There are two "wants" in mentoring as far as I'm concerned. One a more class like structured. Assignments/here's what's wrong kinda thing and the other a more "mentoring" Hey here's what I did... what do you think where do I go from here.
Bear you're great at that :) And I appreciate the time you've spent with me. How this continues I don't know. I seldom see anything resembling landscape at anything other than 60 miles an hour between home and work, and I don't know enough technically to ask the right questions.
PEOPLE! Sound off please! Is there ANY point in ressurrecting both landscape and natural light mentorship threads and creating a new group combining them? Do we have enough interest?
And is there any serious objection to just making it "open mentorship"?
And would the group as a whole prefer a structured "lesson plan"?
Open mentorship is fine with me however I would prefer a more structured approach as just a 'post - what do you think' approach will get out of hand very quickly.
PEOPLE! Sound off please! Is there ANY point in ressurrecting both landscape and natural light mentorship threads and creating a new group combining them? Do we have enough interest?
And is there any serious objection to just making it "open mentorship"?
And would the group as a whole prefer a structured "lesson plan"?
Robt.
I read this thread actively in the beginning, and was excited about it. I liked the early format of the mentor providing information about light and giving assignments for us to apply it. Discussion from others was fine, too, afterwards, but I lost interest, Robert, when you stopped bringing new info to the table in a structured way and the assignments stopped. So, yes, I'd prefer more structure. Give us new topics to chew on.
I have no problem with an "open mentorship" or with combining "natural light" with "landscape."
