So to capture the pregnancy of this woman the fauxtog decided to make her disappear into the background and focus on this rather unimpressive flower? Brilliant!
← Previous post
Next post →
I actually like this idea, but bad choice of flower/weed, and it should not be a stand-alone photo.
This would be a nice background with other photos on top of it. Or, in a group with other photos with variations on this theme.
You ever get the impression that 90% of the photographer screw ups that we (rightfully) mock are from people just trying too f’ing hard to be “artistic” or “creative”?
Here’s a radical idea: just take a friggin’ picture of your subject.
It’s a lot easier to be artistic/creative/different than to actually practice and develop good technique and execution. (This is true across all artistic fields… music, visual arts, writing, … even fashion.)
I disagree. If everyone was just technically proficient you would have Blah pictures…I see plenty of those in pictures from pixel peepers and the same brick walls or blah landscapes. I find a picture more appealing off of Lomography’s website with people and their holgas.
that being said the above picture was not artistic.
One time I took a picture like this…then I deleted it
okay so I’m going out on a limb here and I’m going to say something that, well, I hope know one hurts my feelings….ah, well…I kinda like it. She shouldn’t be THAT blurry…but yeah, be nice to me. Had an uneventful day…and I’m a girl.
That was the most useless comment I’ve ever read. Thank you.
you’re welcome! glad I made your evening.
Please tell me you also have an excuse for your typos.
“Had an uneventful day…and I’m a girl.”
While some of the stuff I see on here is horrible, I think this falls into the “probably a beginner but all in all not that bad category.” Lighting isn’t horrible, composition could use some work, but I can still tell what’s going on and if I was the client I wouldn’t be completely pissed if this was in my final photos, especially if there were others. I’ve seen worse composition and lighting “fauxtographer” photos from high end pro studios. Like I said, some stuff on here is awful and deserves to be made fun of for a variety of reasons, but I bet this photographer would be crushed to see their work on here.
The idea isnt bad but when you can;t tell what is in the background – and the thing in the background is the raison d’etre of the photo – well, a little more focus would have been better. And the clover? Well, a rose or daisy might have been too trite.
If I hadn’t been clued in that it was a baby bump I don’t know that I would have figured that out. I see very little maternity photography that I appreciate.
“lighting isn’t horrible, composition could use some work…” I seriously get more annoyed by the arm chair pros in the comment sections than the actual photos here. If this is a maternity photo (which I am 99.99% sure it is) then this photo fails horribly on composition. The subject of the photo is completely out of focus! And unless you’re saying the lighting on that weed is good, how can you even comment on the lighting? You can’t see it! lol. Come on.
I agree – it shouldn’t be that blurry. I get the point, maybe if it was a real flower and not a weed and if there was less blur this could have been…something. But as is – I’d toss it. I give the photog points for trying…
a flower is a flower is a flower. just cause it wasn’t cultivated and sold in an overpriced boutique doesn’t make it any less of a flower. like people – am i less of a person if i didn’t go to a fancy 4-year uni to get my doctorate? it’s just not the best flower for this kinda thing. a different wildflower (still a weed) would DEF have been a better choice! …and agreed – a little more focus on the BG. if i had paid for shots of my distended abdomen i would not have enjoyed a clover instead.
Hmmm focus stacking might make it interesting…. both her and the flower in focus.
@ no one special. NO. that wouldnt be good.
Didn’t mean THIS photo would work, meant the idea could.
“Artistic” attempt aside, when your subject is completely unrecognisable, then it’s a no go. I had no idea what it was until I read the text and comments. “Yeah, this was when I was… uhh… Let’s see. Maybe… 6 months? Or 7 months pregnant? I dunno. Well, the flower says spring? So maybe… 7 months. I think… Wait, was this me?”
This comment deserves more LIKEs…
HAD there been a fair bit less blur on the lady, and IF this were part of a set, and HAD this been a more attractive flower or at least the flower were somehow of great personal significance to the client, then it would be a good concept. That’s a lot of “if”s.
If you’re going for bokeh, I’d think you’d want what’s in the bokeh not to catch your eye before the in-focus part of the picture.
Pot, meet kettle. One of the surest signs of a faux-tographer is the use of the word “bokeh.”
