I don't see anything wrong with them. Do you see anything? - write what's wrong specifically.
I want Vlad to write specifically.
He simply has to respond to his criticism.
15G, he has to. You say? Seriously? Haven't you heard of that Indian dwelling called "figwam"? And don't you want to think for yourself before taking a picture and then throwing it on a photo site? Can you just explain why you took this picture? What did you want to show with this photo? There's no plot, no quality, no content, no work of the photographer. If we were on a botanist's forum, no one would say a word about this "photo," however you present it. But this is a photography website. A photograph must have some artistic value. What is it here? Where can it be seen? In some soap pistil or a murky, smeared drop of water? Just because you like this photograph doesn't mean others will. Other people may have a completely different, more accurate perception of the photograph.
15G, I have to. You say? Seriously? Haven't you heard of this Indian dwelling called "figwam"? And don't you want to think for yourself before taking a picture and then throwing it on a photo site? Can you just explain why you took this? What did you want to show with this photo? There's no plot, no quality, no content, no work of the photographer. If we were on a botanist forum, no one would say a word about this "photo," however you want to present it. But here, it's a photo site. A photograph must have some artistic value. What is it here? Where can I see it? Is there water in some soapy pestle or a murky, smeared droplet? Just because you like this photograph doesn't mean others will. Others may have a completely different, more accurate perception of the photograph.
Vlad Sokolovsky, https://photocentra.ru/comm.php?type=answer And what did you show here? What's the point? Green and black fields, is that the plot? Just because you like it doesn't mean everyone will. Everything you wrote is just fluff. I responded in the same vein.
P Laura, So he doesn't write or criticize. He just gives 2, 3, 4, 1 based on his mood. When someone criticizes, you should say thank you. But when they stupidly give a low score, and not to just one or two, or even 10, but to many, then the attitude toward them is either that of a psychopath or that they want everyone to come and like them. But he chose the wrong path, IMHO.
15G, That's what I'm talking about. If you gave me a failing grade, explain it. If you have nothing to say or are too lazy to write, then just move on and don't visit. If you don't like it, no one is forcing anyone or forcing anyone onto their pages. I wrote about the rating, so Sokolovsky could have simply responded quietly and quietly, asking what was wrong with my photo. Where did he start? He brought in some faceless trolls and started demagoguery about honey, about who has what diagnosis and level, etc., etc., let him sit and give whatever he wants, even 1, yes, Vlad Sokolovsky's works are good, but with his actions he has caused disgust in himself, and his pages have become less interesting to me, you just have to be a person first and only then a photographer.
Michail Novikov, I've told you a hundred times: you should have justified your positive grades as "Cs and Ds." But now, you gratefully fall at the knees of Taimas and his ilk and that's it... Now it's your turn to visit them... If you achieve some results, you'll get a different grade; if you're stuck, you'll get the grade you deserved again. If you don't like it, well, what can you do...
I'll respond here, as the author deleted the work I wanted to respond to Vlad Sokolovsky's request.
I won't speak for everyone on the list, but I will speak for myself, as I'm also on the list of ardent honey-producing photographers :). Although I've temporarily taken a timeout, I'll express my opinion. I appeal to everyone to support Vlad Sokolovsky's proposals. Vlad is right on all counts. I think all of us who are guilty of being generous with rivers, out of the kindness of our hearts, and stingy with critical (constructive) comments, need time to reflect on the future of the site. The rating should objectively reflect the photographer's level of skill, not just their level of goodwill toward other photographers, and it doesn't matter what genre they work in. I'm talking about shifting all the blame onto landscape photographers, because I categorically disagree, as I see that "non-landscape photographers" generally rank each other's rivers without bothering to comment. They give recommendations, and instead of a constructive comment, they don't even write a poem, but just a flame. Either they have nothing to say, or they're afraid to offend the artist. I assume everyone is the same when it comes to honey, because people are naturally "not only drawn to knowledge," but I'll immediately clarify that not all, but most. The fact is, there are more landscape artists, and this, as I understand it, is a consequence of the site's policy of increasing traffic. I understand the site owner's position: it's not us, our beloved selves, with our own quirks in our heads that matter; the key criterion is traffic. The task is not an easy one: to maintain traffic and not fall to a trashy level. Let's draw conclusions. I've made mine, and in my opinion, Vlad should be supported. The price of the question is, as much as possible for everyone, to be discerning in their opinions and find time for constructive comments, including criticism.
