[bertwert]

That would be a shame because this (was) legitimately an interesting discussion.

It was... maybe another moderator can delete the last page or so then?

[BrianR]

Use a harmonica bracket to hold the sandwich. I thought I had an original idea but Google proved me wrong:

I will be on the lookout for a harmonica/sandwich bracket. Combined with a beer hat and a catheter, I'll no longer have an excuse not to comment when I dish out a 'like'.

That would be a shame because this (was) legitimately an interesting discussion.

I vote we get back to it.

I'm in a local facebook photography group with ~1000 members. It's fairly typical, mostly hobbyists posting photos from around the area. There's no defined theme, but it's generally landscapes, cats, flowers, and virtually no photos involving people. I don't participate much, but it's pretty interesting watching stuff go by and see what attracts attention and what gets ignored.

A standard photo of a flower with an out of focus background might get 50-60 likes. One guy posted a few of what I'm sure are some of the best environmental portraits taken anywhere in the area. This was quality stuff by someone aspiring to be a pro and build a portfolio- excellent lighting, style, make up, meaningful settings, etc. He ended up with 3 or 4 likes, and a lone comment from me expressing lament that it wasn't receiving any love. So disappointing.

So my question is why? Are people not willing to comment or 'like' something that's beyond their own abilities? Or if something is so far outside of their skill set that they can't appreciate it?

[csa]

So my question is why? Are people not willing to comment or 'like' something that's beyond their own abilities? Or if something is so far outside of their skill set that they can't appreciate it?

I'm guilty of posting Likes without a comment, as something I do "Like", I usually have posted in the thread what I like about a particular photo, etc. Your second question is quite interesting, and may definitely be the case in some instances!

[WPRESTO]

It's hard to penetrate the psychology of posting a "like." Early on when I joined PF, I gave them very rarely, but more recently I've been giving far more. There's no contest involved. No one is going to win a $10,000 gift certificate to B&H or Adorama for having the most "likes." As I said above, it's a pat on the back, I saw your post and enjoyed it.
However, sometimes there's a really stunning image and I hesitate and think: this will or already has received dozens of "likes." Why bother giving it yet another? That's a bit foolish, as if I treasure my "likes" and don't want them lost in a crowd. BTW: I recently noted some remarkably fine images posted by a Pentaxian I had not encountered before. He had more "likes" than posts. Yes. REMARKABLY fine images. I hesitated a moment, and gave him another.
AND I've developed the habit of always leaving some sort of comment with a "like," however banal.

[THoog]

So my question is why? Are people not willing to comment or 'like' something that's beyond their own abilities? Or if something is so far outside of their skill set that they can't appreciate it?

It may just not be something they are interested in, which is why there aren't a lot of people shooting it in that group. Going back to WPRESTO's example of the judge who hated cats, was a good cat photo beyond the judge's abilities? No, they just weren't interested in a cat photo. However, most (or a very large portion of) people DO like pictures of cats, babies, and flowers, to the point where they are a cliche.

I usually use the 'like' button in lieu of filling up a thread with "LOL" or "+1" posts. I figure most people don't care if I LOL'ed or agreed with what was said.

[BrianR]

I'm guilty of posting Likes without a comment, as something I do "Like", I usually have posted in the thread what I like about a particular photo, etc.

You saw the sandwich holder? There's no more excuses for this behavior unless you're on mobile

[micromacro]

One guy posted a few of what I'm sure are some of the best environmental portraits taken anywhere in the area. This was quality stuff by someone aspiring to be a pro and build a portfolio- excellent lighting, style, make up, meaningful settings, etc. He ended up with 3 or 4 likes, and a lone comment from me expressing lament that it wasn't receiving any love. So disappointing.

So my question is why? Are people not willing to comment or 'like' something that's beyond their own abilities? Or if something is so far outside of their skill set that they can't appreciate it?

It was one great photographer, who was not getting so many likes on fb until he posted funny series posing himself as a female model. Yes, it was hilarious and he got tons of likes and shares. He's been asking the same question- why?! Why his fine art is not likable, but easy joke set suddenly made him famous.

I thought about it as well. I guess people are spoiled with massive amount of outstanding- great-good images everywhere (magazines, advertising, etc.), they just don't value it as something challenging. Only those who knows how hard it is to achieve great result can appreciate the work of photographers. Especially if it's landscape or astronomy, or anything, but cats

[bertwert]

I usually use the 'like' button in lieu of filling up a thread with "LOL" or "+1" posts. I figure most people don't care if I LOL'ed or agreed with what was said.

