People getting paid to post disinformation

[jnantz]

credentials, experience, client lists, &c have nothing to do
with whether or not someone's opinion is valid.

a random person on the street can have just a valid opinion as a self proclaimed expert.
often times advertising agencies look for non-expert opinions, it's called "market research"

i can't imagine why someone's opinion ( of things that may be a matter of taste for example )
is valued more than anyone else's opinion. i have gone to restaurants ( and movies ) that have gotten
"rave reviews" ( by experts of course ) and after i ate the meal, or left the theater, i wondered if
i had been to the same restaurant or movie that was reviewed.

[Kirk Gittings]

For what it's worth, I have no hidden agenda or issue with any moderator on any topic. Mr. Gittings does give me a chuckle with his comments about not being around here very long...like this forum is the center of the photographic universe and nothing existed before it. That's a good one.

Bob, You misunderstood me. Sorry if I wasn't clear. You quoted Once about how professionals "were'' leaving this forum "one after another" and you said he was right on the mark. There was indeed a time when indeed that was happening more frequently (though a few didn't "leave" voluntarily). That was about 4 years before you joined here. I'm not aware of any that have left (voluntarily or not) since you joined here.

[paulr]

Paul I would think that the term "professional photographer not meaning anything to you should come as no surprise. A professional photographer by definition earns their income primarily through photography.

Thanks for the definition. I thought you'd understand from context that I mean I don't assume any sort of exceptional authority from someone just because they earn their living as a photographer.

You say that the best and most knowledgeable practitioners that you have known have been amateurs?

I said,, "the best and most knowledgeable practitioners I've known have mostly been amateurs." You left out the word "mostly." There have been exceptions.

Well I just have to say you must know some shitty "professionals" ..."

As I said, I've known great and hopeless professionals, just as I've known great and hopeless amateurs.

Granted there are some lousy "pros" out there, but to my standards they are merely amateurs ...

We already agreeed that a professional photographer was someone who earns their living with photography. Now you're changing the definition to a tautology that just proves your point. I'm not biting.

There are droves of professional photographers in the very competitive market of New York. I see their portfolios all the time. By my standards, which I fully accept may be different from yours, many of them, even successful ones, aren't very good. If they're successful, it means they're good at something. It always means being good at making the client happy. It often means being able to spot and imitate trends. But it doesn't always mean a high degree of technical skill, and it only occasionally means having any kind of exceptional visual imagination. The latter being the point that I care about more than any other.

I have to wonder whether your consistently dim view of "professional" photographers ...

I have not expressed a consistently dim view of professionals. You're just putting words in my mouth. I've said that I see the full range of good to bad in professionals. I've also said that the best photographers I've ever known, with a few exceptions, have been amateurs. This isn't a dig against professionals; it's just my reason for not being automatically impressed by someone's ideas just because they happen to make a living doing commercial work.

[Jay DeFehr]

Brian K,

True experts don't lobby continuously for respect as an entitlement, but earn it by the quality of their contributions. It should be easy for experts to defend their positions (after all, they're experts) with something more than a list of credentials, and it is never inherently disrespectful to disagree with an expert (especially a self-proclaimed one), regardless of one's experience. Your logic is often comically faulty, and your arguments essentially baseless ( a list of credentials is not an argument for anything except credentials), and no experience exempts you from these basic requirements. I'm not sure where you should go to get the unquestioning respect to which you feel you're entitled, but you won't get it from me.

[paulr]

credentials, experience, client lists, &c have nothing to do
with whether or not someone's opinion is valid.

The Greek philosophers called the kind of argument you're describing "appeal to authority." It's one of the oldest recognized logical fallacies. It's the fllipside of "ad hominem," which is to try to invalidate someone's argument by attacking their character. Neither is a strong argument.

To be precise, these are both considered "informal" fallacies, in the sense that they do not represent formal, mathematical logic where an argument is either valid or not. Informal fallacies involve inductive reasoning where arguments can be any degree of strong or weak. Appeals to authority can have some weight ... just not very much.

