Peter Lik

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
biza43 Forum Pro • Posts: 10,796
Re: Peter Lik
1

lilBuddha wrote:

biza43 wrote:

AOC wrote:

There are people who wait months and years to get just the right shot. This guy appears to peddle some fake version of reality that anyone can concoct and digital artists do all the time.

I see nothing more in his images than the cheap, dime a dozen wallpaper backgrounds we see on the Internet.

Well, what is preventing you from doing it and be successful then?

Ethics.

There is nothing in AOC's post related to ethics. So your answer is moot.

-- hide signature --

www.paulobizarro.com
http://blog.paulobizarro.com/

 biza43's gear list:biza43's gear list
Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R XF 90mm +1 more
Jonsi
Jonsi Veteran Member • Posts: 4,487
Re: Peter Lik
2

biza43 wrote:

AOC wrote:

There are people who wait months and years to get just the right shot. This guy appears to peddle some fake version of reality that anyone can concoct and digital artists do all the time.

I see nothing more in his images than the cheap, dime a dozen wallpaper backgrounds we see on the Internet.

Well, what is preventing you from doing it and be successful then?

An inability to leave DPR for more than an hour.

lilBuddha Veteran Member • Posts: 4,377
Re: Peter Lik

biza43 wrote:

lilBuddha wrote:

biza43 wrote:

AOC wrote:

There are people who wait months and years to get just the right shot. This guy appears to peddle some fake version of reality that anyone can concoct and digital artists do all the time.

I see nothing more in his images than the cheap, dime a dozen wallpaper backgrounds we see on the Internet.

Well, what is preventing you from doing it and be successful then?

Ethics.

There is nothing in AOC's post related to ethics. So your answer is moot.

moot/mo͞ot/1.subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty.

Wasn't really commenting on AOC's post, but what would prevent me from adopting Lik's marketing strategy.

Aaron801 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,173
Re: Peter Lik

biza43 wrote:

Bill Ferris wrote:

It's so odd yet so typical to read the comments that are little more than uninformed speculation about Lik,how he achieved success and runs his various business interests. I get that folks don't like his photographic style or the technique of compositing to build imagined scenes. I'm not a fan, either. However, let's acknowledge some facts.

Peter Lik worked very hard to develop his craft, build a band anf achieve success. He came to the US in 1984 and spent a year traveling around the country in an old van doing photography. He returned in 1989 to undertake a project to make at least one quality landscape photograph in each of the 50 states.

In the early 1990s, he worked for the Queensland Department of Tourism in his native Australia, traveling the Outback photographing little known locations. By the mid-1990s, he'd opened a print studio in Las Vegas. He'd also stated a publishing company. He opened his first gallery (1997) in Australia and his first US gallery (2003) in Hawaii. His first book (1997) featured photographs of the Outback. In 2003, he published a coffee table book of his photography of the US.

Lik opened galleries in Las Vegas and Manhattan in the 2000s. From 2010 to 2013, he won multiple prestigious international photo competitions and placed highly in others. He's been honored as a fellow of the Royal Photographic Society.

Over more than 25 years. Peter Lik built a brand as a skilled photographer, an artist/adventurer with a camera, and as a person whose work is synonymous with, quality. He has one documented sale of an original photograph for $1 million and has claimed to have sold another photograph for $6.5 million.

Whatever one may think of his photography, style or use of compositing, Peter Lik has worked hard for his success. It's not the product of luck. Success wasn't handed to him on a silver platter. He worked his keister off, built a brand around his name and is reaping the rewards of his labor.

You are trying to instil some common sense into the minds of several fellow DPR'viewers... I fully agree with you. Photography as Art can not be limited by narrow minded preconceptions.

I think there's a difference between saying that you don't think that Lik has skills, has worked hard, knows how to market himself, etc and saying that you just don't like the work. I don't care much for what he does, but I'll never say that he doesn't have skills or a work ethic...