Yep, same here.
But sometimes Ill like and post a

You saw the sandwich holder? There's no more excuses for this behavior unless you're on mobile

How would I eat my cereal then?

[BrianR]

I thought about it as well. I guess people are spoiled with massive amount of outstanding- great-good images everywhere (magazines, advertising, etc.), they just don't value it as something challenging. Only those who knows how hard it is to achieve great result can appreciate the work of photographers. Especially if it's landscape or astronomy, or anything, but cats

This is most definitely true. Once you start getting an idea of the 'behind the scenes' work that can go into great photos you can better appreciate the effort and skill that went into it even if you've seen it a million times already.

It may just not be something they are interested in, which is why there aren't a lot of people shooting it in that group. Going back to WPRESTO's example of the judge who hated cats, was a good cat photo beyond the judge's abilities? No, they just weren't interested in a cat photo. However, most (or a very large portion of) people DO like pictures of cats, babies, and flowers, to the point where they are a cliche.

Good point. I guess part of my thinking is that most photographers I've spoken to view "people photography' as something of a dark art that they are afraid to practice but secretly wish they could. So there might be a tendency to not just avoid practicing it, but also to avoid even looking at it since it's a constant reminder of this fear. Simply not caring for a genre is certainly fair game.

How would I eat my cereal then?

Your basic horse-style feedbag works. Kinda gross when used with fast food, as this Onion video shows, but not so bad for cereal if you go without milk. Or put the milk in the beer hat.

[bertwert]

Your basic horse-style feedbag works. Kinda gross when used with fast food, as this Onion video shows, but not so bad for cereal if you go without milk. Or put the milk in the beer hat.

I liked your post for this...

[Murfy]

A standard photo of a flower with an out of focus background might get 50-60 likes. One guy posted a few of what I'm sure are some of the best environmental portraits taken anywhere in the area. This was quality stuff by someone aspiring to be a pro and build a portfolio- excellent lighting, style, make up, meaningful settings, etc. He ended up with 3 or 4 likes, and a lone comment from me expressing lament that it wasn't receiving any love. So disappointing.

So my question is why? Are people not willing to comment or 'like' something that's beyond their own abilities? Or if something is so far outside of their skill set that they can't appreciate it?

I see this all the time and I have no answer. I belonged to a similar group and I left for somewhat of the same reason. the people who I thought were really good, whether it be unusual subject or experiment or I could see the work they put into it, would get 2-3 likes and the guy who took street shots portraits (not sure what to call them they were people who attended fairs, parks, etc) would get lots of comments and likes. His pictures were neat at first, but he would flood with 30 or so pictures every few days. my guess is that people 'thought' he was someone to know, so they gave him more accolades? I felt bad for the people who had good photos and little votes, so I would always vote and comment. And its why I moved away from that into juried shows. I know others don't like that, but it is between the juror and me and I don't feel I am taking part in a popularity contest.

I also think its so discouraging to people who are starting out. I left the group because I just thought it was so dismissive.
I wanted to add that many photos that I posted that didnt get many likes on facebook or instagram have been accepted or placed into shows, so maybe it is appealing to masses of what people typically see on facebook?

[Nass]

I see this all the time and I have no answer. I belonged to a similar group and I left for somewhat of the same reason. the people who I thought were really good, whether it be unusual subject or experiment or I could see the work they put into it, would get 2-3 likes and the guy who took street shots portraits (not sure what to call them they were people who attended fairs, parks, etc) would get lots of comments and likes. His pictures were neat at first, but he would flood with 30 or so pictures every few days. my guess is that people 'thought' he was someone to know, so they gave him more accolades? I felt bad for the people who had good photos and little votes, so I would always vote and comment. And its why I moved away from that into juried shows. I know others don't like that, but it is between the juror and me and I don't feel I am taking part in a popularity contest.

I also think its so discouraging to people who are starting out. I left the group because I just thought it was so dismissive.

There is another factor though which explains like disparity - the size of the "social circle". So in other words, on many social media if you post something, the something gets pushed out and shown to your "social circle". So if you have 1000 friends it's more likely that 50 will like it than if you have 50 friends. 5% is easier than 100%. Same with Flickr and FB I think. Ie in Flickr if you post a pic and have 5000 following you then it's perfectly normal to get 50 faves.... because with any large following there's bound to be a few people that like any obscure pic x/y/z. Doesn't mean it's better at all.

[timb64]

What would people think of comments with "likes" being visible?

[bertwert]

What would people think of comments with "likes" being visible?

What do you mean?

[timb64]

What do you mean?

When you post a "like" on this forum you can also leave a comment,but as far as I can tell these comments are only visible to the parties involved not everyone else.