Censorship and judgement on APUG and in the world...

[Mark Crabtree]

Since the membership can't actually remove your images, I would call that "criticism" rather than "censorship."

Nobody censored you. Your entire problem seems to be that people didn't like your picture and the way it was presented, or see in it what you did. That not only seems to be criticism, but could be considered useful criticism.

I saw a thread elsewhere that showed lots of people think you should only leave positive comments on pictures. That is one of the things I most dislike about Flickr, the barrage of back pats regardless of merit. That sort of mutual admiration society seems pretty useless to me. Hopefully there is some middle ground of civil discourse; more likely to happen here than on most of the net. I think if somebody really steps out of line here, others will come to your defense.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I have to agree totally with David. And, I have to restate the fact that I have seen just about everything in the poll posted here by someone.

Much ado about nothing but a mediocre to bad photo.

PE

 

[MattKing]

I'm just glad sly posted, so if necessary I can stop referring to "she".

 

[BrianShaw]

I'm just glad sly posted, so if necessary I can stop referring to "she".

... and now you can refer to "her".

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I wrote a post yesterday but deleted it before I posted but the jist was the same as P.E.

After reading this thread it should occur to anyone that the internet allows free access to anyone, regardless of their problems.

 

[tkamiya]

Much ado about nothing but a mediocre to bad photo.

PE

That's really a harsh comment for someone's work, no matter how much you don't like the image....

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

It's really harsh because the second part somehow got left out,

"and here's why I think so..."

Ken

 

[juan]

I thought this was settled years ago when a member posted a shot of a rather "happy" male appendage.
juan

 

[Photo Engineer]

That's really a harsh comment for someone's work, no matter how much you don't like the image....

I also said IMHO, qualifying it to my own opinion! I am entitled to one, am I not? There are some excellent photos here that I have really given kudos to as well, but Stone asked for opinions in a thread.

PE

 

[hoopla]

Sly... Stone. ah, levity.

Anyway, I did like the photo in question. I liked the double exposure and I liked the background and peripherals. I found the image somewhat disturbing, or at least unnerving. I never read any accompanying caption and am glad. Just show me the photo. I do agree that the model wasn't sufficiently skinny as to represent anorexia, but I thought the treatment conveyed that anyway.

 

[StoneNYC]

Since the membership can't actually remove your images, I would call that "criticism" rather than "censorship."

Censorship by peer pressure, as in censoring oneself for fear of other peers disapproval.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[StoneNYC]

It's really harsh because the second part somehow got left out,

"and here's why I think so..."

Ken

It's a little harsh, but PE has also seen many photos, and from all of his comments I've seen thus far, I can point to lots of things he might mean, many having to do with the exposure and development stuff that is more technical, whether this is true or not I'm going to pretend it is, somehow technical details like "the blacks don't fall between this ratio" don't seem to bother me at all, so I'm imagining that's more his issue with the photo. I'm probably wrong but that's what I'm pretending haha


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[StoneNYC]

Sly... Stone. ah, levity.

Anyway, I did like the photo in question. I liked the double exposure and I liked the background and peripherals. I found the image somewhat disturbing, or at least unnerving. I never read any accompanying caption and am glad. Just show me the photo. I do agree that the model wasn't sufficiently skinny as to represent anorexia, but I thought the treatment conveyed that anyway.

Thanks


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[StoneNYC]

I thought this was settled years ago when a member posted a shot of a rather "happy" male appendage.
juan

I wasn't around then, but it's been referenced a few times now, but not before this post.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[StoneNYC]

Nobody censored you. Your entire problem seems to be that people didn't like your picture and the way it was presented, or see in it what you did. That not only seems to be criticism, but could be considered useful criticism.

I saw a thread elsewhere that showed lots of people think you should only leave positive comments on pictures. That is one of the things I most dislike about Flickr, the barrage of back pats regardless of merit. That sort of mutual admiration society seems pretty useless to me. Hopefully there is some middle ground of civil discourse; more likely to happen here than on most of the net. I think if somebody really steps out of line here, others will come to your defense.

I don't care if people don't like it, if they have constructive criticism that's even better.

The fact that the image is good or bad is irrelevant it's just one image and I have no issue with people not liking it.