That's your right. Therefore, I will do as I see fit... And I will give the grades I deem appropriate, regardless of whether you need them or not. All the best and happy shooting!
Sooner or later, such a showdown was bound to start here. No public photo resource has ever managed without it. And how this situation will be resolved is also a foregone conclusion. There are only two possible outcomes. And both depend on the Admin's actions. Outcome #1. FC will follow in Photoline's footsteps. There, exactly the same conflict took place two or three (I don't remember exactly) years ago. The gist of the outsiders' complaints against the advanced ones is the same: you give them two stars without explaining why.
Meanwhile, the outsiders' ratings were many times higher than the advanced ones'. It all ended with the persecution of the advanced ones through Pobedimsky's censorship policies (the equivalent of the local Master). The advanced ones left. There was nothing left to watch or listen to. Only old farts remained, seeking solace in their senile infirmity through mutual licking. Result: about 10-15 people are hanging out with 2-word comments (Excellent work, Great!, I really like it, etc.) By the time Pobedimsky came to his senses, it was too late – the site was dead. About two months ago, even Sergey Chubarov (the most loyal, the most tolerant, and the most forgiving of them all) announced that he could no longer stay there. The last one whose work was capable of generating interest had left. Thus ended the resource that once brought together the most interesting photographers and the most powerful theorists.
Outcome #2. The Admin will finally realize that there are two groups of photographers with FUNDAMENTALLY different interests in photography. Their views on "good/bad" will never coincide. Moreover, those who have left the threshold of the "people's" The "populists" will never be able to explain (even if they really wanted to) to those who are now attacking Sokolovsky why they consider their "popular" photographs worthy of nothing but pity. The "populists" will never be able to understand Sokolovsky. Because they simply aren't ready for it—they lack the necessary knowledge, experience, visual aesthetics, etc. If they possessed all of this, they would never have taken the kind of photos that Sokolovsky gives his "F" marks. There are many populists. Their number is many times greater, perhaps even dozens of times greater. It's really they who set the tone on the site: both with the mass of their pictures and the mass of their comments. And they could very easily harass Sokolovsky. But it will all end, as it has on all other resources (see Photoline). Not long ago, the Master was made proposals for the necessary advanced transformations. He doesn't care. Instead, he deliberately did the exact opposite – he brought the populists here from all their internet dumps. And now they rightly and proudly tell Sokolovsky: I have thousands of recommendations on YF, and you – scoundrel, madman, maniac, envious person, etc. – are giving me bad grades!!! Who are you after that? And Sokolovsky sits and thinks: What place have you and your FC fallen to for me to go there, get covered in shit, and ruin my mood? What good do I get from communicating with you all? Can you give me anything?
Michail Novikov, I bet: if I gave you a 10 for what you call a good photo, you'd hardly be so hysterical right now demanding justification and accepting it as due.
Vlad Sokolovsky, Here's an example for you: This is how it should be done, humanely and properly. And not like trolls, who usually do it silently for fun. Regarding the 10, you'll never give it, because people like you don't know how to give it. If people like you like something, they usually pass it by silently, and if they don't, they just as silently give it those ratings that know how to give it a one, two, three, or something like that. So, if you're going to start rating, out of respect for your colleagues on this site, you should still force yourself to write comments on the fails you're not too lazy to rate. Good luck!
Sooner or later, such a showdown was bound to start here.
Such showdowns happen here twice a year.
The Admin will finally realize that...
The Admin has finally realized that Kud is incapable of anything serious, so let him entertain the people.
The "populists" will never be able to understand Sokolovsky.
