APUG Galleries

[Ed Sukach]

First... I've gone over all the existing Forum "Slots" here, trying to decide where to post this... I've finally had to stop somewhere - so this it it.

I've been "evaluating" the work in the APUG Galleries - not really on purpose, but that is sort of a conditioned reflex.

If I were to receive the "usual" invitation to visit the Opening of a New Photography Show in a "Fancy" New York City Gallery, and discovered the work that is in the APUG Galleries on the walls, I would consider ALL of it to be appropriate, and certainly *nothing* would seem to be "inferior" or out of place. Certainly, the works of each of us there are distinctive (thank God for that!), and from experience, the "chemical" prints would be of markedly higher technical quality.
The "Visions" exhibited here are second to none. Yeh, yeh, "In My Humble Opinion" ... but I'll be hardheaded about defending this opinion.

What a *wonderful* book this all would make!!!

Now ... A real problem... We are constantly joined by photographers who submit exceptional work ... the kind of photographs that "reach my innards"... and I have pretty much run out of fuel (maybe I should try butane?) as far as commenting about them. I find myself really stretching for something "new" and "fresh" to say about them.

Cases in point ... the new participant, "Dina Marie" - to me, nearly on the same "level" as Cheryl Jacobs -- that is to say, about a twelve, on a scale of 1 - 10... - no, strike that -- Let "`WAY up there" suffice. Certainly their work is not the same ... but BOTH produce work that is so beautiful that it almost *hurts* to look at it.

We have "Melinda" -- right "up" there ... and - Where would I start? --- SyviaHB, SamS, Keith, pierre, crazyvision. mike pry .... so many more ...

What superlatives can I use now without sounding like a repetitive doofus?
- And yet they all deserve those superlatives.

Before anyone suggests it - NO, I will NOT support any sort of "numerical" ranking. Make that !!! In my opinion, that could only lead to "This one is better than that one"... and that is just idiotic.
What "number" could be assigned to any single example of Renoir's paintings, and how could anyone compare that ONE work with ANY of Picasso's works?. Simply change and substitute photographers at random, and the idea remains the same.

All I can do is hang on ... visit the Galleries, as I do, every time I log on -- and marvel (at times - silently) at the extraordinary levels and amount of talent we have on board here!!

 

[bmac]

Ed, I give your post a 7/7, you said it all. Brian

 

[Thomassauerwein]

Ed, I'm in full wonder myself also! Rating certainly would serve for nothing. personally I receive inspiration and confort seeing the other people all over the world working and exploring their world with a camera and chemically exibiting their efforts for all of us to enjoy and draw from. the assistance in the forums has made my efforts easier. I know with this group I am not alone in my personal quest and am very excited to hear their progress as well as share my own.

 

[Cheryl Jacobs]

Well said, Ed. And.....wow. Thank you.

 

[noblebeast]

(sarcasm alert...sarcasm alert...)

But Ed,

If we don't use a number rating system how will I ever know which photographs are good?

And with no cumulative ratings, how will we be able to determine which photographer is the "BEST" ?

(This has been a test of The Early Sarcasm Alert System. If this had been an actually posting, you would have been directed by the authorities where to go and what to think. This concludes our test.)

The Beast

 

[Eric Rose]

I look at the galleries as icing on the cake for our members. Some of us, not me, have good scanners and know how to use them. This results in not bad uploads. But for the most part I think many of us don't bother to upload our better images because we just can't bear to see them multilated by the digital world of crappy scanners and reduced resolution.

I post the odd "working image" to show what path I may be following at any given time, but it in no way represents what I consider my best work. It's more a photo travel log. I work very hard on my wet prints to tease out all the nuances etc.. I'm not going to post a fine art image of mine for all to see that as far as I'm concerned sucks due to the above mentioned limitations. Hence the images I do post.

I love the unconditional acceptance attitude of this site and I think it would be lost if we started to "rate" each others work. I also think we would loose the free exchange of thought and knowledge we currently share as well.

I understand where you are coming from though. Sometimes it's just sufficient to say "nice work" or such. Personally I don't need to find lots of "wow's" etc. posted under my pics to make me feel better or to feel I have "made it". Conversely sometimes I wouldn't mind someone telling me my photo lacks something or could I consider this or that. Or just asking what the heck I'm trying to say. That I would find useful.

We have had that discussion between the two of us on several pictures and I have really enjoyed the exchange.

That's my Canuckdian 2 cents worth.

Eric

 

[garryl]

We have a Gallery? :roll:

(This has been a test of The Early Sarcasm Alert System. [/quote]