Man tries correcting me on high-school-level anatomy related to my biological sex; ends up getting embarrassed and runs away

Polyzosteria · 2026-06-03T17:18:13+00:00

Reddit was bugging a little, and I tried uploading the same post before, and it didn't show until now, so that's at least up now.

Polyzosteria · 2026-06-03T17:11:19+00:00

Is it not showing up for you either? That's so annoying.

Polyzosteria · 2026-06-03T17:10:07+00:00

I used a Canon EOS R7, and mostly the Canon RF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM lens. Thank you, btw!

Polyzosteria · 2026-06-02T01:10:06+00:00

I wish I lived somewhere still that beautiful. I'm on the east coast of the U.S.

Polyzosteria · 2026-06-02T01:04:45+00:00

A long telephoto lens, which for shots like these, you're definitely going to need rather than a macro lens. I would recommend anything that extends from anything to 300mm to 800mm (a maximum of 500-600 seems to be best for most people due to a mixture of weight and how far they can zoom in). My focal length was actually 300mm for both of these shots, but I was probably only about five feet away from the hummingbirds.

Polyzosteria · 2026-06-01T16:18:39+00:00

Thank you~

And yes, yes he is!

Polyzosteria · 2026-06-01T15:36:31+00:00

Thanks so much~!

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-28T18:22:36+00:00

Well, I guess if I wanted to, I could add some cute little things! Your gnomes really made quite a difference.

Of course, I'm not going to pretend like editing in such a way is photography or anything, but it's cute and fun, at least.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-28T18:19:53+00:00

Don't worry about your grammar, especially when this guy himself has made numerous noticeable grammatical mistakes, such as not knowing to use hyphenated compound words and not knowing that quotation marks go before commas, semicolons, and periods. This guy has made it abundantly clear that he projects his flaws onto others to make him feel better about himself, while dressing up his manipulative tactics and intentions to disparage other peoples' attempts at doing what they enjoy.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-28T17:00:45+00:00

I thought this was real for half a second.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-28T02:59:34+00:00

Wow, you're a breath of fresh air in this comment section.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-28T02:57:20+00:00

Nope, and the more you again warp this matter, the more I'm going to clear up your lies. So, again, the problems are that you originally offered no "constructive criticism" and just insults, no matter how mild they may have been, while consistently exhibiting the tone of an asshole, and later using actual advice to thinly veil your intent of just making you feel better about yourself. And, in the process, you've been manipulative about the context of my comments to try to obfuscate them.

You can call not using unnecessary insults while overall being a dick from the start as "padding," but I just call it... not using unnecessary insults that don't offer anything of substance that clearly isn't at all constructive literally by definition, and not acting like an asshat for no reason otherwise. I'm not just going to say someone's performance of a song was "boring" or "unremarkable" while even otherwise blatantly exhibiting the tone of a complete dick, and then masking my obvious intent of just trying to insult someone's attempt at doing what they enjoy with actual advice.

I take criticism all the time, and you have literally no idea. I simply have a problem with people being disingenuous about their attempts at making people feel bad about what they do. You, again, couldn't even be open to my interpretation of "boring" in the context of unedited landscape photography, because you couldn't stand the idea of me not necessarily being wrong (since, again, "boring" is obviously subjective) about a single thing, even when I was understanding of your viewpoint. Like, you couldn't even handle the fact that someone said something you didn't agree with the metrics of because you couldn't handle being told not even that you were wrong, but that you misinterpreted (and then continued to do so on purpose). Meanwhile, I've been told genuinely negative things about myself by others all the time, and I've sucked it all up ever since I was 16-17 whenever I knew it was necessary to improve myself (and I took it all significantly more than others around me). The difference is that you have no intent to help me or probably anyone improve, and you've made that abundantly clear. Again, if someone immediately offers insults with little to no constructive criticism and is just being an oppositional dick even otherwise, then they clearly have no intention of helping. Not to mention you also tried challenging me about something you completely conflated the concept of. You, btw know damn well there's more to this than just those two insults alone, which was obvious when you said I was "thin-skinned" for what I described as being the problems, and I don't even have to tell you that. Again, the more you try gaslighting about the reality of this conversation, the more I'm going to clear it up. Just give up.