And who's giving him so many recommendations? Not the "populists"? Or are we just that full of "advanced" people (according to Kud)? Oh, Kudryavtsev, how sloppily everything is sewn together. _
Michail Novikov, unfortunately, this isn't an example... it's a farce. More likely out of helplessness, envy, and anger than actual fact... That's how it is...
The administration's decision is strange. Marina Glebova's post about Kud blowing bubbles was a hit and wasn't deleted by the administration. But my shorter, non-defamatory post by the aforementioned author about the same bubbles and fans was deleted by the administration. Is this bias? Or did I miss something, and face, excuse the sound control, has already appeared here recently? And then they wonder why there are so few comments, or why what is allowed for some is not allowed for others? As for Kuda, I saw through him right away, and most defended him, but not for long. But then the truth dawned, even here. But for some reason, Kuda's posts under many of my works, when he mercilessly bullied me as a person, thereby lowering my reputation, along with his minions, were never deleted; I can provide links. What does all this mean? Can someone explain it to me? Is this the kind of fairness that exists on the site, or does the administration have a soft spot for it? If we're going to be fair, then we should treat everyone equally in everything.
Michail Novikov, unfortunately, this is not an example... it's a farce. More likely from impotence, envy, and anger than from any real reason... That's how it is...
Michail Novikov, unfortunately, this isn't an example... it's a farce. More likely, it's out of helplessness, envy, and anger than actual merit... That's how it is...
Vlad Sokolovsky, I also watched yours and noted what I liked, but didn't mark what I didn't, and didn't give you a 1, 2, or 3. I simply passed it by. But when I gave you a 3, returning to the example you presented to me, I immediately received a response from you (unfortunately, this isn't an example... it's a farce. More likely, it's out of helplessness, envy, and anger). You're a funny little man, though. I could also write to you that you're rating me out of envy and anger, although that's not true. So, if you give me a rating, please provide an explanation, otherwise it's just not very nice.
Vlad Sokolovsky, I also watched yours and noted what I liked, but didn’t mark what I didn’t and didn’t give you a 1, 2, 3, but simply passed by, but when I gave you a 3, returning for the example presented to you, I immediately received a response from you (unfortunately, this is not an example... it’s a farce. Rather, from impotence, envy and anger,) You are a funny person, however. I could also write to you that you're rating me out of envy and anger, although that's not the case. So, if you're giving me a rating, please provide an explanation, otherwise it's just not looking good.
Michail Novikov, We'll have to end this conversation. You're the one sitting here, unemployed, chatting away day and night out of boredom, while I have a ton of work to do. I'm tired of wasting my time on nonsense. Real life is much more interesting than virtual life. So, you'll spend your whole life sitting at your computer, proving your useless idea. Good luck with your chatter, Vlad. You know how it is: photographers take pictures, amateur photographers take pictures, and chatterboxes chatter away, trying to prove something. But what's the point? There's no point, since art has no boundaries.
Michail Novikov, Why are you showing your photos on this site? To only get gasps and sighs? I think the feedback on your photos is fair.
Pavel Nagin, I don't care about ratings or likes. I care about comments and explanations of what the person writing these comments thinks about my photos. That's what's important to me. I can hear gasps and sighs from real people in real life by participating in photo exhibitions, or I can hear the opposite and discuss them with those who have definitely achieved the highest level in photography. That's not what I was actually writing about—for some reason, everyone here thinks I'm very offended by the ratings Vlad gives me. I REPEAT—I'M NOT OFFENDED. I want to convey a basic idea to all of you - the idea is this: GIVE AN AFTER GRADE AND EXPLAIN THE REASON IN THE COMMENT UNDER THE PHOTO YOU GRADED IT ON. Anything easier to understand immediately sparked a heated discussion with attacks, personal insults, and insults. The question is, why is all this necessary when you can take a simpler approach: either do as I ask, or simply avoid visiting my pages altogether, bypassing me as an undesirable author.