-- hide signature --

my flickr:
www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/

 Aaron801's gear list:Aaron801's gear list
Olympus PEN-F Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 ASPH Mega OIS Panasonic 12-60mm F3.5-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +1 more
SonyOB Contributing Member • Posts: 814
Re: Peter Lik in the pudding

A lonely wolf cannot create a business scheme. You need somebody who can organize and delegate. We are great apes but we are not bonobos or chimps. Our social structures are a lot more complicated. What an alpha human being does, he uses the effort of other people to get him what he wants while giving them a reason to keep on delivering. That might be money or drugs. redemption, social status or just the permit to survive.

You seem to be stuck on the fact that the concept of 'alpha' originates from wolf studies.
It is a very viable concept, seems to be the law in most sociable land animals.
Drawing parallels from animal studies to human society is great fun but other than giving directions to social psychological studies, have very little value outside their original realm.
I know that the liberal ideology is at odds with the idea that someone is born with qualities that the other people in the neighborhood do not have. It is one of the comforting lies the postmodern snowflakes use as their Charlie Brown blankets.

Seriously, are you suggesting that the business of Peter Lik just sort of happened?
LIke he did not have a vision about how to make money off his skills or talent?
Are you suggesting that he made it all alone, without an organization?
That somebody gave him all he's got? A fairy grandmother? Who?
Nothin he did had anything to do with the position where he is today.

Peter Lik's yearly income is estimated between 100 000 - 1000 000 USD.
Reliable figures do not exist. His real estate business is not in those figures.
Still, pretty nice for an Aussie with a Czech background who was given a camera at the age of 8. He did not stay at home waiting for somebody to give him the life he wanted.
He made it himself. Maybe in the modern memetics he would be classified as an omega, one who makes his success according to his/her personal values, rather than the prevailing consumer society. Semantics. Should we take Reddit or 4chan as authorities?

I would not write this to support a person I really do not care much for, but it bothers me how jealous people try to pump up their deflated egos by pulling other people down.

-- hide signature --

"If your pictures are not good enough, you need to buy some more stuff from Amazon"
(Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon)

 SonyOB's gear list:SonyOB's gear list
Sony RX100 V Sony a7 III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 III Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar +13 more
Bill Ferris
Bill Ferris Veteran Member • Posts: 4,468
Re: Peter Lik

lilBuddha wrote:

biza43 wrote:

lilBuddha wrote:

biza43 wrote:

AOC wrote:

There are people who wait months and years to get just the right shot. This guy appears to peddle some fake version of reality that anyone can concoct and digital artists do all the time.

I see nothing more in his images than the cheap, dime a dozen wallpaper backgrounds we see on the Internet.

Well, what is preventing you from doing it and be successful then?

Ethics.

There is nothing in AOC's post related to ethics. So your answer is moot.

moot/mo͞ot/1.subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty.

Wasn't really commenting on AOC's post, but what would prevent me from adopting Lik's marketing strategy.

Just a guess, but a limited supply of custom-framed, gallery quality prints of stunning photos and financial resources to build, staff and operate galleries in several of the highest-priced real estate markets on the planet?

-- hide signature --

Bill Ferris Photography
Flagstaff, AZ
http://www.billferris.photoshelter.com

 Bill Ferris's gear list:Bill Ferris's gear list
Nikon D610 Fujifilm X-T20 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD +3 more
pcrc11 Regular Member • Posts: 327
Re: Peter Lik
1

Fortunately for Peter Lik, photographers are not who he is making or marketing his work for and to.

 pcrc11's gear list:pcrc11's gear list
Canon EOS 80D Canon EOS 90D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 +2 more
Teila Day
Teila Day Veteran Member • Posts: 4,879
Re: ((chuckle))...

Aaron801 wrote:

Teila Day wrote:

AOC wrote:

There are people who wait months and years to get just the right shot. This guy appears to peddle some fake version of reality that anyone can concoct and digital artists do all the time.

Oh good grief.. There's a marked difference between "doing it" and doing it and actually selling the work through your own gallery and getting well paid.

I see nothing more in his images than the cheap, dime a dozen wallpaper backgrounds we see on the Internet.

Well you can't hang those dime-a-dozen backgrounds on your wall now can you? But you can hang a huge Lik print on your wall, unlike most dime-a-dozen shots on the internet.