Bahahahahaha … dying clover … hahahahaha … can’t breathe …. bahahahahaha … … what’s that blob in the background …
To the people justifying or making excuses for this photo, what the FLYING FUCK are you thinking?
My first reaction was “oh shit, my contact lenses fell out” and I got pissed because these are my last pair. Then I realized that they didn’t…I’m just looking at another faux’s objet d’art and that pissed me off even more.
1:its a weed. not a flower. 2:why?
Well it certainly looks like a flower…. weeds have flowers too you know 😛 (ok ok unless you include ferns as a weed)
another thing jyst out of curiosity, and forgive me, im in bed seeing this on my mobile device.. but how would that bokeh? what am i missing
It’s not. It’s a short depth of field. But it’s not bokeh.
At least they finally figured out how to blur the backgrounds.
Seriously people, YANAP has yet to post anything worth defending in any way. If you find yourself wanting to defend any images you see here, then it’s time to examine your OWN portfolio and/or sell your camera
I think you should get off your high horse. And chill out. Stop being a snob. Maybe I should sell my camera now? and give up? Haha not very likely, not based on your pointless advice. Are you telling me that you were an amazing photographer from day dot? This person/people were clearly happy with their image and I will have to assume that the person the photograph was for must have been happy with it, if they have posted this on their website or fan page or whatever. So it really doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks even photography “masters” like yourself.
There’s a difference between being a fauxtographer who has a business page and someone who is just learning photography. Someone who is learning, should not be running a business. Leave that to the people who know what they’re doing. In the meantime, learn your craft/art and enjoy it without the pressures of trying to please everyone.
Just because a photographer was happy with their image, doesn’t mean it was good. I look back at images I did back when I started and I cringe to think that I thought they were good then. We are the worst people to judge our own work as we are not usually emotionally distant enough from it.
Good point(s): Something is in focus.
Bad point(s): Everything else.
IF, if, if and had. All those applied it would been a better photograph. Sadly none of those happened.
No amount of Gaussian Blur can replace fast, prime lenses.
I think you might be right about this being Gaussian Blur rather than in camera. All blurring is equal, regardless of distance from the camera and it doesn’t show any bokeh from the aperture.
This makes the photo even worse. They took a (probably) in focus shot, blurred it, and then layered on a picture of a weed.
Who the f**k cares? I dont see much wrong with this phot. At least they have the balls to try something different. Why does anyone need to have an opinion and more importantly why does anyone need to voice it? Just focus on what you’re doing. Some people are trying to be creative and try something different, we have all been there. Some people will like this and some wont, get over yourselves. How very dare you mock someone else work, I am sure a lot of your work is far from up to scratch, in fact I would money on that being the reason most of you come on here and act like Barry big balls because your work is far from any good, or you are all very insecure. Photography snobs. And again get over yourselves you losers. Also The comment about certain peoples work being below par is mealy an educated guess.
If it all doesn’t matter, why are you here? I’m here for a laugh. I remember so many of my rookie mistakes and you know what, this site actually helped in what NOT to do.
I thought those were bokeh balls below the subjects? head…but I bet those are just more weeds blurred. I’m beginning to suspect post-prod blur too. ..and based on the apparent angle of the ground, either that clover is ass-high to an elephant, or the ‘tog actually bothered to pull it and hold it up for the camera, which really doesn’t make sense. At first glance I had just assumed that the whole thing was a focus accident that someone for some reason had decided to keep.
Are those for, like, catching bokeh, mon? Gotta ketchum all!
At least you didn’t say “orbs.” Thank you for that. 🙂
Maybe this shot was a witty editorial statement on how the baby bump came to be?
Roll me oh-o-ver in the clo-o-ver…
I submitted this photo and it was meant to be a maternity photo. It was one of many terrible maternity photos by this “professional photographer.” This one just happened to be my “favorite” because you wouldn’t even know it was a maternity photo by looking at it!
And this is what happens when you use Auto-focus for a “professional” photo.
Most photographers (or even just amateurs just trying to take a nice photo) would say “whoops! guess my camera tried to focus on this flower instead of my subject–oh well, delete!” But this fauxtographer said “whoops! guess my camera tried to focus on this flower instead of my subject–hey actually, that looks kind of cool, I’m gonna put this in my portfolio and call it an ‘artistic’ shot!”
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.