Michail Novikov, Why are you showing your photos on this site? To only get gasps and sighs? I think the feedback on your photos is fair.
Pavel Nagin, How would you feel, Pavel, if someone came to your page and silently gave you, say, a 2? Wouldn't you wonder why? It's a given, so what's the matter? Why, if I have a question for this person, does he avoid answering it, citing that I supposedly wouldn't have asked him such a question if I'd given him a 10? A 10 is satisfactory, while 1, 2, and 3 are unsatisfactory, and I'm simply curious, as a human being, to read what Vlad Sokolovsky would write. But he's used to silently giving his 1, 2, and 3 ratings. I think if you're too lazy to write, then don't bother giving it. For example, I gave him a 3 under his photo, so what did he write to me? Read his response above (Michail Novikov, unfortunately, isn't an example... it's a farce. More likely, out of helplessness, envy, and anger than any real reason... That's how it is...) Although I also looked at this photo of his earlier and didn't like it, but I didn't give it any ratings and passed it by. Based on this, I understand one simple thing: everyone should like his work without exception, since the author considers himself a brilliant photographer. And if, God forbid, someone like me doesn't like it, he'll immediately write a fib about envy, anger, and impotence. That's exactly what I'm getting at. And not about, "Oh, holy cow, I'm going to get revenge and give everyone two." I won't. It's just that now, for the future, I'll be giving photos by those silent authors who are used to silently giving them failing grades, along with comments, the ratings they deserve in my opinion. It's not like before, when I didn't like something and silently passed it on.
Michail Novikov, no one is obligated to explain the reasons for a rating. You can ask for clarification, but you shouldn't demand it. I visited your page, and there's not a single noteworthy photo, only scans of the area.
Michail Novikov, no one is obligated to explain the reasons for a rating. You can ask for clarification, but you can't demand it. I visited your page, and there's not a single noteworthy photo, only scans of the area.
The comments are absolutely trashy. But the photo is awesome.
Vladimir Voychuk, Well, it's not just the comments that are trashy here... If you look at the "Landscapes" section and its contents, the comments there often pale in comparison to what's posted there. ;)
babka.ru, fortunately, this isn't the worst example you've given me as a reproach. I guess you learn from your mistakes if you have the desire to learn. From memory, this desire came to me somewhere around 2011.
babka.ru, fortunately, this isn't the worst example you've given me as a reproach. I guess you learn from your mistakes if you have the desire to learn. From memory, this desire came to me somewhere around 2011.
Vlad Sokolovsky, I understand... I just don't understand why you're so eager to push such desires in others!?
Vlad Sokolovsky, I understand... I just don't understand why you're so eager to push similar desires in others!?
babka.ru, it's taken on a slightly different scale now. Although this was the case before—there were (or were) good authors on this site, some came/went/changed. They had works in different genres, they also argued and bickered among themselves, but they were AUTHORS. Now there's no influx, rather an outflow. Because seeing what's going on now, you still have to respect yourself. Something like that... And... yes...
Since you have such a good memory for a "babka," could you remind me of one phrase about "fingers and art/photography"? Seriously... I forgot...
Vlad Sokolovsky, the old woman would keep quiet if you were working with people equal to you in rating and experience... there are plenty of honey producers among them.
Do you really want to put up with novice greenhorns!?
If you have such a good memory for a "old woman," could you remind me of one phrase about "fingers and art/photography"? Smile Seriously... I forgot...
If it's relevant, then it's your right and even duty to remind her... and if not...then sclerosis suits the old woman, and not you...
Everything in its time. I'm well aware that a fish rots from the head. But in this case, I don't really believe in "Grandma's" "fair" silence, or rather, in talkativeness. Rather, this now resembles the "good cop/bad cop" method and another game/intrigue. And as for the young authors ("greenhorns," as you called them) - if you look closely, you can hardly accuse me of pressuring them. After all, I also look at what people do on the site. It happens that someone gets into trouble. But as the saying goes, "A fool won't understand, but a smart one will thank you." So there you have it...