You remind me of people who slave at some ratty-behind 9-5 job all day long going on about how Rap music isn't really music, is just simple to make, isn't original, so easy to make that even their kid can do it... Yet here they sit, 20-30 years later still in their same crummy job, making the same crummy money... going on about how easy it is to create the same product that others are making hundreds of millions of dollars from.

I say, if it's that easy- why aren't you doing it?...

Yeah.. exactly..

I don't really agree with the "anyone can do it" part as I credit Lik as a pretty skilled photographer.

Hi Aaron

Ageed.

I do agree though that the work is of a pretty generic, "this ought to match the couch" variety. Ikea has in its frame section mass produced prints that are framed and good to go. All of the art is really of a generic variety as the artists aren't credited and the look of the stuff seems to be designed far more for mass appeal (for decorative purposes) than it is to show off any kind of personality of the artists.

If you want to make a lot of money in almost anything, you have to appeal to the masses. You can own a fancy, horribly expensive upscale eatery and get paid $$$ or you can own a McDonald's in a high traffic area where your "cooks" don't require special skills or training, etc.. and critics don't really affect your bottom line which is $$$$$$ compared to the aforementioned fancy eatery.

Same with porn in the late 1990's and early oughts; You could make a few thousand monthly taking expertly metered portraits with perfect flighting, negotiating a view camera, etc.. or you could make the same amount of money shooting a D1x, horrible flat lighting, and unflattering scenes and below average subjects... and keep making money from those shots years after you initially shot them. it's about money. For some it's about the art, but I think Lik has got a handle on the fact that most people simple wants what looks good to them, without getting all into boring artist statements, etc., etc..

My point:  If you're wanting to get paid well.. you target where and how the money is coming in.

Frankly, I'd rather have something from Lik on my wall when compared to a lot (most?) other photographic works however, buying Lik's work as an investment isn't something I'd remotely entertain.

Mr. Lik's work reminds me of the photos that I see in this kind of Ikea pre-framed art stuff. I suspect that if he wasn't selling his work as limited edition fine art prints, he could be very successful licensing the images for the aforementioned use...

eh... I think Lik knows that such work for run-of-the-mill prints are a dime-a-dozen on the web. He wan't to make money.. not nickels and dimes.

-- hide signature --

Teila K. Day
http://teiladay.com

lilBuddha Veteran Member • Posts: 4,377
Re: Peter Lik in the pudding

SonyOB wrote:

A lonely wolf cannot create a business scheme.

Again, I said lone wolf was art of an inaccurate viewpoint.

You need somebody who can organize and delegate. We are great apes but we are not bonobos or chimps. Our social structures are a lot more complicated.

OK, so you get the complicated part, which is good. But you still insist on using the alpha thing, which is not.

What an alpha human being does, he uses the effort of other people to get him what he wants while giving them a reason to keep on delivering. That might be money or drugs. redemption, social status or just the permit to survive.

You seem to be stuck on the fact that the concept of 'alpha' originates from wolf studies.

And you miss that it is false.

It is a very viable concept, seems to be the law in most sociable land animals.
Drawing parallels from animal studies to human society is great fun but other than giving directions to social psychological studies, have very little value outside their original realm.

Again, you acknowledge something and then ignore it.

I know that the liberal ideology is at odds with the idea that someone is born with qualities that the other people in the neighborhood do not have. It is one of the comforting lies the postmodern snowflakes use as their Charlie Brown blankets.

The counter is that conservative ideology is to ignore reality in favour of one's chosen narrative and to put life into an overly-simplistic mould whilst reducing opposing viewpoints to self-reflecting caricatures. And using insult instead of reasoned rebuttal.

The problem is that it gets us precisely nowhere.

Peter Lik worked hard to get where he is. I acknowledge this with no hesitation. Not everyone has the drive to succeed in the manner he did, I also acknowledge this.

The point that our exchange began on was the inaccuracy of the alpha rubbish. Who succeeds and who doesn't, indeed how to even measure success, is a much more complicated thing than the alpha model of behaviour.

