Reply To: Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page…

[fstopper89]

What I find puzzling is that same photographer with the horrid baby-in-pumpkin photo also has some decent newborn photos, where the baby is sleeping calmly on a soft blanket, that also illustrates some solid knowledge on editing or at least decent editing. The pumpkin ones are all contrasty, blotchy, and appear to have been taken with on-board flash. It almost makes me wonder if those (the bad ones) are even his photos! I looked through his page a bit, and his work isn’t that great for the most part but there are a few images that are not completely terrible. I question this mainly because he had some sort of photo with a border and text on it (it was a pretty bad photo too) that he captioned with “not my photo, just my idea” while he was using it to advertise a session. If that’s so, that’s a huge mistake of the fauxtogs. I’ve seen a lot of these so-called “ideas” for photo sessions advertised on fauxtogs’ pages and it’s technically an infringement on copyright and/or false advertising. One local woman has her print products advertised, and they looked like they were stock photo of items pulled right off of one of the popular photo printers’ websites, complete with other photogs’ images displayed in them.