Vlad Sokolovsky, if you understand... then start with your closest "comrades," who exemplify blind unscrupulousness. With the Times, for example, and others like it—glamorous landscape painters and perfectionists.
babka.ru, I see that with your words "game" and "intrigue" - I was right after all.
Vlad Sokolovsky, you got it right... everyone has the right to choose who to play with and who to intrigue... I just really don't like watching experienced players beat less experienced ones, especially in a crowd. Otherwise, everything's fine, everything's according to plan... Thanks for your sincerity, Vlad and
I don't like slanderous talk, but I can say for sure that I've long been a fan of Vlad Sokolovsky's work, and I don't care what rating he gives me. I told him on one of his websites that I'm essentially a fisherman, and we've settled that perfectly well. And he rates me as a fisherman. I have no pretensions to greatness. But those who devote their soul to their favorite craft (photography) deserve special attention and appreciation. They are few. They must be cherished. As far as I understand, this site isn't for exhibitions or awards, and everything that happens here isn't a competitive struggle. Therefore, every author expects ratings and recommendations. If there aren't any, people will leave the site. I believe—to each according to his abilities, and to others according to their needs. I can rate as I wish. That's my right. Essentially, this site, like others, is also a social network, helping people communicate. And, in my opinion, quite successfully. The other day, one of my favorite authors posted a piece that no one rated, but it was featured on another site, and it was the third piece in a month. For over ten years, I've been posting mostly my fishing photos on various sites, and I'm happy when someone likes them. Vlad—go ahead! Make us happy. Friends, self-esteem is a great thing. Creative success to everyone!
, excuse me, but what's that supposed to mean? So, is it now common practice to ask photographers who post on photo sites about their additional hobbies and rate those hobbies, not their photography?! This doesn't paint Vlad Sokolovsky in a good light if he can't distinguish between a fisherman and an amateur photographer.
And don't you want to think for yourself before taking a picture and then throwing it on a photo site?
What did you want to show with this photo? There's no plot, no quality, no content, no work of the photographer. If we were on a botanist's forum, no one would say a word about this "photo," however you present it.
But this is a photography website. A photograph must have some artistic value. What is it here?
Where can it be seen? In some soap pistil or a murky, smeared drop of water?
Just because you like this photograph doesn't mean others will. Other people may have a completely different, more accurate perception of the photograph.
And, yes, we're waiting for comments from those you trust more ;)
If you gave me a failing grade, explain it. If you have nothing to say or are too lazy to write, then just move on and don't visit. If you don't like it, no one is forcing anyone or forcing anyone onto their pages.
I wrote about the rating, so Sokolovsky could have simply responded quietly and quietly, asking what was wrong with my photo. Where did he start? He brought in some faceless trolls and started demagoguery about honey, about who has what diagnosis and level, etc., etc., let him sit and give whatever he wants, even 1, yes, Vlad Sokolovsky's works are good, but with his actions he has caused disgust in himself, and his pages have become less interesting to me, you just have to be a person first and only then a photographer.
But now, you gratefully fall at the knees of Taimas and his ilk and that's it... Now it's your turn to visit them...
If you achieve some results, you'll get a different grade; if you're stuck, you'll get the grade you deserved again.
If you don't like it, well, what can you do...
I won't speak for everyone on the list, but I will speak for myself, as I'm also on the list of ardent honey-producing photographers :). Although I've temporarily taken a timeout, I'll express my opinion. I appeal to everyone to support Vlad Sokolovsky's proposals. Vlad is right on all counts. I think all of us who are guilty of being generous with rivers, out of the kindness of our hearts, and stingy with critical (constructive) comments, need time to reflect on the future of the site. The rating should objectively reflect the photographer's level of skill, not just their level of goodwill toward other photographers, and it doesn't matter what genre they work in. I'm talking about shifting all the blame onto landscape photographers, because I categorically disagree, as I see that "non-landscape photographers" generally rank each other's rivers without bothering to comment. They give recommendations, and instead of a constructive comment, they don't even write a poem, but just a flame. Either they have nothing to say, or they're afraid to offend the artist. I assume everyone is the same when it comes to honey, because people are naturally "not only drawn to knowledge," but I'll immediately clarify that not all, but most. The fact is, there are more landscape artists, and this, as I understand it, is a consequence of the site's policy of increasing traffic. I understand the site owner's position: it's not us, our beloved selves, with our own quirks in our heads that matter; the key criterion is traffic. The task is not an easy one: to maintain traffic and not fall to a trashy level. Let's draw conclusions. I've made mine, and in my opinion, Vlad should be supported. The price of the question is, as much as possible for everyone, to be discerning in their opinions and find time for constructive comments, including criticism.
