>>4160806You're absolutely correct.
>>4160809>Whether you would post a good photo or not is actually irrelevant. OP posted some absolute trash and he's still a bigger and better man than you'll ever be for it.No, you're just mad he's right about what he said. "Nophoto" is just a thought-terminating cliche to soothe the cognitive dissonance that comes from losing an argument and being in denial about it.
You're a dishonest fuck, in fact you're so dishonest I'd be happy to bet money that you shoot street and admire spray and pray hacks like Winogrand and Moriyama. That's also why you hate the guy in the OP, it's not so much your dislike of his photography but the fact that he shoots large format - a format where the gear impedes spraying and praying, "the machine-gun approach" as Adams would call it. Large format is the long rifle of photography.
>>4160811Not just interesting, but correct. "Nophoto" is the last refuge of the intelectually dishonest.
>>4160812You know what's worse? If you posted a completely shit photo they'd praise it too if they believed it'd lead to praise of their own crap. It's a disgusting culture they push.
>>4160845What would a photo do for the argument? What photo did the guy asking for a photo post? If he posted one it'd be either a hobo, his cat or a trashcan. Maybe some AF test shots if we're lucky. Art? That is beyond the reach of someone who gets offended by others making criticisms he disagrees with.