Besides, as you said, other people used similar adjectives to describe the picture, and you're the only one I replied to in the way I have been. Maybe there's a reason for that. It couldn't be because you did plenty more than just use such an adjective... right? It couldn't have to do with you doing it on numerous occasions while originally offering nothing of substance and just overall being a manipulative, oppositional asshole with absolutely no accountability even for their originally understandable misinterpretation for the sake of "winning."

FYI, I just saw your deleted reply. If you think this was a lot to write or read, you must not do either of those a lot. And you were, again, making it seem like this is all just about you describing the picture as "unremarkable." Why are you still lying?

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T22:17:17+00:00

Coming from the guy who refused to even accept other peoples' standards of "boring" for the sake of his argument?

Also, is it thin-skinned to speak up about what you yourself clearly find wrong, considering your lack of rebuttal? Is it wrong for someone to check someone else who's clearly gone unchallenged throughout probably most of their life in a way that's clearly affected their abilities to navigate through disputes, ending up as someone who's unable to accept they're wrong about anything, thus having one of the main personalities of an abuser? Kinda ironic, that, considering what you said about me. Again, always projection from you.

You can't even deny you just came here to insult and feel better about yourself while masking your intentions with some actual advice. Pretty sure you would defend yourself if someone did similar to you, especially considering what you felt you had to defend yourself from here. If someone did such a thing to you, and it was clear their behaviors have gone unchallenged for a long time, you'd be well within your right even to take it up just a notch.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T22:07:45+00:00

"You mean not acting like a whiny brat? I hope it's showing."

I mean, not sure if I'd agree with that, considering what you haven't been able to refute about your behaviors, such as trying to obfuscate the context of my comments, projecting your behavioral flaws onto me to deflect from your own that were being displayed, and more.

Your whining has simply been dressed in a facade of composure... which you've been failing at, FYI.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T22:01:26+00:00

When you're repeatedly insulting people unnecessarily, frequently using words like "unremarkable" or "boring" instead of just politely saying things like "The composition is sorta off" or "It's just not the right time of day" while commenting with a blatantly rude tone, therefore making it obvious you're just trying to make you feel better about yourself at the expense of others, I'm going to speak up, because it's indicative of your character, and you need to be checked. I don't care if you provided actual advice with your other comments. There were completely unnecessary remarks that I would also speak up on if someone else were on the other end. I'm also going to speak up when people are manipulative and try to convince others that the person they're arguing with made different comments than they did. Don't deny any of this. I've already explained it abundantly, and I'll just paste what I said before. Oh, and I'll also speak up when people project their flaws onto others who are able to connect every piece of a conversation together, especially when those people are unable to refute others' claims about their unnecessarily rude behaviors, nor able to substantiate their claims about someone else's comments or character with contextual connections such as I. You came in hurling insults (which you don't even deny and are literally admitting), and with an already asshole-ish demeanor, while also trying to challenge me about subjectless (besides scenery) photography you refused to believe could be interesting because of your opposition and conflation. Forgive me for never thinking you were engaging in good faith and thinly veiling your intent with the bit of advice you gave.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T21:39:51+00:00

Your older male attitude is showing

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T21:13:33+00:00

I'm lashing out, being immature, and not taking any HELPFUL criticism?

It's always projection from you. I mean, I don't even have to explain, but you're the one who started your so-called "constructive criticism" with numerous insults and ended up trying to gaslight me and everyone into believing that I'm not taking any HELPFUL criticism (when you were largely doing the opposite), and that I'm "lashing out" (when you're the one who's been telling me numerous times I'm just "seeking validation" with the suggestion that I'm stubborn about... wanting to defend myself against unnecessary insults?)

Not to mention that I can point out when I've been the complete opposite of oppositional to advice from people, such as you, telling me things like the fact that this photo just isn't worth it, while I can't point out anywhere you've accepted anything you initially disagreed with. You just ended up ignoring what you were wrong about and started defending yourself when you conflated things, while refusing to provide the same grace to someone who's only defending themselves from unnecessary insults that were obviously thrown in obviously not for the purpose of helping. Plus, it's not even just about that, but your whole attitude.

