Home Forums Am I a Fauxtog? .. Fauxtog of the worst kind.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 36 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #4571
    fstopper89
    Member

    My $1300 camera and $1100 lens put together cannot take pictures like that either.

    It takes someone who doesn’t know what they’re doing to click the button.

    No one was making fun of your family, they were just making fun of the photographer who apparently doesn’t know at all how to use any settings on their camera correctly to take a good photo.

    #4572
    meganray
    Member

    I would REALLY like to know WHO the original poster is. A lot if drama was started over this and is unnecessary.. Why try and start something between people who have know each other for years? I have no problem with Allison and this post had me thinking (wrongly) that she had a problem with me and that upsets me.

    #4573
    meganray
    Member

    .. if you do not like her, or my pictures, thats one thing, I am wanting to know where the proof is she attacked other photographers. I have not seen proof of that, and I let it get into my head it may be true.. please message me if you do not feel you can post here

    meganray@live.ca

    #4575
    glowatski
    Member

    hey …brown one……DRAMA is what you like?????  No one said anyone was making fun of my family????    I dont know why you are making fun of someone who just loves taking photos????  She is an awesome, super nice person who loves doing what she loves doing!! I love supporting people who are just starting out!!!!!!!  Did you start out pro??????   or what do you do???  Would you please send me your professional photography website?  I would love to look at your photos and prices.  Im actually looking for someone for the summer!!  Hope to hear from you soon!!           glowatski@gmail.com

    #4577
    fstopper89
    Member

    The point is, a camera does not ever take a picture. It’s the person behind it- their experience, expertise, knowledge of functions of the camera, use of lighting, ability to focus, ability to compose a shot, ability to properly post-process, etc. I certainly did not start out pro because that’s impossible. But I didn’t market myself as a photographer for hire, until I had some experience, college credits, and actual field experience in photography and knew my work was worth it. Assuming from what you said being the family in those photos, I saw the same family when perusing Megan Ray’s page. It is evident she has much more knowledge about photography as a whole than the other photographer.

    #4578
    meganray
    Member

    I have more experience ..the thing is the person who started this thread accused someone of offering cheaper services and trying to steal clients and I don’t think she’s ever done that.. And its important to note, she did not submit her OWN link so she didn’t ask for her images to be critiqued.

    #4580

    well… my first ever shoot ended up making a person become the face of NZ fashion week. So if you look at it objectively, I started out pro 😛

    i kid i kid. (jokes NZ slang)

     

    #4583
    sask13
    Member

    So once again… Maybe those who want to bash her photos and her clients should really just grow up and move on cause the only one who needs more experience with anything are those peoplto who think they are above others enough to start critzing them behind there back! it shows you need to try and feel better about yourself … Go to the gym or volunteer or actually do something worth feeling good about instead!

    drop the issue and be a respectful adult. If you must continue putting others down then do it to yourself! Your the only ones I see who have some issues needing to be fixed!

    #4605

    @glowatski — I think you might have been addressing my comment about stuff jumping into the frame, so I will respond.

    I really don’t care who you hire to take photos and I was not commenting on your tastes.  However, it is the photographer’s responsibility to look around the viewfinder to see what is in the picture besides the subject.  At one time or another we all take photos with either foreground or background junk, sometimes both, that we wish was not there.  You might be amazed at how often EXIT signs appear while doing event photography!  When that happens to us (while not shooting reportage, you are not allowed to edit stuff into or out of a news shot) we can employ editing software to fix our mistake.  If I was paying for, or being paid for, a photo, I would expect it to be free of obvious errors.  If it was something I shot on vacation and I just put it on my personal page for my mother to see, I might have different standards.

    As far as using a $100 camera from Walmart, yes, it can take good, interesting photos, but for a lot of what we shoot, it is a pain to use so most of us use cameras that are slightly more expensive.    Please check out this show:

    http://www.digitalrev.com/article/chase-jarvis-lego-camera/NDAxNjI3Mg_A_A

    #4618

    @meganray — Ali may not have asked for a critique but her photo was linked in this thread and it appears from the discussion that she is charging for her time and expertise.  If she is taking them and providing them for free, a different standard may be applied.


    @sask13
    — It seems anyone can call themselves a professional photographer and start charging for their services.  It amazes me what some are charging for, and it amazes me even more that they are actually getting paid.  Are they able to charge for enough work that they can make a living doing it?


    @glowatski
    — I had some time this morning and instead of watching TV, I edited Ali’s photo.   The original is on the left and what I think it should have looked like is on the right: Compare these.

    If you like the edited version, you can pick up a copy here.

     

     

    #4622
    lincolnphoto
    Member

    Attention: cameraclicker

    Any commissioned or non-commissioned photograph taken is the work of that person who also owns the copyright to that photo. Did you get written permission of the photographer whose picture you edited before you did it? If not I suggest you brush up on your copyright laws!!

    #4623

    @lincolnphoto — I am guessing you are American?

    The US act states:

    § 107 · Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use 40
    Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a
    copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords
    or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism,
    comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use),
    scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining
    whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to
    be considered shall include—
    (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a
    commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
    (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
    (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted
    work as a whole; and
    (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted
    work.
    The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if
    such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    Since there is not much for sale on this page, and certainly no one is offering that image for sale here; and, since this whole thread is news/educational in nature; and, since this thread has already been noted for containing criticism, it seems to me that the fair use doctrine applies.  As such, I don’t need the copyright holder’s permission.

     

    #4628
    lincolnphoto
    Member

    cameraclicker-

    If you would have taken the time to research this more thoroughly you would have noticed that the photo you edited (without permission)is from Canada which means your previous info is not applicable.. This photo is protected under copyright laws! Furthermore this forum was meant for discussions, not taking others work and changing it to your liking…

    #4629

    The Canadian version was just overhauled, and right after that the Supreme Court issued a number of verdicts which apparently broadened it further.  According to the heading, this is accurate to Oct. 31, 2012:

    29.1 Fair dealing for the purpose of criticism or review does not infringe copyright if the following are mentioned:

    (a) the source; and
    (b) if given in the source, the name of the

    (i) author, in the case of a work,
    (ii) performer, in the case of a performer’s performance,
    (iii) maker, in the case of a sound recording, or
    (iv) broadcaster, in the case of a communication signal.

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    #4631
    fstopper89
    Member

    I think Cameraclicker was doing it more as a joke.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 36 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.