Photography in General

I think I may have mentioned this before, however, photography IS the slowest moving medium in the art world as far as galleries go. If you think about the amount of work it takes whether film or digital: going out in the world to take the fabulous photo (being at the right place at the right time), then come back develop and/or print the photo, cut the mats, frame the matted photo, and then take it to the gallery for hanging - that's a lot of (loving) time and effort expended. Then of course, the galleries take their percentage usually 40 - 60%, and if you have a sale then you get your reward, little as it is. That is why I am in it for the ART OF PHOTOGRAPHY. I receive more than my fair share of cudos from the people who admire my work and that in itself encourages me to continue on. One of these days I may add the capability to purchase my photos off my website, but I'm good for now.

And to tell you the truth, I'm not much of a "joiner" of clubs (i.e., photography clubs). Once in a while I might think about it, but I've heard from others who have been to clubs that it's everyone's own perception of what is "beautiful or awesome". Critiquing can be a good thing and I have taken constructive criticism from other photographers and I appreciate their input. But to sit around and evaluate another's work, nit picking to the 'inth degree is not something I would hang around for. What one photographer sees is not necessarily what another photographer appreciates which lends to bad criticism (e.g. '...you should have made the tree the focal point', or '...why not try to capture the scene full on as opposed to just that portion of it?'). Overexposure and underexposure should definitely be something a photographer can identify right off the bat - but I've seen both cases hanging in galleries! So go figure.