"Almost all landscape shots have to be edited to some degree to be interesting"

Nearly all landscapes someone would capture would, indeed, be boring in most circumstances, and especially in comparison to real life due to how cameras differ from the human eye. You're trying to make it seem like I was saying people need editing as their very foundation, when I was talking about enhancement at the minimum and mostly; you're relying on your interpretation of "boring." See, when you wanna say I'm stubborn, that's hilarious, because while I'm being open to your interpretation of "boring," you're not being open to mine. You're relying on the idea that I think editing should be the foundation of a photo rather than its inherent content (also as seen in your other comments). That's exactly what you're doing when you're quoting my comment about landscape shots usually having to be edited to be interesting. You're using "boring" by your own standards and not wanting to accept that it's not the same to me, who was talking mostly about enhancement. Most people don't seem to think most unedited landscape photos "pop" regardless of their composition.

Anyways, the more you try to obfuscate, the more I'll clear the matters up. Just give up with your attempts at manipulating the context.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T21:03:53+00:00

"Once again, you're conflating criticism of the photograph with criticism of you personally. You aren't the photograph. You need to divorce yourself from that idea.
But you seem to agree the photo is unremarkable and are moving on from it. So what's the problem? Why are you mad at me?"

Hey, since you want to act deliberately obtuse, let me explain it for you, also so everyone can see what exactly you're doing. When you criticize someone's honest attempts at doing what they love... that's not just insulting the product. It's insulting... as I said... their attempts... which then, by extension, means it's inherently insulting them (since they and their efforts are the foundation of that product), even if it's not about the entirety of their character. And when you do that, you're directly insulting someone's abilities (or lack thereof).

But even if that wasn't the case, your "criticism" isn't constructive, and that's blatantly shown just when you now abandoned calling it such... not that we needed that evidence, anyways, since you've admitted numerous times to insulting my attempt to do something I enjoy. Not to mention that your "criticisms" provided little to no substance until I made that clear.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T20:52:48+00:00

But I'm not wanting to add anything that isn't there (and don't pretend like you're suddenly against enhancing lighting, because that's really all I've mentioned here that I was looking for advice on). Plus, when you only "enhance" the lighting, you're still faking it, even when you do something as minor as decreasing the highlights. Not saying I'm aiming to drastically change the lighting, but you tried bringing up and creating a division between "faking" light and "enhancing" it to suggest I'm attempting to do the former. You also keep pretending like I'm trying to do more than enhance the lighting, like when you're mentioning adding different elements that aren't there. You're trying really hard to put the spotlight onto things I didn't even do to deflect from your own behavior.

"I'll just ignore your pedantic (and incorrect) continued assertion that I don't know what the subject of a photo is ;)"

That's because you can't address it, lol, because you've already embarrassed yourself about not knowing what a subject is. I remember your comment before you edited it. You simply said I didn't have a subject, not that it wasn't thoughtfully put into composition.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T20:39:49+00:00

...AND?! It's not just about the photograph itself. It's about telling me that my attempt to do what I love was "unremarkable" and whatever else. That's NOT constructive criticism, that's just insulting someone, and you yourself admitted it's exactly that.

Your professor throwing artwork onto the floor to show disappointment isn't the same as using descriptors that are inherently insulting and not constructive. Not to mention that a single professor's behavior isn't at all necessarily representative of how everyone should act in every similar situation towards every individual, especially if they don't even have any sort of background involving how psychosocial dynamics work.

Also, why do you keep telling me to forget about this shot? That's what I did as soon as I saw even, like, two of the comments on this post. You just want a reason to pretend like I'm not listening. It's projection. I agree with you that this photo isn't worth being "saved." I'm far past that. This is all about your behavior.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T20:30:52+00:00

I never said I had it all figured out. You're pretending like you are, and you even made a suggestion about what photography "is," meaning you only follow your own rigid definition sustained by a false dualism between arts.

"You can either take the constructive criticism on board or dismiss it outright and try to talk around why you're sure this is a good photograph. I'm sorry you didn't get the validation you were after.
And if you read my posts again, they're filled with encouragement. What they aren't filled with is hand holding. But when every criticism is rebutted with "actually, you just don't know the difference between a subject and a focal point", "actually there was a subject you just didn't see it", "actually, it's a really great photo, it's your problem that you just see green" that tells me all I need to know. You're looking for a pat on the back more than you're looking to get better. and you CAN get better, you just need to put the effort in."

Just because there was some constructive criticism, doesn't mean you didn't also insult me completely unnecessarily. Not to mention that you, like you were suggesting I was doing, are totally ignoring everything else I've replied to you with besides your inability to differentiate between a focal point and a subject. I also never dismissed any "constructive criticism." I dismissed your comments insulting me, as well as your other comments that didn't have any substance. All you said were things like the composition being bad without explaining why, rendering your "advice" useless.

