Home › Forums › Am I a Fauxtog? › Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page…
Tagged: fauxtog?
- This topic has 3,097 replies, 358 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 4 months ago by
cameraclicker.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 6, 2013 at 7:48 am #12674
wtf
ParticipantThis one did good work, until here lately.
Why focus anymore??…… https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=614599395247524&set=pb.137569979617137.-2207520000.1378467882.&type=3&theater
Oh no the gazebo is falling…… https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=614031975304266&set=pb.137569979617137.-2207520000.1378467929.&type=3&theater
Hey selective color looks to be all the rage now….. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=613775231996607&set=pb.137569979617137.-2207520000.1378467940.&type=3&theater
YuckY!! She seems to be running low on creativity and time. Gotta get eveybody through the line.
September 6, 2013 at 1:49 pm #12679ebi
Participantman, that baby on the guitar is scary. No freaking way someone is doing that to my newborn.
September 6, 2013 at 1:51 pm #12680snaphappy
ParticipantI really hope that newborn photo is a composite. I audibly gasped when I saw it.
September 6, 2013 at 3:06 pm #12694cass335
ParticipantUmm…odd place for someones head.
Based on this poor little one’s hand position I would assume it isn’t a composite. I feel really bad for this baby!
September 6, 2013 at 3:07 pm #12695ParticipantSeptember 6, 2013 at 4:02 pm #12697Sarah
ParticipantUpdate on essence wedding productions. He actually admitted that all he does is change his iso and lets the camera decide the other settings after looking at his proof and being surprised at how the photos look on our monitors.
I think I see a thumb holding the guitar in the newborn on the guitar photo =/
September 6, 2013 at 4:42 pm #12702BCLC
ParticipantIf you’re talking bout near the neck of the guitar, then no that is part of the guitar.
How awful for the baby!!
September 6, 2013 at 7:16 pm #12716fstopper89
ParticipantThat wedding one with the person under her dress might have been a funny blooper or joke for the couple, but heck it is really terrible and doesn’t belong in a portfolio. The exposure is terrible and the action or whatever they used is kind of blah.
However I did post a “funny” shot for a wedding couple last fall- I photoshopped in several pictures of a frog we used to have as a pet and painted on some crude mustaches. It was a previous joke when I posted a picture to Facebook of the bride’s little nephew sitting at my computer with Lightroom opened up and the wedding set on the screen, calling him my little editing assistant. She had said “Well now I will know why one of the pictures has Frank the frog and mustaches photoshopped in!” So I surprised her with adding the photo with just that to their disk. Lol. But it was obvious it was a joke.
September 7, 2013 at 12:54 am #12731ParticipantI messaged Amberlin and the baby on the guitar was held by her dad and photoshopped out. So no worries there. It made me really nervous to see it so I needed to ask so that if it WEREN’T a composite, maybe I can prevent a disaster in the future.
September 7, 2013 at 2:37 am #12732Participanthttp://www.fallerphotogroup.com/index.html
I just moved near this city and I drive by this studio all the time. It looks SO impressive from outside! Huge sign, nicely manicured. So I decided to look up the group. Eeeck. Not impressed. There are a few nice ones. I clicked the senior gallery and there are a lot of out of focus, weird colors, and they are really contrasty.
September 7, 2013 at 4:29 am #12733nesgran
Participantthis popped up on my facebook, well worth seeing http://words2vomit.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/walmart-called-your-photos-are-ready/
September 7, 2013 at 3:23 pm #12745Thomas
Participant@ Snaphappy – Wrong topic, that is not a fauxtog.
September 7, 2013 at 8:20 pm #12756seth
ParticipantSarah – that’s insane! Why even bother changing the ISO then if the camera does all the other settings? I mean that’s just kinda bizarre imo.
Here’s a few new ones (though still same old, same old)
Because lighting smighting: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=497011603717867&set=pb.443606615725033.-2207520000.1378599302.&type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ash3%2F556754_497011603717867_1233873690_n.jpg&size=640%2C960
Because who cares what your background looks like, you can just pretend it’s studio: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=488540561231638&set=pb.443606615725033.-2207520000.1378599303.&type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash4%2F1075351_488540561231638_1696611283_o.jpg&smallsrc=https%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ash3%2F943634_488540561231638_1696611283_n.jpg&size=1366%2C2048
And because who needs to invest in REAL props when you can just photoshop them? https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=491493100936384&set=pb.443606615725033.-2207520000.1378599303.&type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-prn2%2F970296_491493100936384_429437480_n.jpg&size=640%2C960
September 8, 2013 at 1:24 am #12761ParticipantOne of my Facebook friends “liked” this page today. Yikes. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=545358618842234&set=a.461011133943650.106867.133118240066276&type=1&theater
This person “loves taking pictures of people.” Why can’t people enjoy being hobbyists and not pretending to be a business?
September 8, 2013 at 1:47 am #12762ParticipantFaller is sort of a fauxtographer with their missed focus and selective coloring. Yet they have a few pretty good images. The inconsistency is weird. Their website isn’t navigable though! I think they have potential but aren’t there.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.