I would not write this to support a person I really do not care much for, but it bothers me how jealous people try to pump up their deflated egos by pulling other people down.

Cute. Again, throwing out insults in order to discredit an argument.

I am not jealous of Lik. I like the fact that he succeeded outside the established art market. I do not like the dishonesty in the sales tactics, though.

lilBuddha Veteran Member • Posts: 4,377
Re: Peter Lik

Bill Ferris wrote:

lilBuddha wrote:

biza43 wrote:

lilBuddha wrote:

biza43 wrote:

AOC wrote:

There are people who wait months and years to get just the right shot. This guy appears to peddle some fake version of reality that anyone can concoct and digital artists do all the time.

I see nothing more in his images than the cheap, dime a dozen wallpaper backgrounds we see on the Internet.

Well, what is preventing you from doing it and be successful then?

Ethics.

There is nothing in AOC's post related to ethics. So your answer is moot.

moot/mo͞ot/1.subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty.

Wasn't really commenting on AOC's post, but what would prevent me from adopting Lik's marketing strategy.

Just a guess, but a limited supply of custom-framed, gallery quality prints of stunning photos and financial resources to build, staff and operate galleries in several of the highest-priced real estate markets on the planet?

Whilst I do think he is a decent photographer, most of his work fails to be stunning. Most of it is very good, but rather workmanlike. But that is my opinion, just as is yours calling Lik "stunning".

I do not know the accurate story on Lik, but I am fine accepting the general narrative, which means he built those resources which means the path is available to any travel magazine level photographer. And there are a lot of those, so that isn't stopping most people.

lilBuddha Veteran Member • Posts: 4,377
Re: Peter Lik

pcrc11 wrote:

Fortunately for Peter Lik, photographers are not who he is making or marketing his work for and to.

Lol, that is true. Artists are rarely the target market of artists.

lilBuddha Veteran Member • Posts: 4,377
Re: ((chuckle))...
1

Teila Day wrote:

it's about money. For some it's about the art, but I think Lik has got a handle on the fact that most people simple wants what looks good to them, without getting all into boring artist statements, etc., etc..

Boring is a relative term. But Lik, like Thomas Kincade, targets people who are outside of and ignorant of, the art-world in general. And that is perfectly fine.

Dogs Playing Poker on one's wall is as valid an expression of art as Renoir's Bal du moulin de la Galette. It is what one likes that is important to any given individual.

doady Senior Member • Posts: 1,602
Re: Peter Lik

Aaron801 wrote:

I agree with what you say... except for one small point that really is just a more subtle matter of semantics. I see what the man does as art since the work isn't for any other purpose other than contemplating (the way that he markets it aside) but I don't think that it's particularly creative, thoughtful art. I think, as you say that it's really pitched towards and audience who aren't particularly interested or well informed about the greater world of art. Not that I'm saying that this somehow invalidates what he does, but that it very much does seem to be for that specific audience. It may also be why his work has apparently turned out to be such a poor investment. If it isn't collected buy the kind of folks who typically collect art, it doesn't get their endorsement and therefore isn't going to have that kind of value...

I think you make good points. I didn't mean to suggest that his work is not artistic in any way.

I think true artists, even mainstream artists, in any medium, try to connect with people. It's hard to see meaningful and long lasting connections from preying on tourists who are passing through who have never bought fine art before and probably never will again.

Lik is very good at getting money from people, but I'm not sure he can get anything else from them.

 doady's gear list:doady's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Phase One Capture One Pro
Aaron801 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,173
Re: ((chuckle))...

Teila Day wrote:

Aaron801 wrote:

Teila Day wrote:

AOC wrote:

There are people who wait months and years to get just the right shot. This guy appears to peddle some fake version of reality that anyone can concoct and digital artists do all the time.

Oh good grief.. There's a marked difference between "doing it" and doing it and actually selling the work through your own gallery and getting well paid.

I see nothing more in his images than the cheap, dime a dozen wallpaper backgrounds we see on the Internet.

Well you can't hang those dime-a-dozen backgrounds on your wall now can you? But you can hang a huge Lik print on your wall, unlike most dime-a-dozen shots on the internet.

