you know....
Jan. 3rd, 2008 10:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
blustockingMaybe I am taking it personally, but this kind of pisses me off.
JPG Mag.com took down one of my photos because there was a hint of dick in it. Yes, a hint. It wasn't pornography, it wasn't "lewwwd", it wasn't distasteful. So, I get their standard form letter and blah blah "no genitalia". Yes, but shitty self-portraits of some chick's boobs are okay. Whatever.
Then I see someone's entry for this "Noir" theme and it's a photo of someone else's graffiti work. Okay, that crap pisses me off. If you're going to be a photographer, don't go around taking pictures of other people's art and passing it off as a photo. Unless you're bringing something new to the table, get back into kitchen (and make me a pot pie, of course). So, I was going to comment on this person's photo, somewhat nicely, but bluntly, and say "Hey, nice shot. But that's not yours" (since a few others raved about what a great photo it was). But then I see there are "comment guidelines". Apparently we're all supposed to be nice and coddling and say, "Aww gee, that's swell. Please try again with more shitty photographs" rather than giving someone some honest fucking feedback that they may be sorely lacking (myself included). How is this going to make better artists out of anyone and is JPG even a place for artists? Maybe it's been a namby-pamby design magazine all along.
ALSO, what is up with people saying "great capture" instead of "great photo" or "great shot"? WHY MUST YOU ACT LIKE DICKS? DICKS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN ART.
fdkj foaurieoujio:!!111
goddammit.
/rant.
JPG Mag.com took down one of my photos because there was a hint of dick in it. Yes, a hint. It wasn't pornography, it wasn't "lewwwd", it wasn't distasteful. So, I get their standard form letter and blah blah "no genitalia". Yes, but shitty self-portraits of some chick's boobs are okay. Whatever.
Then I see someone's entry for this "Noir" theme and it's a photo of someone else's graffiti work. Okay, that crap pisses me off. If you're going to be a photographer, don't go around taking pictures of other people's art and passing it off as a photo. Unless you're bringing something new to the table, get back into kitchen (and make me a pot pie, of course). So, I was going to comment on this person's photo, somewhat nicely, but bluntly, and say "Hey, nice shot. But that's not yours" (since a few others raved about what a great photo it was). But then I see there are "comment guidelines". Apparently we're all supposed to be nice and coddling and say, "Aww gee, that's swell. Please try again with more shitty photographs" rather than giving someone some honest fucking feedback that they may be sorely lacking (myself included). How is this going to make better artists out of anyone and is JPG even a place for artists? Maybe it's been a namby-pamby design magazine all along.
ALSO, what is up with people saying "great capture" instead of "great photo" or "great shot"? WHY MUST YOU ACT LIKE DICKS? DICKS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN ART.
fdkj foaurieoujio:!!111
goddammit.
/rant.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-01-05 02:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-06 08:04 pm (UTC)I always worry about ppl-currently, 90% of America give or take-who see sex where there isn't any. Like in the movie Dirty Pictures, when the Senator keeps asking the art critic(?) if he sees "teh sex" in a fairly innocuous shot of a naked child, and the fellow on the stand says "No, you're the only one who sees that". Or something. I do the scene no justice in this description.
The tragedy is when you've got sex in the head instead of down where it belongs. -D.H. Lawrence
thank you.
Date: 2008-01-07 09:49 pm (UTC)Nice quote, by the way. I may have to incorporate that into my favorites.
Re: thank you.
Date: 2008-01-10 07:14 pm (UTC)Re: thank you.
Date: 2008-01-12 10:19 pm (UTC)