/p/ burns down people's photographs as part of a concerted and ongoing effort to hammer into the human psyche what is not professional and what is not appealing to the eye.

It is an educational act which encourages caution in preparation, retention of technical skill, and experimentation in exercise.

There is no need for a separate flaming thread as /p/ has historically (if not so much today) managed to tear apart photographs successfully without such an aid.

The woman in your photograph (which you didn't take yourself) is a vengeful and tyrannical charlatan. She has little or no interest in the quality of life of working people. She has a self-congratulatory confidence which is deeply abhorrent and smile which never leaves a crease by her eye. She is false and bitter.

>>2828563
/p/ does it without reason.

"This shit sucks" is not criticism or education. Fuck off.

>>2828595
Actually "Shit sucks" is a way of catching the photographer's attention. If they bother to reply "why?" the poster is forced to explain themselves. If they can't their opinion is invalid - but if they do then it may expose actual weaknesses in the image and enlighten the photographer.

https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/4h5okq/some_of_you_gave_me_advice_on_where_to_place_a/

>>2828600
It is when it's used sparingly, otherwise it loses all weight.

It's kinda like seeing the word "nigger" on 4chan. It means literally nothing because it's used so often.

>>2828600
>If they bother to reply "why?" the poster is forced to explain themselves.

That's funny. Every time I've asked for somebody to elaborate their critique on here I either got no response, or got told to go read a book.

>flaming
>2016

is this /b epic raids XDXD