You remind me of people who slave at some ratty-behind 9-5 job all day long going on about how Rap music isn't really music, is just simple to make, isn't original, so easy to make that even their kid can do it... Yet here they sit, 20-30 years later still in their same crummy job, making the same crummy money... going on about how easy it is to create the same product that others are making hundreds of millions of dollars from.

I say, if it's that easy- why aren't you doing it?...

Yeah.. exactly..

I don't really agree with the "anyone can do it" part as I credit Lik as a pretty skilled photographer.

Hi Aaron

Ageed.

I do agree though that the work is of a pretty generic, "this ought to match the couch" variety. Ikea has in its frame section mass produced prints that are framed and good to go. All of the art is really of a generic variety as the artists aren't credited and the look of the stuff seems to be designed far more for mass appeal (for decorative purposes) than it is to show off any kind of personality of the artists.

If you want to make a lot of money in almost anything, you have to appeal to the masses. You can own a fancy, horribly expensive upscale eatery and get paid $$$ or you can own a McDonald's in a high traffic area where your "cooks" don't require special skills or training, etc.. and critics don't really affect your bottom line which is $$$$$$ compared to the aforementioned fancy eatery.

Same with porn in the late 1990's and early oughts; You could make a few thousand monthly taking expertly metered portraits with perfect flighting, negotiating a view camera, etc.. or you could make the same amount of money shooting a D1x, horrible flat lighting, and unflattering scenes and below average subjects... and keep making money from those shots years after you initially shot them. it's about money. For some it's about the art, but I think Lik has got a handle on the fact that most people simple wants what looks good to them, without getting all into boring artist statements, etc., etc..

My point: If you're wanting to get paid well.. you target where and how the money is coming in.

Frankly, I'd rather have something from Lik on my wall when compared to a lot (most?) other photographic works however, buying Lik's work as an investment isn't something I'd remotely entertain.

Mr. Lik's work reminds me of the photos that I see in this kind of Ikea pre-framed art stuff. I suspect that if he wasn't selling his work as limited edition fine art prints, he could be very successful licensing the images for the aforementioned use...

eh... I think Lik knows that such work for run-of-the-mill prints are a dime-a-dozen on the web. He wan't to make money.. not nickels and dimes.

I have to wonder how much money the folks who license those images make...? Either way, what I'm saying is that to me Lik's work resembles that stuff.

Sure, I get the idea of "appealing to the masses," in order to make a buck, but to me this is so obvious as to go without saying. I was saying that for me the man's work is soulless and cliche and I don't see how any kind of explanation about how he appeals to the masses is going to change my view of it. What's compelling to me about art is not how people are able to make money from it but as a vehicle for personal expression. Some artists are in my mind able to combine both, expression and profit, while some are able to do only one of these...

-- hide signature --

my flickr:
www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/

 Aaron801's gear list:Aaron801's gear list
Olympus PEN-F Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 ASPH Mega OIS Panasonic 12-60mm F3.5-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +1 more
doady Senior Member • Posts: 1,602
Re: Peter Lik

lilBuddha wrote:

All art is commercial art unless one does not attempt to sell it. Motive is a false differentiator. Picasso used to use doodles to pay restaurant bills, how crass is that?

Yes, I guess you could say Lik's work is more on the level of Picasso's doodle napkins than to Picasso's other work. I can agree with that. Good point.

 doady's gear list:doady's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Phase One Capture One Pro
Leswick II Senior Member • Posts: 1,099
Re: Peter Lik

Although I agree with your sentiment, lots and lots of folk out there buy various visuals to fit their couch.....so who am I to say they are wrong ?  It's highly subjective.

Teila Day
Teila Day Veteran Member • Posts: 4,879
Re: ((chuckle))...

Aaron801 wrote:

I have to wonder how much money the folks who license those images make...?

My guess isn't much today. You could make a decent amount 20 years ago. Even in the late 90's, CD's of stock nature shots would often go for $450-$700 a set.

Either way, what I'm saying is that to me Lik's work resembles that stuff.