And I will give the grades I deem appropriate, regardless of whether you need them or not.
All the best and happy shooting!
Outcome #1.
FC will follow in Photoline's footsteps.
There, exactly the same conflict took place two or three (I don't remember exactly) years ago.
The gist of the outsiders' complaints against the advanced ones is the same: you give them two stars without explaining why.
Meanwhile, the outsiders' ratings were many times higher than the advanced ones'. It all ended with the persecution of the advanced ones through Pobedimsky's censorship policies (the equivalent of the local Master).
The advanced ones left. There was nothing left to watch or listen to. Only old farts remained, seeking solace in their senile infirmity through mutual licking. Result: about 10-15 people are hanging out with 2-word comments (Excellent work, Great!, I really like it, etc.)
By the time Pobedimsky came to his senses, it was too late – the site was dead.
About two months ago, even Sergey Chubarov (the most loyal, the most tolerant, and the most forgiving of them all) announced that he could no longer stay there. The last one whose work was capable of generating interest had left.
Thus ended the resource that once brought together the most interesting photographers and the most powerful theorists.
Outcome #2.
The Admin will finally realize that there are two groups of photographers with FUNDAMENTALLY different interests in photography. Their views on "good/bad" will never coincide. Moreover, those who have left the threshold of the "people's" The "populists" will never be able to explain (even if they really wanted to) to those who are now attacking Sokolovsky why they consider their "popular" photographs worthy of nothing but pity. The "populists" will never be able to understand Sokolovsky. Because they simply aren't ready for it—they lack the necessary knowledge, experience, visual aesthetics, etc. If they possessed all of this, they would never have taken the kind of photos that Sokolovsky gives his "F" marks.
There are many populists. Their number is many times greater, perhaps even dozens of times greater. It's really they who set the tone on the site: both with the mass of their pictures and the mass of their comments. And they could very easily harass Sokolovsky. But it will all end, as it has on all other resources (see Photoline).
Not long ago, the Master was made proposals for the necessary advanced transformations. He doesn't care. Instead, he deliberately did the exact opposite – he brought the populists here from all their internet dumps. And now they rightly and proudly tell Sokolovsky: I have thousands of recommendations on YF, and you – scoundrel, madman, maniac, envious person, etc. – are giving me bad grades!!! Who are you after that?
And Sokolovsky sits and thinks: What place have you and your FC fallen to for me to go there, get covered in shit, and ruin my mood? What good do I get from communicating with you all? Can you give me anything?
Here's an example for you:
This is how it should be done, humanely and properly.
And not like trolls, who usually do it silently for fun.
Regarding the 10, you'll never give it, because people like you don't know how to give it. If people like you like something, they usually pass it by silently, and if they don't, they just as silently give it those ratings that know how to give it a one, two, three, or something like that. So, if you're going to start rating, out of respect for your colleagues on this site, you should still force yourself to write comments on the fails you're not too lazy to rate.
Good luck!
The Admin has finally realized that Kud is incapable of anything serious, so let him entertain the people.
And who's giving him so many recommendations? Not the "populists"?
Or are we just that full of "advanced" people (according to Kud)?
Oh, Kudryavtsev, how sloppily everything is sewn together.
_
More likely out of helplessness, envy, and anger than actual fact...
That's how it is...
I kindly ask you to confirm these words of Glebova.
