>>1252851Sorry, I should have written that differently.
I was mad because people are usually bashing him when he posts something good. There was a thread where he posted like a million of photographs of mainly junk, if I remember correctly, and everyone was calling them snapshits, although it was clearly seen he put quite some effort in them. On the other hand, those five photographs of vancouver in the fog, he posted the same night he shot them, were loved by everyone. They were technically much weaker than the photos in the first thread. And I definitely don't care if photographs are techinically perfect or not, but still. I just don't like photographs of stuff that looks like it is from some random digital photography magazine.
In my opinion art should highlight subjects that people usually don't pay much attention to. In that first thread he photographed stuff new topographers dealt with decades ago, but it is still stuff that is neglected or too mundane.
I don't really remember what he shot in the second thread. I remember some totems and I believe that native canadians should get more attention, because their value system was so much better than our is now, but the photographs were pretty weak and they didn't make me explore the subject any deeper. It's not like I ever get any deeper, I basically just didn't find them appealing.
He should definitely post whatever he wants to and people can fap to whatever they want to.
That's tl:dr for me. Sorry if it doesn't make any sense.
And I don't prefer film to digital.