Agreed... however I will say that much of his work looks better than most of the stuff I see that resembles his shots. I don't mind that he composites at all.

Sure, I get the idea of "appealing to the masses," in order to make a buck, but to me this is so obvious as to go without saying. I was saying that for me the man's work is soulless and cliche and I don't see how any kind of explanation about how he appeals to the masses is going to change my view of it.

That's something to be appreciated as well-- there's nothing at all wrong about your view regarding art. There's something to be said about those who put their heart and soul into their work.

What's compelling to me about art is not how people are able to make money from it but as a vehicle for personal expression.

Like... a Ferrari.

(couldn't help myself)

Some artists are in my mind able to combine both, expression and profit, while some are able to do only one of these...

Agreed-- there is something really special about those who can manage to do both; soulful and aesthetically beautiful or work that makes a gripping statement that leaves one thinking and or art that fosters meaningful conversation regarding the respective topic or piece.

In my last post I meant to write:

"Same with porn in the late 1990's and early oughts; You could make a few thousand monthly taking expertly metered portraits with perfect flighting, negotiating a view camera, etc.. or you could make the same amount of money *before the end of a work week*  shooting a D1x, horrible flat lighting, and unflattering scenes and below average subjects...

-- hide signature --

It's nice that there's a plethora of various art to please the lot of us whether the art be superficial renditions or rich soulful pieces that touch us at our core.  You have a nice view of art.  Thanks for sharing it.

Best in photography to you Aaron

--
Teila K. Day
http://teiladay.com

SonyOB Contributing Member • Posts: 814
Re: Peter Lik in the pudding

All attempts to depict reality from an ideological starting point have failed, whether religious, communist, fascist –or postmodern progressive. While I pointed out the postmodern Neo-Marxists, I did not take sides for the conservative idiots who are plentiful also and have a grim history with reality.

The problem is the natural world. It is too complicated to be explained through dogmas and word games created behind desks. You try to impose your ideology on its mechanisms and you get a kick in the face –unless you are well protected among your peers who shout down anybody who presents views or data that goes against the credo.

Your only argument is based on one badly conducted study from the seventies.
I find that a bit scarce.

You also seem to take disagreeing with your ideas as an insult.
As it is, I do not see your contributions worth any further attention and I bow out.

-- hide signature --

"If you gotta go, go now"

(The Moody Blues)

PS. I know that politics is a no-no on this site and I apologize.
I am against politics as it is played today.

 SonyOB's gear list:SonyOB's gear list
Sony RX100 V Sony a7 III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 III Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar +13 more
MyReality
MyReality Contributing Member • Posts: 802
Re: ((chuckle))...

There is a lot of money in cliché's and risqué art.  Thomas Kinkade is worth a small fortune.  Robert Mapplethorpe left quite an estate.  Currently, there are a few stock photographers making very good money with old 3 to 5 mpx cameras for a retro color look.  I recently read about one in DigitalPro Magazine.

It is easy to underestimate and put down other photographers when it is not your style.

 MyReality's gear list:MyReality's gear list
Canon EOS 80D Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 20mm f/2.8 USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro +8 more
lilBuddha Veteran Member • Posts: 4,377
Re: Peter Lik in the pudding

SonyOB wrote:

All attempts to depict reality from an ideological starting point have failed, whether religious, communist, fascist –or postmodern progressive. While I pointed out the postmodern Neo-Marxists, I did not take sides for the conservative idiots who are plentiful also and have a grim history with reality.

The problem is the natural world. It is too complicated to be explained through dogmas and word games created behind desks. You try to impose your ideology on its mechanisms and you get a kick in the face –unless you are well protected among your peers who shout down anybody who presents views or data that goes against the credo.

I am not imposing ideology, just confronting the one you are using.

Your only argument is based on one badly conducted study from the seventies.
I find that a bit scarce.

No, you are using the constructs from the results of one badly conducted study. You have presented no evidence that the terminology you use is relevant.

You also seem to take disagreeing with your ideas as an insult.
As it is, I do not see your contributions worth any further attention and I bow out.

Again with the dismissal instead of a reasoned argument.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads