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

[picstop]

I haven’t really given it a lot of thought but I think that an oof pic has got to be near the top if not at the top of the list of fails for a photo. In this day and age of amazing AF cameras, there is little excuse to not get a shot in focus. Yes, you may have to take responsibility and select an AF point and with regards to the cameras and lenses I use at F2.8 and less, you may have to do a little afma-ing. But for the most part, the photos these fauxs take are snapshots. For example, I looked through a lot of the ones by PH pros. My ancient P&S that I carry around for fun when I go on a hike can get better shots than this https://www.facebook.com/498124273533390/photos/a.505573086121842.121173.498124273533390/881151088564038/?type=1&theater
I realize it’s not a ten grand fashion shoot but why people think they can post something like this is beyond me. If you can’t take a simpe snapshot of a bunch of kids, how can I expect you to take a decent shot of me and hand you cash for it? And on and on it goes as I look through the “portfolio” of shots, one oof after another. Not that the ones in focus are gems of any sort either. I’ve never used a $300 bridge camera for model shoots so I don’t know if it’s the camera limiting this “pro” or their inability to actually use it properly.
I always get a kick out of how people “like” stuff. I guess I have higher standards. Personally, I don’t like “pizza skin”,
https://www.facebook.com/498124273533390/photos/a.726733047339177.1073741857.498124273533390/726739084005240/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/498124273533390/photos/a.734513066561175.1073741860.498124273533390/734513796561102/?type=3&theater
To be fair, I think some of the soft photos are due to motion blur and/or ridiculously high iso settings (for the camera used). Which though it has little to do with AF, has everything to do with the ability of the photographer/gear.
In the end, just another wannabe in a hack market.