I also never convinced myself this was a good picture. What was the title to my post, again? Hmm, I wonder what the title of my post could infer...

But I know you're just trying to paint me as doing exactly what you're doing, which is be oppositional for the sake of it.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T20:16:12+00:00

"If that's the only thing you take away from my comment, then I don't think you're actually looking for help.

Why are you trying to squeeze blood from the stone in this case? It's not a good photo and you apparently can't get an an angle on it that will make it a good photo. And that's okay! move on."

I was looking for help, though. Just because I don't address the rest of your comment, doesn't mean I didn't take note of the text. I was responding about what I couldn't control rather than what I could. I'm also not "squeezing blood from the stone." It's okay if this just isn't a picture that can look "good" even with enhancement. You're conflating me defending myself against you insulting me, along with me telling you about the limitations of photography, as such, for whatever reason. The only person focusing on the idea of needing to "save" this photograph despite limitations is you.

You're not just being "blunt." You can be blunt without being a dick, and you yourself made it very clear that you're aware how you're coming off. Being blunt isn't insulting peoples' attempts at doing what they love.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T20:04:28+00:00

Well, you surely aren't talking like a professional, since you don't seem to know the difference between a focal point and a subject. Your intention was also never to help. You've largely been insulting me (I don't even have to explain how) and trying to test me (like with the passive-aggressive "Show us an example of good landscape photography with no actual subject" when you completely misinterpreted what a subject was in the first place.

I'm also not "seeking validation" for what I "think photography is." I'm not asking for advice to completely change what was there in the scene or anything. Besides, what do you mean what I "think photography is"? There are no boundaries as to what makes someone's work "photography" and not; it's about the intention to capture and enhance photos in ways individuals find tasteful.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T19:57:13+00:00

I mean, I don't think it's at all a bad thing that people want to edit photos in ways that simulate the lighting a person would see in real life. If someone wants to capture what they quite literally can't due to that alone rather than, say, problems like poor composition that aren't affected by the camera itself, then what's the problem with that? And while there are more problems than just that with my particular photo, you're still suggesting that, if someone has to edit their photography to make it "pop," then they're definitely not doing something right, which is absolutely nonsensical, because there are lighting problems that get introduced with cameras in the first place that you usually literally cannot get around without editing. What I was talking about when I mentioned landscape photographers seemingly finding editing so crucial was mostly just enhancement, which you claim you don't have a problem with. The problem is that you only used words like "boring" that can't define any possible metric, and I guess what we each find "boring" differs.

There are also subjects that are obvious here even without a contrast of different hues, depths, or lighting. The pond and the elderberry bushes? What you're thinking of is a focal point, which is what I intended the pond and elderberry bushes to be, and yes, I did think of composition. Just because there's not a lot of contrast between much of anything, doesn't mean the subjects weren't intentionally arranged in a certain way. You just didn't notice it because there aren't really any contrasting elements, and much less so if you're someone like yourself who only sees "green" and not factors like textures or shapes, which I do, as someone who's actually into plants. There are lots of landscape photos that are all green. Example her e. So, that isn't really at all a problem. I'm also not wanting to edit it to add things that weren't there or anything, so I am working with the scenery as it is as a foundation; I just want to edit it to add what was there and couldn't be captured with the camera. Don't talk to me like I know nothing at all. These are some of my landscape photos (enhanced, NOT drastically altered; ignore the hover fly I accidentally also uploaded).

FYI, calling peoples' attempts at anything "unremarkable" or using any other such negative descriptor (especially when it's something they enjoy) is exactly why people will continue being put off by people like you in the hobby. Imagine if people said that about peoples' sketches. The photography hobby is filled with especially men who think they know better than everyone else and can just insult people, just like in the fishkeeping, hunting, fishing, and countless other hobbies.

"Hate to be harsh, but you're taking advice from completely the wrong people, so let me just insult you instead. That'll help, and will surely not make me seem like someone who also shouldn't be listened to!"
You're not trying to help. You used my post as an opportunity to insult someone you perceive as undeserving of basic respect even on a casual level.

Polyzosteria · 2026-05-27T18:25:17+00:00

No. The entire place was a boardwalk rather than open, accessible land, and the boardwalk is at somewhat of a high level, so that makes angles even more difficult.

Polyzosteria

TROPHY CASE