I could also write to you that you're rating me out of envy and anger, although that's not true. So, if you give me a rating, please provide an explanation, otherwise it's just not very nice.
Good luck with your chatter, Vlad. You know how it is: photographers take pictures, amateur photographers take pictures, and chatterboxes chatter away, trying to prove something. But what's the point? There's no point, since art has no boundaries.
That's not what I was actually writing about—for some reason, everyone here thinks I'm very offended by the ratings Vlad gives me. I REPEAT—I'M NOT OFFENDED. I want to convey a basic idea to all of you -
the idea is this: GIVE AN AFTER GRADE AND EXPLAIN THE REASON IN THE COMMENT UNDER THE PHOTO YOU GRADED IT ON. Anything easier to understand immediately sparked a heated discussion with attacks, personal insults, and insults. The question is, why is all this necessary when you can take a simpler approach: either do as I ask, or simply avoid visiting my pages altogether, bypassing me as an undesirable author.
More likely, out of helplessness, envy, and anger than any real reason...
That's how it is...) Although I also looked at this photo of his earlier and didn't like it, but I didn't give it any ratings and passed it by. Based on this, I understand one simple thing: everyone should like his work without exception, since the author considers himself a brilliant photographer. And if, God forbid, someone like me doesn't like it, he'll immediately write a fib about envy, anger, and impotence.
That's exactly what I'm getting at.
And not about, "Oh, holy cow, I'm going to get revenge and give everyone two." I won't. It's just that now, for the future, I'll be giving photos by those silent authors who are used to silently giving them failing grades, along with comments, the ratings they deserve in my opinion. It's not like before, when I didn't like something and silently passed it on.
Well, it's not just the comments that are trashy here...
If you look at the "Landscapes" section and its contents, the comments there often pale in comparison to what's posted there. ;)
Vlad Sokolovsky, I'm interested in your opinion about the sixth one from the bottom here: https://photocentra.ru/author.php?id_auth=5486&more=1#comm_give=1&id_auth=5486&page=283 ?
I say it's crap... and the bees agree with me - and we like it... Who's right?
I guess you learn from your mistakes if you have the desire to learn.
From memory, this desire came to me somewhere around 2011.
I just don't understand why you're so eager to push such desires in others!?
Although this was the case before—there were (or were) good authors on this site, some came/went/changed.
They had works in different genres, they also argued and bickered among themselves, but they were AUTHORS.
Now there's no influx, rather an outflow.
Because seeing what's going on now, you still have to respect yourself.
Something like that...
And... yes...
Since you have such a good memory for a "babka," could you remind me of one phrase about "fingers and art/photography"?
Seriously... I forgot...
Do you really want to put up with novice greenhorns!?
If it's relevant, then it's your right and even duty to remind her...
and if not...then sclerosis suits the old woman, and not you...
But in this case, I don't really believe in "Grandma's" "fair" silence, or rather, in talkativeness.
Rather, this now resembles the "good cop/bad cop" method and another game/intrigue.
And as for the young authors ("greenhorns," as you called them) - if you look closely, you can hardly accuse me of pressuring them.
After all, I also look at what people do on the site.
It happens that someone gets into trouble. But as the saying goes, "A fool won't understand, but a smart one will thank you."
So there you have it...
Thanks for your sincerity, Vlad and
As far as I understand, this site isn't for exhibitions or awards, and everything that happens here isn't a competitive struggle. Therefore, every author expects ratings and recommendations. If there aren't any, people will leave the site. I believe—to each according to his abilities, and to others according to their needs. I can rate as I wish. That's my right. Essentially, this site, like others, is also a social network, helping people communicate. And, in my opinion, quite successfully. The other day, one of my favorite authors posted a piece that no one rated, but it was featured on another site, and it was the third piece in a month.
For over ten years, I've been posting mostly my fishing photos on various sites, and I'm happy when someone likes them. Vlad—go ahead! Make us happy. Friends, self-esteem is a great thing.
Creative success to everyone!
For example...
Contemplate and think