare the Spanish pedante.). The origin of the Italian term is uncertain. The first element is apparently the same as in pedagogue, (a teacher) etc.; and it has been suggested that pedante was contracted from the medieval Latin pædagogantem, present participle of pædagogare "to act as pedagogue, to teach" (Du Cange); but evidence is wanting. The Latin word is derived from Greek terms for "child" (παιδ and "to lead" (αγειν.

The term is typically used in a negative connotation, indicating someone overly concerned with minutiae and detail and whose tone is perceived as condescending. When it was first used by Shakespeare in Love's Labour's Lost (158, it simply meant "teacher." Shortly afterward, it began to be used negatively. Thomas Nashe wrote in Have with you to Saffron-walden (1596), page 43: "O, tis a precious apothegmaticall [terse] Pedant, who will finde matter inough to dilate a whole daye of the first inuention [invention] of Fy, fa, fum"


Usage of term
Being referred to as a pedant, or pedantic, is considered insulting. However some people take pride in being a pedant, especially with regard to the use of the English language. In an attempt to avoid censure, people who wish to make a correction often preface it with "not wishing to be pedantic, but ..." or "without being a pedant, ...".

Pedantry can also be an indication of certain developmental disorders. In particular those with Asperger Syndrome, or Higher Functioning Autism, often have behavior characterized by pedantic speech.[1] Those with Asperger's tend to obsess over the minutiae of subjects, and are prone to giving long detailed expositions, and the related corrections, and may gravitate to careers in academia, science or PD&A where such obsessive attention to detail is often rewarded.

The term pedantic is most widely used when referring to citizens of germanic origins. In Switzerland for example the term pedantic is frequently applied with reference to individuals who over process / over engineer any item of work. An example of usage would be - "Today we attended a Project Planning Meeting. During the meeting the Project Manager, Leo Sterzinger was extremely pedantic to the point of being anally retentive. Or is it that he was being anally retentive to the point of being extremely pedantic?"

Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder is also in part characterized by a form of pedantry that is overly concerned with the correct following of rules, procedures and practices.[2] Sometimes the rules that OCPD sufferers obsessively follow are of their own devising, or are corruptions or re-interpretations of the letter of actual rules.

-----------------------------------------

Personally, I think the first paragraph of the definition is the most applicable to George. Listen attentively to ALL he has to say but do not be distracted by the minutiae.

Regards

Drew

Taken 6/3/06 18:15??? Wasn't the K10D released November 30/2006 in Japan? I'm skeptical.

Drew

[quote="petekd"]Yes, what do you know? It was Galloot that took the liberty with your photo, not me. And, you have a LOT to learn about what depth of field means.

Drew

No!! I did not know you changed your mind AGAIN. You keep editing your original post about selling your camera in another topic and I can't keep up. When you do that it doesn't show up as a new post and so nobody reads it again. Very confusing Pete. Editing a post is usually done to correct spelling or minor content re-wording immediately after posting, otherwise you should post again in the same topic if you have something to change or add on that topic.

Sorry Pete. I personally don't think much of any of those three pictures either. The cliché of a slow shutter speed on moving water (with the latest camera) does not automatically constitute a good picture and what else is there in that picture anyway? Adding a frame and an artsy title to compensate for lack of subject matter definitely doesn't work for me either and I feel it makes it worse. The bridge B&W conversion is very muddy and does not give me a good feeling at all. (If you built the bridge though, good job.) I liked the third one the best of the three but only because I was first interested in the contast of the diagonal of the hill against the sky. Here the title is actually the best part of the picture though. At least it gives us a hint at what we are to be looking for here.

When I find a picture I like a lot it has at least two strong elements in it, and three would be even better. Some examples are; great lighting, interesting subject, beauty, vivid colour, a message, something unusual, etc. Above all it must say something. Always ask yourself what "what am I trying to say?" In my opinion, if it has only one element, it is only a snapshot.

I know that you seldom take criticism of your submissions well and that is not that uncommon on sites like this. Many people get far more gratification from the ooooh's and aaaah's they receive from their submissions rather than truly learning anything from what others have to honestly say. I find I learn more if it I get a negative review and very little when it is all positive. I hope you realise I am honestly trying to help you and hope you receive it as it was given. I may be blunt but in no way do I intend to be mean.

Oh, and can I also give you a couple of other posting tips Pete? The word "I" is always capitalized even if it is in the middle of a sentence. Also, I don't know if you realise it but your apostrophe key is not working on your keyboard. Get it fixed! It makes your typing look like you are either lazy or just don't care if it looks like text messaging. That may be the reason people don't bother responding to you.

Regards

Drew

Another outstanding macro Tom. Because of your technique I recently ordered and yesterday received a male to male adapter and have been experimenting with my Pentax M 100mm f4 macro with a reversed Pentax 50mm f1.7 WOW! almost a microscope. I also have some extension tubes and will be trying those out too. I would be interested to see what you have invented for your flash diffuser.

Cheers

Drew

PS: Intersting house fly fact: Not only is each compound eye made
up of 4,000 six-sided lenses (all of which work independently) did you know that those two short, thick antennae set between the eyes detect the slightest air movement. No wonder they are so hard to swat!

How truly unfortunate but a sincere thanks anyway for that test and your reply Arthur. Hopefully Pentax will get this sorted out well before I can afford a K10D. As you know, there is much chatter about this everywhere on the Web so I am sure Pentax is all over it. In the meantime that does little for you and your fine manual lenses Arthur.

I'm sorry justgetoutandride I must be dense but after reading your reply several times I just don't understand your answer in relation to my post. What I was trying to ask was; if you are experiencing exposure errors, does setting the shutter speed manually using the DOF preview button and the Tv wheel work any better than using the green button?

I don't know if you realize AJ that you will not get good results using an M lens with the camera set to Av mode unless you want to shoot with the lens wide open.

Interesting opinions about abandoning M lenses now that some have upgraded to the K10D. That is valid if you value the camera body more than the lens but I for one will not be upgrading if the K10D makes my lovely M primes useless. But hey, that's me. I'm different.

Anxiously awaiting for a flurry of M lenses on Ebay

Drew