For example, to argue an idea about physics because Einstein says it's true isn't entirely unfounded. Einstein WAS an authority on the topic. His opinion has more weight than my 10 year old nephew's opinion. But it doesn't mean that he's right—an argument based on actual evidence and deductive reasoning is fundamentally stronger.

Witness that Einstein could be wrong. He argued with Heisenberg, appealing to no less an authority than God. We saw how valid that argument was in the end.

[Heroique]

Thank you Jnanian, Paul and Jay.

[Brian K]

credentials, experience, client lists, &c have nothing to do
with whether or not someone's opinion is valid.

a random person on the street can have just a valid opinion as a self proclaimed expert.
often times advertising agencies look for non-expert opinions, it's called "market research"

"a random person on the street can have just a valid opinion as a self proclaimed expert."

John, you really believe that? Talk about the lowering of the bar. So basically everyone's opinion is valid even if they have no experience in the subject to which they have an opinion? So I assume that you have never hired a doctor, lawyer, accountant, general contractor, plumber, electrician, auto mechanic, or gone to a school (those teachers all have credentials you know) etc, etc, etc. And I'm sure that you'd be fine with someone off the street piloting that airliner you're flying on is ok too.

And a "self proclaimed expert" is not an expert. Being considered an expert usually requires that groups of other people, with extensive experience in the field in question, has determined that you are an expert, or that you have passed exams that measure competence in that field, or that you have achieved consistent recognition by those with extensive experience in the filed in question, for your abilities in that field. The problem with photo forums is that there are too many "self proclaimed experts".

And the analogy of ad agencies asking people on the street for non-expert opinions, which you rightly point out is called market research, well, your analogy is wrong. The agencies asking possible these possible buyers of their products for their opinions regarding their product is similar to a waiter asking a guest at a restaurant what they would like to eat. And in THAT case, everyone's opinion is valid. But further, the ad agencies themselves are marketing experts hired by a client looking to sell more of their products. And those that the ad agencies hire to formulate those questions and ask them at focus groups? More marketing experts and psychologists. Not exactly non-expert, typical "people on the street". But maybe I'm wrong about that, I only worked with ad agencies almost daily for 25 years......

[Sal Santamaura]

...There are very few topics discussed here or questions asked that haven't been asked and answered a dozen times on this and other forums in the past 10 years. Threads that are 80 pages long with over 800 comments may have some good information, but few will be patient enough to look for it...Many newbies can't be bothered to search for answers to their questions..

Explaining that the forums at LUSENET, which was the original home of this one, were intended to build up a useful, searchable archive and not be a chat room has been futile. I used to frequently point that out to "newbies" who were either too lazy to or incapable of performing an effective search. Almost without exception, I was then chastised for stifling said newbies' inquisitiveness. While 800 posts is an exaggeration, there are many long threads here. Proper search techniques using Google will take one directly to relevant posts within them. For a while, I took to replying with searching "how to" information and links to those posts. I've now thrown up my hands and just remain silent.

I have read exchanges by several people disparaging an individual (whom they had never met)...What is gained by making those mean comments? They call that bullying in schools these days...

It's bullying here too. The problem is that LF photography is engaged in by and this forum's membership is composed of humans. There's a certain percentage of the population who bully. This is an area where I wouldn't mind moderation that's more heavy-handed. However, my sense is that a desire for maximum openness drives Tuan and the others to impose the least possible restraint on posters' freedom of expression. Not my house, not my decision.

...wading through the detritus has become tedious, sometimes offensive, and lately, not very rewarding. At least one person on this forum has said not to let the door hit me in the butt on the way out. I don't believe I have ever met him, yet he certainly has some pretty nasty things to say about me, (Sal). Tell me, please, (privately) just what did I do to deserve such vitriol?...

