Am I a fauxtoggg

[Delete Account]

I was being nice and took this photographer out for some steel wool spinning now that I used his picture with watermark still showing he is telling his Facebook Fans I stole his images. This fauxtog did absolutely nothing but take pictures of ME spinning the steel wool off a local bridge.  I think this guy deserves a place on the front page.

They call this art..? Really this is art?

https://www.facebook.com/165935570099003/photos/a.655937187765503.1073741833.165935570099003/655937221098833/?type=3&theater

and this is mine

https://flic.kr/p/o3Fdmf

[cameraclicker]

The Stephen Orabec photo is much better than the Cochran Images photo.

I think you are trying to say:  “I was being nice and took this photographer out for some steel wool spinning.  Now, after I used his picture with watermark still showing, he is telling his Facebook Fans I stole his images. This fauxtog did absolutely nothing but take pictures of ME spinning the steel wool off a local bridge.  I think this guy deserves a place on the front page.”

I’m not sure how or why you “used his picture with watermark still showing”.  Some uses (critique for instance) are perfectly legal and are covered under Fair Use. Other uses are illegal.

The way this site uses the word “Fauxtographer” the image creator has to meet a couple of criteria:

Photos are below a standard which has been set pretty low; and,

Photography services are advertised, seeking paid work.

So, a bridge with burning steel wool, no matter how poorly exposed, or composed, does not make a Fauxtographer, unless someone has hired him/her, in advance, to photograph the bridge.  Generally, the title applies to wedding and portrait photographers that are clueless.  To truly earn the title, almost all photos should fall below the bar, not just one or two out of hundreds.

Looking at the rest of the FB page, there are lots of distressing photos.  The woman in under garments in front of the Christmas tree, for instance.  Or the senior’s portraits with neon grass.  I think I have seen these photos before so a link was posted somewhere!

[EyeDocPhotog]

One may have better exposure & focus, but neither of these images do anything for me.

Light painting has become soooo ubiquitous you’d have to show REAL creativity to stand out.

Steel wool, 9v battery, off a bridge? NOT ART.

[IHF]

I don’t get it.

So you took this guy out to teach him how you make your shots using steel wool.  Then you post one of his images from your lesson, and talk about how yours is superior.  Then you also start talking about his other photographs, and his photography in general.

First, if you felt he had no potential and didn’t agree with or like what he’s been doing, why offer to teach him?

second, if he failed at getting the shot while working with you, then doesn’t that just reflect badly on YOU the teacher?

you offered unsolicited critique to someone who isn’t receptive.  Unsolicited critque rarely, if ever helps a fauxtographer.  They already “know” they are good enough to go pro and charge people for their expertise. (Just as you know you are good enough to teach)  They will almost never respond kindly.  To top it off, you put yourself in a mentor type position and then stepped all over it by posting his pictures along side critisism, unless that was agreed upon before hand and it was understood that that is what you would be doing, it was a major asshole move.  You just shut a Fauxtog off even more tightly to learning, and to critisism by behaving the way you did.  That is IF I’m understanding correctly.

You may be right in your assessment, but you were very unethical in the way you went about things

[IHF]

And I agree with eyedoc.  If you are going to do shots like these that have been way over done, you have to BRING it.  Otherwise it’s just ho hum even when technically sound.

[Don]

Yours is better, but enough with the watermarks. No one is going to steal EITHER of those photos.

[Delete Account]

Sure don’t see your work  you fucktard!

EyeDocPhotog One may have better exposure & focus, but neither of these images do anything for me.

Light painting has become soooo ubiquitous you’d have to show REAL creativity to stand out.

Steel wool, 9v battery, off a bridge? NOT ART.

[EyeDocPhotog]

Sure don’t see your work  you fucktard!

Again, as CC insinuated above some months ago, your grammar requires some remediation.

I don’t have much time, so I’ll be succinct. In EVERY English sentence there must be a subject and a predicate.  Your statement above does not qualify as a inasmuch as there is no defined subject. Writing a simple “I” would suffice as the defined subject. Moving along, using “sure” as an adverb modifying “don’t” works GRAMMATICALLY but the urban genre from which the rest of the statement is borne begs for  different wording – perhaps “ain’t seen” would suffice. “Your work,” while, again, technically correct, wouldn’t allow the same fluency. Perhaps “YO shit” emphasizing the ‘yo’ with caps.

Substitution of these 2 phrase would also take care of the missing comma.

“you fucktard” is a splendid choice as an interjection phrase. The only change I’d make here is to capitalize the ‘F’ because, technically, the word becomes a quasi-proper noun as it refers back to a named individual, EyeDocPhotog. But that’s a small point.

So…. let’s put it all together shall we? You wrote

Sure don’t see your work  you fucktard!

and incorporating my changes we now have

I ain’t seen YO shit, you Fucktard!

Better? 🙂

[photosbytw]

Damn…………………..I just snorted hot tea through my nose…………………(sniffle)……………..(snork)

[nesgran]

well played sir

[Delete Account]

LMFAO  you spent all that time to correct me….  ?

I’m not perfect, I’m human.

yoyO  iZ CHu Izz Daa interneTs’$ gRammAr pO-poo  ?

 

[Author]

Posts