This post happened to be how I personally was referred to in combination between the image an the other thread about the model who didn't know what film was. It was about my character and how my character was referred to. I felt personal hurt by the way I was referred to or the feelings about what kind of man I was, that's what this is about.

That said sly and I have talked, she pointed out my mistakes in speech and the perspective I gave and that my speech/language could have been clearer as to not give leeway to misunderstanding and not not allow bad comments to be said about the model in the post.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JBrunner]

The Internet is an interesting place. One must realize that it is in practice the foulest version of democracy, the version where ignorance is equal to knowledge, facts are arrived at by consensus, and anonymity or distance guarantees righteousness.

I don't worry much about it. This is a good Internet community, one of the best you will find, but it is still the Internet. You can get a lot out of it, but when you stand up it goes away. It is not real for most intents and purposes.

 

[semi-ambivalent]

One must realize that it is in practice the foulest version of democracy, the version where ignorance is equal to knowledge, facts are arrived at by consensus, and anonymity or distance guarantees righteousness.

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars
But in ourselves...

- Shakespeare

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I thought this was settled years ago when a member posted a shot of a rather "happy" male appendage.
juan

Juan- the male appendage in question you refer to was not "happy" - just apparently intimidating to some folks. But even before that happened, it was always APUG policy that nudes are allowed, barring depiction of explicit sexual activity. I don't know that a gynecological photo would even per-se fall afoul of the rules, although it would certainly be in questionable taste. The only time I can recall in my 8 years on this forum there was even a brief thought given (by management) to asking someone to take down a photo was when someone posted a still-life containing Nazi paraphernalia.

 

[juan]

Happy or intimidating, I found the whole episode funny. The argument that female nudes are allowed, why not male, made perfect sense to me.
And as for Nazi (or other totalitarian) banishment, I think David's earlier post is the only one that makes sense. Depicting that stuff is actually illegal in some countries, so perhaps it should not be on APUG. Some of Tina Modotti's last work was obviously promoting Communism and Stalin, but I don't think that would be, or should be, banned.

 

[fotch]

Come on people, can't we just all get along?

 

[tkamiya]

I am thinking this whole incident has very little to do with the image itself (which I thought was pretty good to excellent) but it has everything to do with what people thought the photographer meant by that image. It didn't help the title didn't accurately describe the photographers intent and things that were said in an unrelated thread weren't received well.

I fully agree with Stone, some of the things said on this thread and the gallery were needlessly hurtful. I have no problems with people expressing how they don't like the image. There are a lot of ways to say that....

By the way.... I am guessing the model is fully aware of her condition and still decided to participate in the shoot. I applaud her for that. I hope she gets well and moves on with her chosen occupation.

 

[StoneNYC]

Come on people, can't we just all get along?

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[StoneNYC]

I am thinking this whole incident has very little to do with the image itself (which I thought was pretty good to excellent) but it has everything to do with what people thought the photographer meant by that image. It didn't help the title didn't accurately describe the photographers intent and things that were said in an unrelated thread weren't received well.

I fully agree with Stone, some of the things said on this thread and the gallery were needlessly hurtful. I have no problems with people expressing how they don't like the image. There are a lot of ways to say that....

By the way.... I am guessing the model is fully aware of her condition and still decided to participate in the shoot. I applaud her for that. I hope she gets well and moves on with her chosen occupation.

Thanks for the compliment and to the first paragraph +1 because that's exactly accurate, at least someone understood.

However it's now sort of settled and I think I've learned something, if nothing else, explain yourself better if you make highly abstract titles...


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[StoneNYC]

The Internet is an interesting place. One must realize that it is in practice the foulest version of democracy, the version where ignorance is equal to knowledge, facts are arrived at by consensus, and anonymity or distance guarantees righteousness.

I don't worry much about it. This is a good Internet community, one of the best you will find, but it is still the Internet. You can get a lot out of it, but when you stand up it goes away. It is not real for most intents and purposes.

+1


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

The Internet is an interesting place. One must realize that it is in practice the foulest version of democracy, the version where ignorance is equal to knowledge, facts are arrived at by consensus, and anonymity or distance guarantees righteousness.

I don't worry much about it. This is a good Internet community, one of the best you will find, but it is still the Internet. You can get a lot out of it, but when you stand up it goes away. It is not real for most intents and purposes.

Best post in years...

Ken