In all of life, one must wade through piles of detritus to find something worthwhile. This forum is no different.

If you had asked your question privately, I'd have answered it privately. Since you chose to put it in the thread, my answer will be here too. In your post #29

Right on the mark. Years ago APUG became useless and irrelevant. This forum is approaching the same per "Once's" comments and I have only been here one year - may not stick around much longer. Thetre is good and relevant inforamtion here, but it is the exception.

you aligned yourself with "Once," a most abrasive and obnoxious individual, by describing this forum as approaching 'useless and irrelevant' status. You characterized most of its information as bad and irrelevant. You then threatened to leave here. Having seen that type of "grand exit" post before, I concluded that both you and other members would be best off if you followed through with the threat. I invited you (and "Once") to do so. Nothing I wrote was nasty or vitriolic. Your post conveyed much of the attitude that Kirk described. Irrespective of whatever other things you've done to share experience in different venues, what you posted above is what I reacted to.

...Mr. Gittings does give me a chuckle with his comments about not being around here very long...like this forum is the center of the photographic universe and nothing existed before it...

You haven't been here very long. If you are aware of any other forum(s) dedicated to LF photography that attract more knowledgeable members, have been in operation for more than a dozen years and/or are run without a hidden agenda (i.e. non-commercial), please identify them. Otherwise, I contend this is the center of the LF photographic forum universe.

[Leigh]

And regarding "questioning the basis for a statement being an attempt to learn" is absolutely true, but telling someone who has experienced that phenomena firsthand countless times that they're wrong and don't know what they're talking about is NOT an attempt to learn.

Hi Brian,

I agree completely.

The point I was trying to make is that photography is a very complex (a)vocation, relying on information from many different disciplines.
The fact that a particular photographer is "successful", however you choose to define that term, does not imply expertise in any particular discipline other than the ability to create a product that others find desirable.

I do not mean to belittle the value of expertise. That's the basis of all education.

Neither do I accept a person's expertise on a specific subject based solely on commercial success.

- Leigh

[bobherbst]

Dear Lord Almighty. You need help.

Explaining that the forums at LUSENET, which was the original home of this one, were intended to build up a useful, searchable archive and not be a chat room has been futile. I used to frequently point that out to "newbies" who were either too lazy to or incapable of performing an effective search. Almost without exception, I was then chastised for stifling said newbies' inquisitiveness. While 800 posts is an exaggeration, there are many long threads here. Proper search techniques using Google will take one directly to relevant posts within them. For a while, I took to replying with searching "how to" information and links to those posts. I've now thrown up my hands and just remain silent.

It's bullying here too. The problem is that LF photography is engaged in by and this forum's membership is composed of humans. There's a certain percentage of the population who bully. This is an area where I wouldn't mind moderation that's more heavy-handed. However, my sense is that a desire for maximum openness drives Tuan and the others to impose the least possible restraint on posters' freedom of expression. Not my house, not my decision.


In all of life, one must wade through piles of detritus to find something worthwhile. This forum is no different.

If you had asked your question privately, I'd have answered it privately. Since you chose to put it in the thread, my answer will be here too. In your post #29


you aligned yourself with "Once," a most abrasive and obnoxious individual, by describing this forum as approaching 'useless and irrelevant' status. You characterized most of its information as bad and irrelevant. You then threatened to leave here. Having seen that type of "grand exit" post before, I concluded that both you and other members would be best off if you followed through with the threat. I invited you (and "Once") to do so. Nothing I wrote was nasty or vitriolic. Your post conveyed much of the attitude that Kirk described. Irrespective of whatever other things you've done to share experience in different venues, what you posted above is what I reacted to.

You haven't been here very long. If you are aware of any other forum(s) dedicated to LF photography that attract more knowledgeable members, have been in operation for more than a dozen years and/or are run without a hidden agenda (i.e. non-commercial), please identify them. Otherwise, I contend this is the center of the LF photographic forum universe.